[0:12] All right. All right. We'll call this meeting in order.

[0:22] Dan, do you want to know what role call please?

[0:25] All right, we'll note it for a minute.

[0:26] I'll ask everyone to rise for a pledge of allegiance

[0:33] to the flag of the United States of America.

[0:37] And to the Republic for which it stands, on nation, on regard in the visible liberty of justice for all.

[0:51] Dan, can you get you to see if anybody send it for open form?

[1:11] Eric Langness.

[1:19] Mayor and city council.

[1:20] So Eric like this, 96, 10, 22, 23rd Street North Forest Lake Minnesota, 5525.

[1:28] I watched your most recent City Council meeting live on cable and was further appalled

[1:32] by comments made by our mayor and winnick.

[1:36] You said you have a couple of issues with a couple of people and first single of me out

[1:40] specifically in my role as a planning commissioner.

[1:42] I highly suggest that you consult our city attorney before you make further disparaging

[1:47] comments about myself, other pointed members of our city boards, or staff in a public form

[1:54] without notice to those who you wish to go on record at school.

[1:57] It's the same thing you did to me, Eric, and then calling you out, not as your duties as a

[2:04] planning commissioner, at the comments you made afterwards, and I'll be glad to talk to you

[2:11] about that anytime you want.

[2:13] I'd like to finish with my three minutes.

[2:16] Furthermore, for someone that has recently demonstrated such an absence of courage, you've got

[2:22] a lot of nerve calling me a liar.

[2:25] Let me speak my three minutes.

[2:27] No, I'm not going to see that opportunity if you just can sit here and try to, I'm going

[2:31] to clarify the record here.

[2:34] Go right ahead.

[2:35] And I'm going to make the record crystal clear for you since you chose to tell lies about

[2:40] me in those few minutes.

[2:41] In fact, about all you got correct was that I'm a planning commissioner.

[2:45] First, you said that I called you out for your vote, which I most certainly did not do.

[2:51] In fact, during my comments in the Planning Commission, I specifically said that I respect that the particular children's mental health facility,

[2:58] and associate a text amendment vote where the power of counsel and I respect it's your decision.

[3:03] I made it crystal clear in my comments that I was appalled by the fact that you suggested the

[3:08] planning commission didn't do their job.

[3:11] Similarly, during the ongoing debate, you said the same of staff at one point in the

[3:17] public meeting telling them you wish they'd do their job.

[3:21] You then said I put it out on the internet, which is also a lie.

[3:25] An activist put it online, and while I certainly shared the video clip, it was not a production

[3:30] I created.

[3:31] You further went on to state that I put it on my own websites, which is also a lie.

[3:37] I own a single domain, Eric Langness.com, which I only used for my email.

[3:42] I suspect you were alluding to the Facebook social media page, Washington County Watchdog,

[3:46] which happens to be a page that I'm one of numerous moderators for, but certainly not the only one.

[3:52] In fact, the vast majority of its content on the page is not me.

[3:56] That said, those that run the page primarily wish to remain anonymous, and we rarely ever share who creates specific posts.

[4:04] You do not know who posted it on that page.

[4:07] You then said, it's wrong, it's a cheap shot, and you know I'm upset, you didn't appoint me to counsel.

[4:14] I've never said I was upset that you didn't appoint me, and in fact I'm not upset about it.

[4:19] Do I find it disgusting that you chose someone specifically so they would vote your way on the upcoming tax amendment?

[4:27] Absolutely. It's infuriating to me that you chose to abuse power in such a fashion.

[4:32] I never abuse power and that's not what it is. You then framed me.

[4:37] You then framed me as anti-business because I voted against expanding hours late into the night for an existing bar

[4:43] that's in the middle of a residential district. You must have fallen asleep during the comments section where I

[4:49] express positive comments about aqua, and said I was willing to expand their hours, but thought

[4:54] that the request went beyond what I felt was appropriate for the neighborhood. I'm both

[4:58] a strong proponent of business and our residents.

[5:02] You finished with...

[5:03] I'm proponent of business, but yet when Minards wanted to, you wouldn't let them expand without

[5:10] a second drive.

[5:11] Obviously you didn't listen to that entire commentary I had either.

[5:14] If I could continue.

[5:16] property, you didn't know all that either?

[5:18] If I could continue, this is supposed to be a public forum where you listened to the public.

[5:23] I could listen to the public, but I'm not going to listen to why, isn't I?

[5:26] I'm not going to listen to somebody that's having a...

[5:27] You're the one that's saying the lies, Mayor Winnick.

[5:30] You finished with a comment about me that you didn't know how many other businesses I've voted against,

[5:36] and that may be true. There's a lot you don't know.

[5:39] You said, just did I called you without giving you an opportunity to be an attendance and respond?

[5:45] Well, at our next planning commission meeting, you showed up thinking you were the liaison when in fact just weeks prior

[5:50] You appointed councilmember Bain to serve in that role. Maybe you should have shown up to fulfill the duty you thought you had

[5:56] But even so our planning commission is always welcomed our elected representatives to join in our public meetings where we transparently make decisions

[6:04] For someone that has shown such cowardice behavior to our community in recent times. You've got a lot in your calling me a liar

[6:11] You're like really pushing it Eric

[6:14] We'll see you sometime when they're not in here.

[6:17] We'll see you as a coward then.

[6:18] You piece of shit.

[6:23] No, that's what he did as well.

[6:26] And all of the was.

[6:29] All of the was.

[6:30] Yeah.

[6:31] All

[6:35] right.

[6:37] Welcome, Jim.

[6:45] Yes, please.

[6:50] When it members of the Council, thank you for the opportunity to be here this evening.

[6:55] and before we get into the reason for our discussion this evening, I would be remiss if I didn't once again think all of you for the support you have shown in the Mercer group and in me particularly to assist you in this incredibly important recruitment that we are embarking on.

[7:13] So, tonight, as I hope you've had the opportunity to glean from the memorandum I prepared,

[7:19] is an important step in that process.

[7:21] It's one of the preliminary steps, but nevertheless an incredibly, at least from my perspective,

[7:26] incredibly important step, because it will give us an opportunity to, after our conversation

[7:32] tonight to, at some point in the very near future, finalize the content for a recruitment profile,

[7:41] which will be the major recruitment document that we will use in soliciting applications for your next city administrator.

[7:50] So as you noted from the memorandum, there are a number of questions that I have specifically for you to give me direction on this evening.

[8:00] And of course there may be other things that you would like to have edited or changed or deleted or whatever the case may be.

[8:07] It is your document, not mine, I've made my best first step or first draft attempt to, I think, put together what reflects not only the community but the position and the priorities that you have identified both in my conversations with you individually and from the materials and resource information that I've had access to over the last few weeks, but there's no pride in authorship here, it is your document and I'm looking for your direction.

[8:36] as you know from the memorandum as well, the other piece of the process that is discussed

[8:41] in here concerns the interview process, both for what I've called semi-finalist as a way

[8:49] to distinguish them from the people that will ultimately become finalists that you will interview

[8:54] the four, five, six, or many that number turns out to be that will be identified as finalists.

[8:59] Well, while those questions are listed in this memorandum this evening, I would say it's not as important that they be resolved tonight that maybe a discussion that you want to have with your city attorney or maybe one that you want to have as a council at a date in the coming weeks.

[9:17] But I think before obviously before we get to the end of the recruitment process, we'll have to have clarity on how it is we're going to proceed both with semi-finalist interviews if that's to occur.

[9:28] and then ultimately the process for interview with finalists.

[9:32] For sake of convenience, they're outlined the recommendations or the options are outlined in this memorandum.

[9:39] But again, I want to emphasize that it's not imperative that some of those questions with respect to process B result.

[9:49] Again, for this evening, my primary interest is in the recruitment profile.

[9:53] So, if that Mr. Mayor perhaps, I'll stop and answer any questions you might have before we get into the content.

[10:01] I'll also say that we have a copy of the self-saint Paul recruitment profile that is loaded that you can see on your screen if you're interested in it.

[10:13] Dan tells me that you have seen that previously and that was a companion document that the proposal I gave you back in April.

[10:20] I'm not going to go through it unless you want to, but if there's questions about what the final document might look like, obviously the content will be very different and the layout will be somewhat different, but it'll give you a good idea of what you can expect from the final document.

[10:39] Well, Jim, thank you.

[10:40] I think it's going through it.

[10:44] I thought it was very thorough.

[10:47] I think identified, and just going through it,

[10:50] I could see different views from the council here.

[10:57] So it isn't just, for me, it isn't just a generic document that you did.

[11:01] it. I think you really did listen to what we were as a group asking for. A couple of questions

[11:09] though. You've done this a lot more than we have. Which is a good thing. Yeah. You're going

[11:17] to come across candidates that are extremely well qualified, but they might not quit what we're

[11:25] looking for. But, you know, I'm kind of torn at that point because, you know, I'd also

[11:33] like to, you know, I mean, if there's that I, you know, really good candidate, but yet, you

[11:40] know, we're looking for the XYZ and they're, you know, XY and, hey, are you going to forward

[11:48] some like that or are you using just our qualifications as a complete yes or no package?

[11:55] First of all, I think that's a very good question, because I think sometimes a review process

[12:02] like this can be too literal, it can be too focused on what the criteria are.

[12:08] They are important and certainly in order to focus attention on this position, you have to

[12:14] start somewhere and you have to say, here are what we are looking for.

[12:18] That said, perhaps the biggest, I don't know that mistake is the right word, because that's

[12:24] it too strong. But I think the biggest error that sometimes can be made when people are doing this that haven't

[12:29] made this kind of decision for a long time or maybe never is to get too focused on a candidate's

[12:37] education on a candidate's experience, where that was years of experience and so forth. And as I've

[12:43] tried to indicate in this report, that is important, it clearly is. But hopefully by the time we get through

[12:48] the review process or the application process, the people that you're going to be looking

[12:53] at are all going to be qualified in one way or another for this position.

[12:58] And to satisfy the concern that you have, I hope this does anyway, you will get a report

[13:02] from me that has at least some explanation of the background of all of the candidates.

[13:09] As I mentioned in the report, assuming we get an adequate number of applications, my intent

[13:15] would be to divide those applications into three categories.

[13:20] those that I think are most qualified, and ones that I have had phone interviews with, a middle

[13:27] group that I think are intriguing. And to your point, Mayor, that may be the group that for whatever

[13:33] reason comes up short on one of the application or the recruitment criteria, but seems to have

[13:39] a really interesting background in another area. I can think of one candidate for example from a

[13:45] the previous recruitment, who had a really very, very strong

[13:48] marketing background.

[13:49] Also, I had a governmental background, but didn't have the

[13:52] years of experience as a city administrator that some of the other

[13:55] candidates had, so I'm hopeful it's a long-winded answer to your

[13:59] question, but I'm hopeful that we'll be able to give you enough

[14:02] information that you'll be able to ask questions of candidates that

[14:05] may intrigue you that I didn't see, and hopefully I'm going to be

[14:09] brought enough in my examination of the applications to make sure that

[14:13] to get a variety of people to look at.

[14:17] All right, yeah, that was great answer, so.

[14:20] Okay, appreciate that.

[14:21] I hope you have the council for any questions or comments?

[14:25] I do have a question, I think there was some concern

[14:27] whether we should expand a search for national.

[14:31] Well, my intent right now, Council Member Eignars,

[14:34] to do that, our normal process would be to undertake

[14:39] a national recruitment.

[14:40] And honestly, I would encourage you to do that.

[14:45] I think it will ultimately benefit you to have a greater number

[14:49] of applicants to look at.

[14:51] I'm not a person who believes that experience in Minnesota

[14:56] makes a candidate superior to another candidate necessary.

[15:00] Early, I think it's can be important. I think it's a value certainly, but I think it's too myopic to exclude people who might otherwise be an ideal candidate for you.

[15:10] And so I would recommend you do a national recruitment, but that certainly is your call.

[15:15] And then in the year experience, especially if you recruited in the state of Minnesota, do you find a trend or a timeline that the same names keep coming up as they choose to advance?

[15:27] Or is that not the case?

[15:30] It isn't, it isn't.

[15:32] There are, I would believe that with this recruitment

[15:36] giving the timing of it, I'm going to see some

[15:39] applications from people who recently applied to

[15:43] South Snake Paul, for example, which was the most

[15:46] recruitment that, or the most recent

[15:47] recruitment that I was working on.

[15:50] That said, it's not going to be an identical

[15:51] list by any measure.

[15:54] I think the communities are different to

[15:56] I think we're going to see a different pool, but there will be some common applications.

[16:02] And I can tell you, in fact, that there are a couple of people that were in that pool that I didn't necessarily think were perhaps best suited for a self-saint Paul that might be more attractive for this kind of community.

[16:14] So I have to see, but I'm guessing we'll see some of the same people.

[16:17] My final question is, do you have other recruiters that are referring candidates to you?

[16:26] Yes, we do.

[16:27] We've got about 15 or so people like me around the country that work pretty much regionally

[16:35] on recruitment like this.

[16:37] And when we get the recruitment profile approved,

[16:41] I will be sending it to all of the people that are in our network as well

[16:45] and a couple of in particular that I have a good relationship with and trust their judgment to say,

[16:51] do you have anybody that might be worth contacting that either you or I can get hold of to encourage them to apply?

[16:58] And that generally works to generate maybe one or two applications in a recruitment like this, I would say.

[17:04] Thank you.

[17:07] Now, if we want to bring forward a council nominee as well or a candidate,

[17:19] is that something

[17:19] that can be included or ties in with through?

[17:23] Mayor, certainly the recruitment process will be open to anyone that wishes to apply.

[17:28] And if there are people that you or members of the council feel would be good applicants,

[17:33] I would suggest that you have them either just send me the application material or have

[17:38] them contact me, and we can talk about the position, and I can certainly help them with

[17:45] the recruitment process.

[17:48] Thank you.

[17:51] Any other questions?

[17:53] I think I got one more for sure.

[17:57] Is there can we have some type of requirement within this recruitment or this position that whoever's hired must live within a certain radius or distance of force like I mean I don't think we can say you have to live in force like but you know if there's 30 miles away now and commuting every day or whatever I just don't you know I'm questioning that.

[18:25] Mr. Mayor, I know you're correct about the requirement to live within the community.

[18:31] You cannot do that unless certain about how the law applies.

[18:35] I know that there's a provision in the law that says if there is a job related

[18:41] reason for the person to be within proximity, whatever that turns out to be, that's permissible.

[18:48] But without doing some additional research, and actually I think would be something the city

[18:52] turning out to give you an opinion on rather than me when we get to that point.

[18:59] And I would say that that's a question when we get down the road a little bit further and

[19:03] we see the applicants that you have because there may be an absolutely stellar candidate

[19:09] that all of you think is exactly the right person and he or she may not be as close to some

[19:15] the other candidates. So I think it would be maybe unnecessary early on to, you know, say

[19:21] that this is something that a requirement for people to put it.

[19:26] I had one concern in the packet for deimitation for administrator under

[19:34] major initiatives

[19:35] for the future. I think the first two bullet points, organizational assessment and team building

[19:41] are pretty spot on.

[19:44] I kind of feel a language could be interpreted

[19:47] to say that there's a problem with staff

[19:51] or say, Morales in peril.

[19:54] Yeah, I said it's spot on as far as the content.

[19:58] I think the delivery might kind of shy somebody away

[20:00] thinking that there's a turmoil here.

[20:04] I'd like to see the council's take on it.

[20:06] Maybe it's just the way I read it.

[20:09] Maybe we'll work a little more friendly.

[20:10] So we're on page 17 under major initiatives for the future, the first two bullet points.

[20:19] I just don't want to feel like a shortening situation, someone will be walking into.

[20:23] But the content is very inclusive.

[20:27] Well, and it gets at a little bit of a dilemma I had on trying to make sure that I prepared

[20:34] an honest document because it does no good for anyone's purpose.

[20:40] I think, to try and deceive people and say, you know, there aren't issues.

[20:44] We all know that there are, but what I've tried to do, and perhaps maybe not as eloquently

[20:50] as it can be stated, is to let people know that some of the issues that they may be aware

[20:57] of, or they may come across in their individual reviews of background materials are what they're

[21:03] going to find is it's more issue-related, and it's not related to the city administrator

[21:10] position for example. And that is a really important point because in many communities

[21:17] where there has been, let's say significant council turnover or community issues for the

[21:26] last several years, oftentimes the city administrator is at the focal point of that. And

[21:34] rightly or wrongly the city administrator becomes kind of the personification of those

[21:39] issues. I've tried to at least indicate in here that that isn't the case based on what I heard

[21:44] in talking to you and to others. But again, I'm open if there's a better way to state

[21:49] any of this, but I'm trying to get that balance between not trying to be deceptive because

[21:55] that doesn't go very far in today's age. Anyway, plus it's not something I'd want to do.

[22:00] I think everything you have in there needs to be stated, definitely want to be honest,

[22:04] not hiding anything but just the position it's in as number two and maybe I

[22:10] just you know just look at this list and context here that organizational

[22:15] assessment absolutely smart growth absolutely structure absolutely and I

[22:21] think somebody who's going to be a skilled administrator is going to it's

[22:26] team building goals of leadership right and we have other points in here where we're

[22:30] talking about strong leadership skills that, you know, I don't know if it needs the same

[22:37] call out that we have in the other items as major initiatives.

[22:42] And maybe it's part of the organizational assessment, right?

[22:47] Right.

[22:47] A skilled administrator will come in, do an assessment, and they will diagnose what

[22:51] they're right next step based on what that looks like.

[22:54] And maybe we could include a sentence in that first bullet and get away from having that

[23:02] I agree, I mean, morale is definitely a priority for my perspective, you know, the employees need to be valued, and people being kept out of Lucas, one of those things that

[23:14] degrades morale. So it's important to keep it in there. But when I read through those first two, you know, I tried to put myself in position. If I were applying for that job, I would I feel. And it kind of threw a flag saying maybe there's some turmoil there's something I wouldn't want to step into.

[23:28] so I hope that's not the case here. I haven't heard it has, but just to kind of put that

[23:36] second thought to ease if somebody was going, what am I walking into?

[23:39] I can certainly do that if that's your desire.

[23:46] Okay. Yeah. I don't think it was a good one.

[23:50] Time to.

[23:52] Oh no, I was just going to say that this is about a thorough

[23:56] whatever expected, you know, the qualifications and this is a learning experience for me certainly

[24:04] and I sure appreciate all that you've done on this thing and I think it's dead on accurate.

[24:10] So thank you.

[24:14] Time cable, you know, it's taking us quite a while to get to this point and you know hopefully we can

[24:19] see an expedited process from here but you know what's your realistic expectations for?

[24:27] Normally, once this, and it sounds like we may be able to get this, the text of this

[24:33] approved this week, if that turns out to be true after our discussion this evening, it

[24:39] will go to our graphics person who will do the design for the brochure similar to what

[24:45] you saw for a cell same Paul. That only takes a few days at the most, so it's conceivable

[24:53] that if we get approval to night or tomorrow we could have that by if not by Friday certainly

[25:01] right after Memorial Day and once that is done and then we can begin to place ads and we'll

[25:09] do that the very same day. Once ads are placed at normally my comfort level is to have about

[25:17] five weeks and honestly I think in this case because we may need to actually be doing a lot more

[25:23] work trying to get people to consider what a good opportunity this can be. I'd rather

[25:30] I'd rather err on having it seem to be a week too long rather than a week too short.

[25:36] But that said, we've also worded the recruitment profile in a way to say that the first

[25:43] review of job applications will begin, I think we said on June 29th, I think, if I go back

[25:49] look, but that's about right.

[25:52] That doesn't mean that we're closing applications.

[25:54] And if applications come in after that,

[25:57] you would certainly be aware of it.

[25:58] And if you wanted to consider them in the process we can.

[26:01] So it's a little bit of an iterative process,

[26:04] but it would be about a five week process

[26:07] with the goal right now of trying to have the first review,

[26:11] my review of the applications to be completed

[26:14] by the end of June.

[26:16] This approval process to approve what he's doing, how are you going to work through that

[26:23] with being this a workshop and not a voting medium?

[26:27] How do we handle that?

[26:31] I think if we have a good consensus, you can go forward and we can approve it at the next

[26:36] meeting.

[26:38] Well, kind of what I was thinking.

[26:38] Yeah, correct.

[26:39] You actually don't technically need a motion.

[26:40] group as long as he's got direction day.

[26:42] The text is good enough to that.

[26:44] That's basically about a four to see

[26:46] a council feedback and make sure you guys are okay

[26:48] with the text that's there.

[26:50] And if he's not hearing that there's any major

[26:51] sticking points on there, we can release us.

[26:54] Proceeded there without having to bring it back

[26:55] from the front door motion.

[26:57] The question I have is, you mentioned that after your review,

[27:01] are you a review of one, or do you have a board

[27:03] or other people working for you that way?

[27:06] We review these candidates.

[27:07] It's me if there are candidates.

[27:10] that I have questions about, I will send it out to the network of other people that work

[27:18] for the firm and say, have any of you encountered this person if they're not people that

[27:23] I know, so I will get some feedback that way.

[27:26] And sometimes that's been very helpful.

[27:29] I was going to be my second question as to what network you had out there for people that

[27:33] are already working in that position.

[27:38] It's given my experience that I've had working in Minnesota for so many years, I will

[27:46] know most of the Minnesota candidates, I think, that are going to apply, and if not,

[27:51] I can find out very quickly from people that I network with, on a national level, it gets

[27:56] to be a little bit more difficult, but I also have a lot of contacts nationally that I can

[28:00] use.

[28:01] Okay, that was my question as to whether or not you were at a larger screening network and obviously you do, thank you

[28:12] Excellent job on the profile and you're getting kind of pulling together consensus from the sources used

[28:18] One of the things that you were looking for feedback on was at placement and you talked a little bit about the national search

[28:23] Right, my thought is you know best the pawns. You need to be fishing him and so I would you know

[28:30] use what you would typically use for a profile like us.

[28:34] I don't have a need to kind of cherry pick your list.

[28:37] You know the pool.

[28:39] Okay. That's my opinion.

[28:45] And again, the question about interview process.

[28:48] I think it's something that can wait.

[28:50] It's something you may want to kind of noodle individually and collectively.

[28:54] And think about it as we as we go through the recruitment process.

[28:58] But at some point we'll have to have some clarity about how you want to proceed both

[29:03] in defining semi-finalist or a finalist for the process.

[29:08] And that is a conversation, probably going to want to have

[29:10] with your city attorney as well, about the conflict,

[29:14] well, not the conflict, but the interaction between the data

[29:16] practices act in the open meeting law.

[29:19] Because they're both excellent laws, but when it comes

[29:23] to the application process, when about for semi-finalists,

[29:28] they create some inconsistencies that you need

[29:31] work around. The other question is not so much for you, but it's for the council. If you

[29:37] should find a candidate outside of Minnesota or wherever in the United States, how do we

[29:46] do we pay for that candidate to fly in or how is that handled? And maybe Dan, you can

[29:53] Shit some light on that. I believe to begin the past we have paid for travel for

[29:58] finalists to come in.

[30:00] Let's go back and verify that, but I know for sure hotel stays that they've come in and had to see overnight for a two-day enemy process. We've arranged for hotel stays in here. I believe if throughout state coming in, you'd also pay for hotel expenses to get here for the enemy process.

[30:15] Depending on the process that you ultimately settle on for the semi-finalist, what I would, if you're going to do interviews with a group of semi-finalists, which would be eight people to ten people perhaps.

[30:30] My recommendation at that point to you will be to do a video interview with them with all of them, whether they're from Minnesota or whether they're from Connecticut, so that they're all treated equally, and you have the same kind of interaction, granted it's not perfect, but it does give you at least a kind of a semi personal contact with these people, and it minimizes the cost as well.

[30:50] And once you get to the final stage, and it gets absolutely critical that you have everybody

[30:54] here that you're considering, and it would be very unusual for a city not to pay for

[31:00] a finalist to come in interview with you.

[31:04] I was going to clarify, too, was I thought, you know, to say I mean, I would think we would,

[31:08] but I just wanted to say my final stage.

[31:10] I want to be sure that we're all on board with that.

[31:13] And to send my final stage, I would rather be some type of video in teleconference interview with

[31:19] candidates and, you know, running them all here for that point, just to keep the level playing

[31:25] field.

[31:28] Okay.

[31:30] Well, thank you for the from us.

[31:31] No, I don't think so.

[31:32] I think, I have what I need so far and I appreciate feedback and I'm excited about this.

[31:38] Well, thank you.

[31:39] Thank you.

[31:40] Now, I think it's going to be a good recruitment.

[31:42] I think you'll be happy with the candidates.

[31:46] Do you have that anticipated number of candidates, you think you'll see?

[31:48] You know, I know I'd get that question because I always do and I thought, well, I'll really say maybe three or four and then when you get 30 or 40 you'll be realistically I would hope we get at least 30 to maybe 40 on the if we exceed 40 that would be really really good

[32:08] That's kind of what the market is right now.

[32:10] That's overall, that's overall,

[32:15] I would say you're probably going to be looking at maybe

[32:24] 15 candidates that you might want to be considering 15 to 20 if we're in the 30 to 40 range.

[32:30] Something like that.

[32:32] But it does vary and it's hard to give you a number, but that's kind of what I would expect at this point.

[32:38] And do you have one last question, as these candidates, do you have some kind of these criteria?

[32:46] Do you wait them or how do you select in your own mind?

[32:50] It's a combination of kind of a checklist, do they meet the basic qualifications?

[32:57] And then it's based on the materials that they submitted my assessment of the experiences that they've had,

[33:04] my phone conversations with them.

[33:06] I don't talk to all of the candidates.

[33:08] If it's clear that they're not a candidate

[33:10] that I think has anything really to offer

[33:13] that you would want to consider.

[33:15] I'm not going to spend a half hour hour on the phone

[33:18] with every candidate, but it's both my judgment

[33:22] and my assessment of what they've submitted

[33:24] in terms of how they meet the criteria.

[33:27] OK, thank you.

[33:29] One last question from me.

[33:31] You've done this a lot more than we have.

[33:33] Is there anything you think we should add to this?

[33:40] No, sorry, I don't think so.

[33:41] All right, thank you.

[33:42] I don't.

[33:43] Any other questions?

[33:44] No, I don't.

[33:45] Thank you again.

[33:46] Look forward to working with you.

[33:47] Have a good night.

[33:48] Thank you.

[33:53] Do you want to take us to the point of yours?

[33:56] Yeah.

[33:56] Maybe I was a council.

[33:59] With Scandy, a fully withdrawing from the Joint Powers Agreement for the Cable Commission,

[34:04] there is a need to take a look at that document and make any changes.

[34:10] at this point to basically revise the joint powers agreement, to reflect that scan is

[34:15] longer and that it can be done either through a complete rewrite of the joint powers

[34:18] agreement or it's just doing a amendment.

[34:20] The joint powers agreement, kind of before we get to the conversation, you know, I did

[34:24] have a conversation, it's afternoon with Bridget, after a couple of questions on some clarifying

[34:30] aspects of the joint powers agreement.

[34:31] And so once Scandia withdraws at June 30th,

[34:34] we still have a drink hoars to do that kind of thing.

[34:37] So it will be valid.

[34:39] However, she reviewed over the weekend.

[34:40] I agree to the weekend.

[34:41] We both are kind of strongly in the position of it

[34:43] should be updated to reflect that Scandia is longer in there.

[34:48] But it's not like we need to get this taken care

[34:50] by the end of June.

[34:51] So we can take the time that we need to do this right

[34:54] to get this drink hoars to give it updated.

[34:57] The first section that I do highlight as needing to be updated

[35:00] It would be the eligible member sections, which is section five.

[35:05] At this point, I'm a recommended point.

[35:07] It's one on hold.

[35:08] Bridget reviewed the make-up of the grant powers as dictated by state statute.

[35:16] And there may be a state statute over arches that basically

[35:20] sets the fact that each member can only appoint two members to the commission.

[35:24] So she's not sure that that's the actual, you know, that is what we have to set our board up to

[35:30] or not. So, basically at this point, we may be stuck with that four member board, just because

[35:34] we only have two members, which would then make a quorum. Everybody has to be the every

[35:38] meeting, which could potentially make quorum issues difficult. However, if we're able to

[35:42] appoint the fifth member, then we could switch the quorum to a majority, which would make it a little

[35:46] more flexibility in terms of making the quorum for meetings. However, I kind of told

[35:50] it, and I said, we kind of would take that, put it on the table, and if we get clarification

[35:53] to whether or not we're able to kind of set the make up of the cable commission or if it's

[36:01] mandated by state statute. So we're currently reviewing that. But a couple of the issues

[36:05] that have come up that will need to be addressed in the new revision is one is for who is able

[36:11] to perform the accounting work for the commission. The current joint powers agreement says that one

[36:16] of the member bodies has to be the group that does the accounting work for the commission.

[36:21] and Forest Lake has done it or had done it in the past

[36:24] for a number of years.

[36:25] Columbus has done it for a number of years.

[36:27] Scandy is currently performing that work,

[36:31] and the Cable Commission has basically,

[36:34] got into an agreement with Scandy to continue on

[36:37] doing that work once they're beyond once they withdraw.

[36:41] At this point, basically, the city of Forest Lake

[36:43] and the city of Columbus had basically kind of said,

[36:47] advised the Cable Commission to find another source

[36:49] to do the book, just because of the extra time requirement for have the cable commission's

[36:54] finances taken care of.

[36:56] We also have capacity, the Columbus workforce, like kind of given our financial staff situations

[37:00] to kind of take on a whole other set of books to maintain.

[37:04] That being said, Scandia is currently able to do us.

[37:06] We do have an agreement with them that able to continue on doing that after Scandia would draw

[37:10] us.

[37:11] However, we would need to update the JPA to allow that to happen.

[37:13] In any event that Scandia then, let's say, a year from now to the stage, you know, what

[37:19] we don't want these books either.

[37:20] We would be able to find a qualified accounting firm

[37:23] to do that work to do the books for Skandia,

[37:27] or excuse me for the cable commission.

[37:28] But that overly complicated, however,

[37:30] there is some time involved in managing

[37:32] and making sure that the accounting is done correctly

[37:34] for the cable commission.

[37:37] The cable commission, as it kind of got

[37:39] into some of the audit language,

[37:41] got through the audit process,

[37:43] has basically made the request that we make a change

[37:47] to the audit requirement that's currently in the JPA.

[37:50] Right now, it basically states every two years

[37:52] the board needs to go through

[37:54] or the books need to be audited by a proven accounting firm.

[37:57] The cable commission has basically,

[37:59] they don't want to, they feel they don't want to pay

[38:01] for the budget savings, pay for an audit every two years.

[38:05] Versus they want to go through

[38:06] if they hit the threshold set by the state auditor

[38:07] demanded an audit, but that won't be the trigger.

[38:10] As long as they have approved financial policies

[38:12] in place that are reviewed at a more frequent basis,

[38:16] This is one where you can kind of see both sides of the arguments.

[38:20] With the current make up of the cable commission, I think a two year audit was, you could probably

[38:25] slide that slide a little bit there in a good financial position that had a good financial

[38:30] decision.

[38:32] Recently, however you change board composition over five years, a lot of damage can be done to

[38:36] an organization's books that you're not in audit that happens in five years, so the recommendation

[38:40] at this point for myself would be to maintain that two year audit threshold, even though

[38:43] a cost associated with it, just to make sure that everything is done, you know, above

[38:48] there.

[38:49] However, you could alleviate that and kind of make that once they had a certain budget

[38:54] threshold.

[38:55] I think right now it's somewhere in the bulk park of like 220,000ish, don't recommend

[38:59] that number kind of changes every year, but once they're operating budget, it hits that

[39:02] number, then it out of McLean, triggers an audit, they're bumping right below that

[39:07] right now.

[39:08] I mean, they're like basically just a little bit thresholds, so you could go either way

[39:12] And it, however, you know, just from a strong financial management perspective, it's probably

[39:16] good to maintain it to your audit as part of the Joint Powers Association, because if there

[39:21] are any problems in the way the finances are managed, you go to catch them early and address

[39:24] them before, you kind of get too far down, you know, a potential problem, and you kind of

[39:29] had that by the past for that.

[39:33] Basically, this item is brought forward just to kind of take a look at, you know, if there's

[39:36] other items council like to see as we kind of go through, revised JPA process.

[39:42] I guess partially the way this will work is this is kind of a joint negotiation of this

[39:48] point between this force like say council and city of Columbus as well as we need to

[39:51] get by and from the city of Columbus.

[39:55] So, you know, just kind of looking at kind of having the initial conversation on what needs

[40:00] to be done there.

[40:01] Bridget basically was looking at some of it more about housekeeping type thing, just limiting

[40:04] the 5th. That's gained use reference a few times in the giant powers. Is there anything

[40:07] else that we want to address at this time when we had the JPE open or going to the process?

[40:13] So, at this point I would be happy to answer your questions or, you know, look for any feedback

[40:17] on the current JPE.

[40:19] Do you have something else?

[40:20] Yeah, it's just being agreement with the dance as far as keeping the audit of the two-year

[40:25] interval. I know that in the case of the parks with Fenway Parks and Floan, we got Australia

[40:31] they're pretty quick. Nobody was doing anything city or on either side. So I'd like the idea

[40:37] of keeping it at two years. And I don't, this cost for an outside firm to do the financials.

[40:46] That would be, that cost would be born between Columbus and us.

[40:49] But cable commission actually pays for the out of it. So they have a standing line.

[40:52] So yeah, the transit fees that are contributed to the cable commission then get

[40:59] I'd rather just outsource it and keep it out of two-year interval.

[41:04] I don't have the fees quoted by Scandia in my back pocket, but it was minimal.

[41:10] To go into a complete external firm would be a substantial jump.

[41:15] To keep them with Scandia seemed like an obvious choice that it would be available and will continue to perform.

[41:23] I'm going to address a few things here, first the audit.

[41:30] It sounds like a great idea to do it every two years, but it's extremely expensive.

[41:37] I think it's in the eight to ten to twelve thousand dollar range.

[41:43] And for a commission that's revenue is 150,000.

[41:49] I mean, it's ridiculous to spend ten percent to audit.

[41:52] I would suggest that maybe wording it different because an audit is a full-blown financial

[42:00] review by, you know, a license CPA auditing firm.

[42:06] We could have an independent review of the book, something like that.

[42:12] We could word it differently where, you know, for $1,000 to $2,000 we could have a CPA look

[42:19] any irregularities within that, rather than doing that full-born audit.

[42:24] So that's where, you know, that word smithing is going to come in.

[42:29] I was, I was just, let's say the challenge of moving away from an audit from other,

[42:35] every two years to something that's off-cycle as they have to do a comparative audit.

[42:38] And so if you wanted to do it every five years, they think you have to re-order it anyway.

[42:42] So the path that you are heading down is a better path of sort of agreed upon procedures,

[42:47] or they could do a lesser report and a less expensive, less extensive.

[42:54] And then also, in this case, we have, I think that you'd want the wording of the joint

[42:59] powers to be worded that as long as the actual finance activities are on a contract basis

[43:04] outside of the cable commission staff itself. Then you've got some assurances, you have independence

[43:10] just by creating a contractual difference that helps with the control structure.

[43:16] So, a couple more things, the peg fees, public education and government fees are a bigger

[43:26] portion of that budget than their actual operating fees.

[43:31] So maybe we could look at separating out the peg fees, bringing that within the remaining

[43:39] communities, for them to use rather than leaving it in the JPI.

[43:44] I'm throwing out there as a potential, if we're worried about fraud or whatever, let's bring it back in here where it's getting in its own bucket in our accounting system.

[43:55] A potential, I'm okay either way and I'd like to see a lot of that revenue going to the schools to help develop some programs, but it's a talking point we should look at as we go ahead.

[44:07] And the last two are kind of the same, you know, we can amend this agreement, but we may

[44:15] possibly want to look at a couple of other things in it as we move in the future, what

[44:23] about adding members?

[44:25] What are your scanty wants to come back in or Wyoming or, you know, as the area increases?

[44:31] So maybe we have that wording in this JPA already and just one more thing along that line is instead of being the cable commission and being strong only with that cable component, maybe it's time to make this a media commission something to be able to deal with

[45:00] The changes in the future, rather than just, we've got this one focus on this cable that is kind of slowly going away.

[45:09] So those are my thoughts as we move forward.

[45:12] We're going to spend money if we have to redo this.

[45:15] Let's see if it's possible to do it, you know, make it better, but if it's going to get too expensive,

[45:22] So, I think what the cable commission is doing, I mean, I have my full faith in confidence

[45:30] and they're doing it right and doing it frugally so I'm okay either way, but if we

[45:40] have the opportunity, let's look at trying to improve that.

[45:47] Anything else?

[45:48] I did have a, it's more of a point of clarification on wrapping up Scandia.

[45:57] Dan, I'm just, I'm just, we went, I went through the JPA, it talks about withdrawing

[46:04] numbers and what assets would potentially go back to the withdrawing member and it seems

[46:10] like it's pretty clear it's anything that's in their city hall or city council chambers

[46:14] for broadcast of meetings.

[46:17] But then we go through a really long discussion of fair market value of assets, and because it also talks about future sale and what that would, and I think we just need to crisp up in the next month or so, not necessarily at this body, but just a staff and then with the, ultimately it's our city council and Scandinavia and come to the city council and what that just makes everyone's crisp up with that looks like.

[46:43] And I believe that you're referring to in terms of the future sales of the asset would be, if it was,

[46:50] let's say the cable commission owned a building that they were broadcasting out of.

[46:55] That was worth $20,000.

[46:57] Let's get in a contribution too.

[46:58] When that building would be sold after which on, they would be a tight up to the portion of the asset for that.

[47:03] The cable commission is in a rental situation right now.

[47:05] So I think, when we looked at it before, I think that's where the original assumption was,

[47:10] with all equipment, and then I think it was tied to real.

[47:12] I think there was a clarifier that said it was real, especially.

[47:15] So it was basically property values not necessarily camera equipment.

[47:19] So really, the confirmation that needs to be made is we need to confirm that there's no property that would need to go underneath a valuation process as part of their exit.

[47:28] Correct. Yeah, because I believe that the medical commission is not only property, they were in a rental situation before and they're currently rental situation.

[47:35] So how much revenue with a cable commission will lose by them pulling out if any?

[47:43] It's very minimal, doesn't it?

[47:44] They've lost some 10% of subscribers. I believe.

[47:46] Yeah, I want to say 10% I just gone, right?

[47:49] 10%.

[47:50] Yes, definitely.

[47:51] It was in a ballpark. I want to say, I mean, this is a really rough number of time ahead.

[47:54] Some of them in a ballpark, maybe $15,000 a year to operate and give or take.

[47:59] And we actually, when we ran the budget for this year,

[48:02] We actually anticipated them leaving in July of June, so we adjusted the budget numbers.

[48:07] We had to kind of did all the tough cuts this year, the next year we were already teed up on a very conservative budget.

[48:12] So even if subscribers continue to decline, they're already kind of already to adjust for that decline in the subscribership and decline in revenue.

[48:19] So this game is what draw was already pretty much has already been kind of absorbed in their budget, but it wasn't, you know,

[48:26] if you look at this subscriber base for us, like definitely contributes to the most to their budget annually.

[48:33] So, part of Scania's leaving the cable commission was not made content, but they have another provider front to you.

[48:45] Front to you.

[48:46] Front to you.

[48:48] Front to you isn't bound by any agreements within this cable commission.

[48:55] What happens if we have, you know, a Comcast or somebody else coming to tell them?

[49:03] Are they obligated to go by the franchise fees and everything that we have and to pay this, or...

[49:11] Yeah.

[49:12] I believe they would fall into the franchise fee because there's two of those of the franchise

[49:15] of the ordinance that sets the fees that the subscribers pay.

[49:19] And then there's the JPA that sets how those fees are managed, which establishes the cable commission.

[49:23] And so if a new subscriber comes in or new company comes in, I believe you'd have to take a look at that overarching franchise fee agreement to see if they can negotiate in and get a set of new.

[49:32] I don't know that for sure, I'd actually be doing that document to see what the pathways are for that.

[49:36] But the cable commission kind of operates as, instead of the city managing the funds, we basically defer that to the cable commission, they get the budget and I guess we'll be able to make sure, yeah, we're spending it appropriately and then they're charged actually executing that budget.

[49:51] Well, that's where the accountability comes in, that's what I was willing to do and head was

[49:56] willing to do, whatever it takes for that accountability, that's what it wants to.

[50:01] If it's a full-blown auditor or something, we could just do annually with a CPA, you know.

[50:07] So.

[50:07] I think also as part of the budget cycle, you'd mentioned Peg Fees, and I think as part of the

[50:11] budget cycle this year, you'll see that others, especially now that the Columbus City Council

[50:16] the funding of that equipment has been done, you'll start to see a kind of evolution or

[50:23] movement of those peg fees to be more in-school programming or equipment to support programming

[50:29] related to schools and education. So you'll see that come through whether we keep those

[50:33] peg fees with the cable commission or whether we were to take them to the internal cities.

[50:37] It might end up being just a wash. I think strategically you'll see that that's where the future

[50:42] direction's going to go. We did need to get conversed fully equipment that you couldn't complete it though before you can make that move.

[50:50] And the pay fees to are also pretty much. Just only there's certain items that they can be spent on.

[50:55] And they're pretty restricted in terms of what they can be spent.

[50:57] They can't be used to cover operating expenses of the cable commission.

[51:00] They can't be used to pay wages and benefits.

[51:02] It's basically equipment and anything that's on for production.

[51:05] And in the last French's fee agreement, the cable prison at the time, it's established that

[51:11] the priority was French's fee increases.

[51:13] So if you look at the cable commission, it's pretty rich in French's fee increases at

[51:17] the expense of, or she's a paid fee increases versus French's fee, so I mean, it's almost

[51:22] like, there's more revenue that I can be generated as French's fees, she's a paid

[51:27] fees versus French's fees moving forward.

[51:30] So they're going to be able to get a lot of equipment which we will use in for school

[51:33] investments and, you know, upgrading at some point in the equipment that's in here, will need to be replaced as it ages out.

[51:39] So there will be fund balance bill for that as well, and standing in Columbus.

[51:44] So with the pink fees that accumulates in its own fund, is there a time table that they have to be utilized with it?

[51:54] The longings are being spent. They're trying to, so that what has happened in the budget, the cable commission would before.

[52:01] a lot of that stuff kind of co-mingled.

[52:02] You know, they've got their total budget at the bottom of the line item.

[52:05] A couple of years ago when I worked with the Kayla Christian in their budget,

[52:08] we separated those out and segmented it out and said,

[52:10] here's your pay revenue fund and here's your operating fund,

[52:12] keeping separate.

[52:13] So they now separated it out and then last year,

[52:16] we actually set them up on a CIP,

[52:17] kind of a loose CIP plan place and what they were doing in the past,

[52:21] they were actually taking these pay revenues and action-making investments.

[52:24] So they weren't just going out and buying the next shiny computer

[52:26] or the next camera, they were actually on a projection

[52:29] so if they wanted to go full HD in five years,

[52:32] they were making the investment

[52:33] that would be so they had the capital available

[52:35] to make that investment.

[52:36] But they are at this point accumulating in a fund.

[52:39] The cable commission, I believe at some point

[52:41] in the official kind of established policy

[52:42] for what they wanted to maintain for minimum fund balance in there

[52:45] because it's pretty easy to even

[52:47] of you could have $100,000 in out of fund,

[52:50] just offending one council chamber can cost up

[52:52] worth $80,000 so you can go pretty quick

[52:55] who want to make sure that you have enough there to cover the categories to get replaced

[52:59] or if there's new technology that comes out that will assist with broadcasting that there's

[53:04] enough fun balancer to make that investment at the time.

[53:11] It's good.

[53:14] May you have a lot of questions?

[53:16] All right.

[53:17] Let's move on.

[53:19] Dan, you want to take us through the 19 budget process?

[53:22] Yeah.

[53:23] I remember the council is getting to be that time of year again.

[53:25] We're going to start dusting off the budget spreadsheets and get a looking at the

[53:30] 2019 budget process, basically this is on the agenda for the

[53:35] night, just to kind of give you everybody an overview of what

[53:37] the process will look like, kind of get some dates out there.

[53:41] And then we're looking at this point in time too, just to get any

[53:45] feedback, Council may have or what are some of the priorities that

[53:47] you guys want to see included in the 2019 budget as any

[53:51] specific initiatives or anything else you want to start pricing.

[53:55] You can also get those figured out in advance of kind of getting

[53:58] down to the actual point where I can have more final level

[54:03] detail of discussions on it at a feature meeting.

[54:06] Looking at the process for 19, it's going to be pretty similar

[54:08] to the process that I've done in the past year, where tonight,

[54:12] we're just basically grabbing trying to get feedback

[54:14] in one of the drivers for the 19 budget.

[54:17] I'll take those back, work with finance staff and department

[54:21] as a kind of, start putting out some rough numbers to that.

[54:25] And then we'll kind of bring back just kind

[54:27] update back at the June workshop, get it back on the Rails Korean June, so you'll hear a little

[54:31] bit more kind of where we are to date with that. We're still just from a staff and from

[54:36] operational perspective, still pretty early out in the process we're just starting to get this

[54:39] spreadsheets release, so we haven't really got a lot of feedback yet in terms of what 18 or

[54:46] excuse me, what's 18's looking like, we're still kind of looking at where we are, our current budget,

[54:50] looking at future projections. We're early out in the process, so we don't have a lot of hard and fast

[54:54] with this point more kind of just kind of moving targets.

[54:58] Once we bring it back from the June Workshop, we'll kind of go back then and really

[55:01] start to put down and drill down those numbers, try to get some actual numbers that

[55:05] will get brought forward.

[55:06] At this point, looking up a third week in July for a finance committee review, the same

[55:11] process for the last year of finance committee review is it, takes a look at what's kind of

[55:15] flush out to the top, what are the main drivers if there's going to be any increases and budget

[55:20] numbers that are in the specific portion of the budget, why are those increases there?

[55:24] and you decrease the wire there, again, gets feedback from the Finance Committee, or kind

[55:29] of female care at the budget to make sense of transfer changes, and then we'll go back

[55:33] into the August City Council budget workshops.

[55:36] Again, we have four of those scheduled for August 8th, 15th, 20th, 20th, 29th.

[55:43] Again, those are kind of where all the, you know, most of the hammering out of the budget

[55:47] will occur.

[55:49] The first ones usually on general fund and I believe the second two are on the Enterprise Fund,

[55:52] through a water fund, we'll be discussing that.

[55:55] Second two, historically we've never really used all four, but we keep

[55:58] mine the count on this in case we do need to use all four.

[56:01] I think in the past, here's one we've had three, one we had two

[56:04] meetings.

[56:06] When we get through the August workshop, we'll go back then, and it's

[56:09] the 10th meeting that we'll bring forward, the proposed budget, we'll

[56:12] set the intermediaries, lobby numbers, at that point.

[56:15] Again, that'll set the highest, the highest point that we can

[56:19] do staff from September, through December, and then at the December 3rd, well, the public

[56:25] hearings and adopt the 2019 budget.

[56:30] So I guess at this point we're just looking for again, like I said before, any specific priorities

[56:34] issues or services you want, staff to evaluate between now and, you know, as we get into

[56:40] the budget process.

[56:41] It's a good point for us to do it now, we're able to take those back and start doing some

[56:44] costing and start to take a look at where would this fit within the budget, you know,

[56:49] At this point, it's kind of looking for any

[56:51] how the little feedback or what are the priorities for

[56:53] 19.

[56:58] Okay, good.

[56:59] I guess I would like to see the budget held as close to

[57:03] the zero increases possible.

[57:10] We added in some money for assisting

[57:16] changing from black top to earth from dirt asphalt for roads, and I believe we were going

[57:24] to try to continue to fund that every year till we hit a specific level and maintain that.

[57:32] So that will affect our overall budget.

[57:37] I think the city,

[57:41] micro managers, too much in our accounting process.

[57:47] I don't think we need to have a separate fund for shovels and a separate fund for

[57:51] brooms and you know I think we have directors of these departments that do a really

[57:57] good job.

[57:59] I got a lot of faith that they're spending the money properly.

[58:02] So I would like to see a little more simplified accounting systems sometimes for them.

[58:08] That may not happen this year but I'd like that to be our goal is you know to acknowledge

[58:16] Joe, our department heads, you have their budgets and can maintain that without trying to

[58:24] shove that money around from one bucket to the other all year long.

[58:29] And to go along with that, if they don't spend that money, I know because of laws, everything

[58:34] else we can't leave it in there, but some type of placeholder or something else that we can

[58:46] to spend that money, there's no reason to spend it by the end of the year, but that additional

[58:51] money is a placeholder for the next year's budget or one-time purchase is things like

[58:58] that, and they don't know how that can get worked in, but there's got to be some type of way

[59:06] to acknowledge that when somebody is running that department efficiently and they didn't spend

[59:13] everything in their budget that doesn't just disappear and we cut their budget the next year

[59:19] and never give that back to them again.

[59:30] I think the only other thing because I heard it's a lot of them in the consumer career

[59:35] was here.

[59:36] They're trying to budget for depreciation, for wear and tear, whether it's on this building

[59:41] or any of the assets we have, but we don't have any money is building up for the eventual

[59:50] need to put roofs and redo asphalt and different things like that.

[59:56] And we should really...

[1:00:00] Start looking at that. Everything's getting over. I'm just going to be needing to fix those sooner later.

[1:00:10] Just not to carry out. What's the dollar amount department from Japan without having the council approval?

[1:00:17] I'd have to take a look. I believe if it's budgeted. It's a line item as budgeted. I want to say, it's up to, I think it's, I think, a crew policy is 50,000. But that's assuming it's budgeted. Or if it's, you know, so let's say you're looking at replacement truck in the truck budget is 50,000.

[1:00:34] and the estimate comes in at 45.

[1:00:37] I believe current fiscal policy would say

[1:00:39] that the department had to just authorize the purchase

[1:00:41] and this is already a pre that's assuming it's pre-approved,

[1:00:44] pre-approved budgetary expense.

[1:00:47] I have to go back to the policy to confirm the number,

[1:00:49] but that's sticking out in the my head

[1:00:51] is what the number the threshold is,

[1:00:53] but I can confirm that for you.

[1:00:55] What, non-budget items?

[1:00:58] In terms of, like,

[1:01:04] there's a lot of different examples.

[1:01:06] One you could use is say, you have an item next to your equipped budget, small item, the one

[1:01:13] you have breaks down, instead of, you know, it's something you could buy, instead of putting

[1:01:17] money into repair, something that should have been replaced or will be next year, can they

[1:01:21] just go ahead?

[1:01:22] It was within the current budget, so an example would be like, you know, in the IT budget, for

[1:01:28] example, we got a request for, we'd replace all the Wi-Fi access points in the building.

[1:01:33] That's full cost, we're right around approximately 7,000.

[1:01:35] And the end of life, you know, they were no longer

[1:01:37] supported, so we had to keep all those access points

[1:01:40] going, so we looked at the budget.

[1:01:41] They said, well, you can do this in 18.

[1:01:43] However, they got a really good price on them in 17th.

[1:01:46] They found a, you know, like, third of the price or whatever.

[1:01:50] So I authorized the purchase in 17th.

[1:01:52] We was pre-boggeted, that didn't go over the budgetary

[1:01:54] amount, you know, at that point, it was basically that.

[1:01:56] But it came out of the expense.

[1:01:57] I made a decision, get the wireless access points

[1:02:00] installed, because they got a better price than them then.

[1:02:02] And when I looked at the whole budget as a whole,

[1:02:04] we were good on every other capital replacement

[1:02:06] that was anticipated at the time.

[1:02:07] It was October, we had plenty of funds balance.

[1:02:09] So for that type of stuff, the department

[1:02:10] has to do some discretion to figure out.

[1:02:12] As long as you're not going over,

[1:02:14] like what I'm able to do, access points at 7,000,

[1:02:16] if my budget was already spent at say 18,000

[1:02:19] of that 2019 budget, because I've been over budget.

[1:02:22] So there's a little bit of discretion in there

[1:02:24] for them to make those decisions

[1:02:26] if it's a repair or replacement.

[1:02:28] I guess a good example would be a pickup truck

[1:02:31] That's budget in the CIP and my rule of thumb is usually 25,000.

[1:02:36] So what's under 25,000, I don't bring it to council.

[1:02:39] If it was budgeted for last year, her dehumidifier at the water plant broke down.

[1:02:44] I could have paid $5,000 to fix it, or we bought high drives for 25,000 to do both plants.

[1:02:51] I came to council to get approval for that, because it wasn't budgeted for, I could still

[1:02:55] probably fit it within my budget, but then I come to get approval just some direction.

[1:03:00] But anything that I have budgeted in, under my rule, I've found this under 25 grand that

[1:03:05] I don't, I don't bring it to Council because it's been fairly approved.

[1:03:11] Okay.

[1:03:14] No, they solved.

[1:03:15] I mean, we have like a yearly budget for that, right?

[1:03:20] But I mean, if we get a bad winner and you go over that and you have to buy it anyway.

[1:03:25] But is that something where, you know, like, we can have that fund and the unused

[1:03:33] portion build in that fund? Or is that just part of the budget and it comes and goes

[1:03:39] over here? That when you can't, that's just budget at a moment. We've been taximables

[1:03:45] like that, you know, you go through our, you know, unless you set up a salt fund, which creates

[1:03:54] a lot more paper, which, yeah, and another good example to that point is our, you know,

[1:04:03] our seal coating fund and our black top action and our gravel roll, it's not really

[1:04:06] don't come from the taxpayers, it doesn't come from the general level, it comes from the

[1:04:12] state of Minnesota, they give us state $88 300 and almost $400,000 a year. So, in talking

[1:04:20] finance, we're actually going to create a pavement management fund where this that money goes into,

[1:04:25] so then we don't have to feel the need to spend it every year. And when Rick Ryan does a good job

[1:04:30] getting bids and comes in 50,000 under that 50 grand can be used next year or now we have 50

[1:04:38] grand do some concrete sidewalks. We're working with finance that kind of money is going to go on

[1:04:44] own little pot, so at the end of the year, if we don't use that, we can go it up or if we have

[1:04:50] a known overlay and we need to get an extra block but we can take some money out of there

[1:04:53] and get that extra.

[1:04:54] If we have 100,000 saved up on there to get an extra up block, so I think for some of it it works

[1:05:01] well for some that's, I mean you're going to create just a nightmare and you could set up

[1:05:05] a fund for every single line item and you know, a nightmare.

[1:05:09] I think fuel is a good example of that.

[1:05:12] The prices are doing this and they're right now they're doing this.

[1:05:16] So we have to have that figured in there and so it's an unfundable.

[1:05:22] How do you have that on the line?

[1:05:25] Yeah, one of the things that we've talked about simplifying some of the mine items and micromanaging,

[1:05:31] but just breezing through some of the things and maybe I read it wrong.

[1:05:35] But Dave, do we have certain equipment like mowers and stuff that divided up between parks and public works or is it all public works?

[1:05:48] Mostly it's, I thought I saw something in there for like, purchase of mower.

[1:05:53] Yep, so the way the CIP is set up, it's there's parks, streets,

[1:05:59] sewer and water and stormwater, I'll fight in the airport as well,

[1:06:03] they're all kind of, but it's all under public works, right?

[1:06:07] Yep, except for the sewer and water doesn't come out of the general fund, that comes out of enterprise.

[1:06:12] So that, that equivalent of CIP is asked for through rate increases.

[1:06:19] Now, that token, are you familiar with where they should be for the enterprise fund?

[1:06:23] You know, we'll be having a discussion about what that will be definitely a home meeting.

[1:06:31] We're actually meeting how we did a water survey in 2014 and kind of laid out what the cities should be doing.

[1:06:40] And then the recommended ready increases and what was recommended as a Madonna and the increases.

[1:06:46] So I'm going to send all kind of reevaluate here.

[1:06:51] And yeah, that'll be a night to discuss just

[1:06:53] an enterprise once more we're sitting and more we're at.

[1:06:57] Didn't met Council come through the, was it a 10 or 15% rating

[1:07:03] increased or slower?

[1:07:05] It had to, by the way, it sounds.

[1:07:08] I know we had to raise it a great challenge just to have

[1:07:11] it met Council.

[1:07:11] Yeah, it's five percent just in CIP and then another five percent just arbitrary.

[1:07:18] Our sewer fund is actually doing surprisingly well and we gave it a good bump last year

[1:07:22] with the bonding for the Weftation Project.

[1:07:26] But out of the two that's probably the healthiest of the two.

[1:07:30] But the water fund where just an operations were running out of deficit.

[1:07:35] Water funds won't dry.

[1:07:38] Get plugged the week.

[1:07:41] Any other questions on the budget process?

[1:07:43] test of a budget process, I think there's a lot of what I see of need is going to be around

[1:07:52] timing on a lot of the CIP items and so just looking through the CIP schedule there's a lot

[1:07:59] of competing projects and what I think we're going to have to just kind of look at each one

[1:08:04] of those individually and to me it's always helpful to line up what the expenses along with

[1:08:10] What are the funding source?

[1:08:11] Because some of those have grant funds applied, some of them have their own separate revenue

[1:08:16] sources.

[1:08:17] And I think we're just going to have to kind of look at those in total and evaluate what

[1:08:22] is the appetite for 2019.

[1:08:26] And what does that look like going forward and help us make some decisions on where we need

[1:08:30] to place bets first?

[1:08:33] I'd say there's just some big numbers coming up and it's going to require us to make some

[1:08:40] or disation decisions.

[1:08:45] Maybe in preparation, somebody request for staff would be to ask you what can you do to prepare

[1:08:52] I guess make sure that list is as complete as possible, even things like, you know, we talked

[1:08:56] about the conversation came up with the squad, the computers and the squad cars and those

[1:09:02] hadn't previously been on there and so if we could just make sure we have as complete of a list

[1:09:06] possible, then we can kind of wind things up and start making some prioritizations.

[1:09:12] And that's one of the kind of dumps you all are right on the next with a CFP update.

[1:09:16] You know, we haven't actually, you know, again, those works sheets were just sent out.

[1:09:19] You know, so it's on there. So it's basically again, we've been back kind of the 1923 plan.

[1:09:24] You know, so you guys will kind of have the 1822 plan as a reference.

[1:09:27] You kind of know, well, the 1822 plan looked like it was more, you know, as a refresher course

[1:09:32] But we will go through all those 19 to 23 items and kind of show exactly that cost what year it's going to stay

[1:09:40] Again, what are the funding sources for that?

[1:09:43] One thing that we'll probably see on the 19 to 23 that was not on the 18 to 22 is

[1:09:49] I've finally got from at the end of last year a list from Metro

[1:09:53] I knit a kind of what the technology infrastructure

[1:09:56] It's costing would be for this building when this building was built everything was brand new

[1:10:01] Which is great gives us about five to seven years with the activity we've been in for four years now

[1:10:06] So we got start planning for if we need to look at a server upgrade

[1:10:09] I mean, I think wiring is some of that stuff is going to last about an issue

[1:10:12] However

[1:10:14] We're sorry to look at you know, there's some switches networks which is that I mean you get replays there may be some you know

[1:10:19] IT interface up backwards build that we got to replace so just getting that stuff in the pipelines

[1:10:23] We're not all of a sudden hit with you know

[1:10:26] And IT budget that's 20,000, which includes, you know, expenses, a computer-based amount of

[1:10:31] your placement.

[1:10:32] And you're through, like, three networks, which is out in there, and you're probably

[1:10:34] at, you know, again, ballpark, probably 25,000, just for networks, which is because they're

[1:10:38] not inexpensive to get those replaced.

[1:10:40] Now, that being said, it rolls with us a very good job of making sure, and they try to

[1:10:44] be as cost, you know, is conscious of cost as possible.

[1:10:47] However, we're going to start to see that demand at T coming forward.

[1:10:51] So I'm going to start looking at, getting kind of an IT, a rough IT list, to get incorporated

[1:10:55] to disarmate compliance for if you do not work so that you're a server or a server.

[1:11:06] So, the capital improvement,

[1:11:10] a couple of basic questions, but like the new greater we

[1:11:15] bought is on a lease, right? Or did we buy it all right with a buyback? Yeah,

[1:11:30] we

[1:11:31] track that down the line to make sure that, you know, we get that, we're looking up, I mean,

[1:11:42] is there?

[1:11:42] All up here, Ben.

[1:11:43] All up here, Ben.

[1:11:45] No, it's a placeholder in the CIP.

[1:11:49] I mean, I have a strong ult, so it's in that year, it's dilated up there, and then

[1:11:55] Prior to your prior, it'll get brought up in the CIP, like, say if it's, so it's 18, so it'll be 25, so in 23, it'll be brought up that, just the reminder that 25, that's that seven year by back of that grader, just that's a pretty solid number that's going to have to happen to get that guaranteed money back.

[1:12:15] Yeah, so it seems like the best value by far to be able to do that anyways.

[1:12:18] Yeah, because if you skip a year then they'll say, well, it's not only worth 50 grand to us, so I'm tough luck, so I mean, you almost have to hit it on those times to get that.

[1:12:27] You're probably at your initial year, do you know what I'm seven years and come back on your journey, right?

[1:12:31] What was it?

[1:12:32] You'll probably be at your initial year, new one at seven years and come back on your door.

[1:12:36] Yeah, exactly.

[1:12:37] That's true.

[1:12:38] And it gives you leverage, too.

[1:12:39] I mean, if you know you can get say 150,000 back from Ziggler, you can put it on the open market, too.

[1:12:45] and then you can get a contract or that might say,

[1:12:47] okay, well, I'll give you a 165th hour support.

[1:12:51] And it gives you that leverage.

[1:12:52] You know what you're guaranteed and you can't go below that,

[1:12:56] so it's worth shopping and as well.

[1:13:01] And we're at pages you go for almost everything now,

[1:13:05] but like the fire truck will be bonded for a correct order.

[1:13:09] So that's included in the CIP, you know,

[1:13:11] so that's still, we have cash available.

[1:13:13] Yeah, that'll be a cash purchase.

[1:13:15] That will not be bonded for at this point.

[1:13:16] And then that speaks to me at the access fund balance from 17.

[1:13:22] And we allocate that all, that's was allocated in there with the intention of,

[1:13:26] we knew there was a farer trick for us coming in at power and 50,000 in that.

[1:13:30] A moment that was put into the cattle improvement fund was enough,

[1:13:33] basically pay for that.

[1:13:34] So we don't need a bond for these life purchases.

[1:13:36] And the way this is set up, if we maintain that, putting money into that account over

[1:13:40] a year and kind of taking a look at putting it in this much as we have,

[1:13:44] You know, we can kind of allocate out these larger purchases on having to bond from, so we're on track at this point for pay as you go.

[1:13:51] Okay.

[1:13:56] Any other questions?

[1:14:05] There's definitely some expenses there.

[1:14:08] So we need to read you there before the budget comes along, but I think it's a good start.

[1:14:14] Or right now.

[1:14:16] And it all goes the same too.

[1:14:17] Or go ahead.

[1:14:18] I'll try to bring back kind of, I mean, we kind of melded the last, you know,

[1:14:21] the budget process with the CFP kind of the guy.

[1:14:24] But I'll bring back kind of where we are, kind of an update

[1:14:26] at the next workshop, just to kind of say,

[1:14:28] here's what's kind of looking at right now.

[1:14:29] I did talk to Hannah, this afternoon,

[1:14:31] just kind of said, you know, and she said,

[1:14:34] it's a little early in the process to really start

[1:14:36] to put numbers out there.

[1:14:37] She wants to kind of see, she's still trying to

[1:14:39] just some year-end stuff for 17,

[1:14:41] and she should once she clears that,

[1:14:43] she'll know kind of exactly where we are

[1:14:44] and where we can go.

[1:14:46] So I'll start bringing, hopefully,

[1:14:46] back some preliminary numbers at the June assert saying,

[1:14:50] Here's kind of what we're looking at, but we're still a little early in the process.

[1:14:55] Thanks, Dan.

[1:14:59] Excuse me.

[1:15:04] Okay, it's that time again where we're doing our annual maintenance of all of our fire trucks, and last week during maintenance, EAM, who's the company that we use to do the maintenance, discovered a 24-inch crack in the frame on our engine to the one that's coming up for CFP replacement next year.

[1:15:28] Uh, because of the crack, uh, we took it out of service and EAM brought it to storm

[1:15:35] welding and manufacturing and clone, uh, one to determine if it would be, uh, fixable.

[1:15:42] And number two to determine what a cost two fix, if it would be, uh, good news that I

[1:15:48] did get an email, uh, today from storm welding and they have two options for repair, uh, one

[1:15:55] option is to take off the driver's side wheels, grind a B, cut into the frame, and weld it.

[1:16:06] That fix is $976.

[1:16:11] The owner of the company feels that we're probably going to get a year and a half to two years

[1:16:16] out of that fix.

[1:16:18] He feels that the weld itself will stay intact, but we'll start to crack the frame on both sides of that weld.

[1:16:29] Both trucks were built in 1997, and they've got rust jacking issues in the frame, because it's a tubular frame surrounded by a C frame.

[1:16:42] And so that salt and debris gets in there and it starts to rust and expands the frame

[1:16:48] or they break apart and end up with horizontal cracks along the frame.

[1:16:53] I think the end is going to show a picture here.

[1:17:00] The second fix, if we want a more permanent tape of fix, is where they take off the entire box of the engine,

[1:17:08] take out the pump and actually put a clamp or a, well, the clamp over where the frames

[1:17:16] cracked and that's about 20,000 to fix. But since this is coming up for CIP here in the next

[1:17:24] year, we're going to move forward with the $1,000 fix. It seems that it's a better.

[1:17:39] I can beat him as he didn't speak in the middle.

[1:17:41] That was what he was going to do.

[1:17:42] No, I was a member.

[1:17:44] That was the white deco.

[1:17:46] That was the white deco.

[1:17:47] That was the white deco.

[1:17:49] So there's some pictures of the actual cracked frame.

[1:17:55] It looks a little bit bigger than it actually is,

[1:17:57] but it is 24 around 24 inches.

[1:18:03] And that's where that salt gets in between the two frame rails

[1:18:07] and starts to expand out,

[1:18:15] you said that another truck's got the same chassis?

[1:18:20] Well, back in 1997 we purchased two identical trucks were called the twins.

[1:18:26] They're both engine tenders, carry 2500 gallons, as you're aware only a small portion of clumbus

[1:18:35] and a small portion of forest lake have hydrants.

[1:18:39] And so, whenever we have a fire outside the hydrated area, we haul water to the scene.

[1:18:45] And so, that's what those two trucks primary function is to haul water, but they're also back up engines.

[1:18:55] So, they were purchased in 1996 when Rosemar was kind of going through growing pains and they pretty much have been lemons from the day that we received them.

[1:19:04] So, when this two trucks came up for CIP, we spread them out two years so we wouldn't run into that issue again.

[1:19:16] I mean, Rosemar has been a great company to work with, but during the time they were going through growing pains,

[1:19:23] being bought out and expanding, and so we just didn't have luck with those two vehicles.

[1:19:29] Is the electric still here?

[1:19:30] Yeah, we have both of them.

[1:19:32] One's in Columbus, one's in Forsyk.

[1:19:34] It's frame still happy, here we have in this too.

[1:19:37] At this point, we haven't noticed any signs of rust jacking.

[1:19:41] If you can you back up to that middle picture that showed

[1:19:46] right there.

[1:19:47] That's what the inside of the frame looks like,

[1:19:49] but we don't have any that discoloration or metal fatigue

[1:19:54] that you see in the other picture.

[1:19:57] They haven't seen that yet.

[1:19:58] Yeah, when they did annual service, they had noticed the rust jacking last year, but it hadn't cracked at that time.

[1:20:09] It should, all along as you look, truck to me, hold on to this one is getting a place this year, the next one is two years old.

[1:20:15] The next one is 19, so it's next year, and then it's two years after that.

[1:20:19] So 2021 would be the replacement on the second vehicle.

[1:20:23] One of the things that I talked with Dan, when we get this truck repaired and we're able to purchase another one of my recommendation would be to keep this truck.

[1:20:31] kind of as a spare parts truck, in case we lose a transmission, lose an engine, we're able

[1:20:38] to take it from this truck and put it in the other truck.

[1:20:42] We're down so we go to use the truck kind of as a training truck until we replace that

[1:20:49] second one.

[1:20:50] I thought on that, should we do something preventative on the second one, should we get the

[1:20:54] frame blasted and sealed, so we don't end up having this again, something you see should

[1:21:01] done. Yeah, I don't know what the cost versus reward for that is because one you don't

[1:21:11] know if it is going to crack. You just assume that you're potentially going to have that

[1:21:15] issue because you had it in the first one. But $1,000 to repair should it crack.

[1:21:26] It might

[1:21:28] store or store and welding they do a lot of welding on salt trucks as you'd expect that's what they're

[1:21:36] hauling and it gets up in the frame and he says this is actually fairly common and fairly easy to

[1:21:44] fix but you have to address it it's not DOT road worthy until you do they're a heavy medium

[1:21:58] process because this is so new and I've never experienced how I've

[1:22:03] worked with this in the past. Okay, two types of repair. We'll have an impact on

[1:22:11] whatever value this truck may have when you do get rid of it. Well, both trucks are

[1:22:16] going to be first of all, being that you're 22 years old for one and then you're

[1:22:28] for the fire service, both tanks and both trucks are cracked. One's cracked further than the

[1:22:36] other tank and we discussed that the joint fireboard and decided that it just wasn't worth fixing

[1:22:42] the tanks. And then on this engine too we're going to have to disclose that the frame was cracked and repaired.

[1:22:51] So you're probably looking at scrap value on one, and if it didn't have a crack tank, and it didn't

[1:23:00] have a crack frame, you're looking at 10,000, maybe 15,000, for a premium to sell it.

[1:23:08] So scrap value at the one of the crack tank in the frame, and maybe 10,000 for the other one,

[1:23:15] is all you're going to get for trucks out of this age.

[1:23:20] You didn't even get that form, I mean there's not much of a delay for that.

[1:23:25] You know, NFPA only allows you to have those trucks.

[1:23:29] No, it's not a hard and fast go to jail type rule, but they're saying 20 years on an engine.

[1:23:36] So we've exceeded that and there's a lot of smaller departments up north that just don't have the funds to replace engines.

[1:23:43] There are probably farther ahead than we are further behind.

[1:23:49] But then you start getting into reliability issues and repair expats, so there's a point where it doesn't make sense to keep second money into these vehicles.

[1:24:00] This vehicle is down at the repair center now.

[1:24:03] It's down at Cologne and storm-wilding and manufacturing.

[1:24:07] Well, I'll quickly get it back to us.

[1:24:09] I give the OK to move forward with that repair today and we should have it back by Wednesday.

[1:24:14] There is yet the latest.

[1:24:16] I think that's, you know, part of the importance of having it here, because if you

[1:24:21] want dollars to get, you know, cell trucks don't think of the fire truck, I'd love it.

[1:24:26] That's what I believe they're on at that anyway.

[1:24:27] Yeah, I would be devastating at that truck, couldn't be repaired, because it is one of, it's

[1:24:32] 33% of our engine pours, you know, I would change a lot of tactics around and then all

[1:24:39] the fire prevention, things that we use these engines for, we just wouldn't be able to pull it out

[1:24:43] service to do that. So I think what you recommended is really good idea, but I guess one thing

[1:24:54] is, are we going to have somebody designated to watch both of these vehicles in case you do

[1:25:01] develop cracks? I mean, is there a way every time they use that, you know, they can be checked easily,

[1:25:08] I guess, I'd rather, you know, we're going to add that to our annual monthly maintenance.

[1:25:14] So the engineers come in each month and they go through their trucks and they go through

[1:25:18] check batteries, fluids, all your tools, the electrical equipment down there, they do system

[1:25:25] trucks and then we'll add a full check for the frame to make sure that we're not.

[1:25:30] at least at the stress point where it's at because you know there's could have been there for almost a year

[1:25:37] or without a deep on it in a way.

[1:25:41] All right.

[1:25:45] I think just one point of clarification on that is, you know, part of this conversation, I think we've

[1:25:49] got lucky and we're able to get, you know, this trucker paid at a reasonable, you know,

[1:25:53] right.

[1:25:53] Because the wind sufficiently was kind of brought forward, you know, the repair estimate

[1:25:57] range between $20 and $50, because you just didn't know if they could even repair the

[1:26:01] you know, was the first issue and if it did, get thicker if you knock the truck to do it

[1:26:05] basically with all of it. So, you know, I think I extremely lucky that the repair is going

[1:26:10] to be around $1,000, you know, to do it. But I think that kind of dump shells in the larger

[1:26:14] conversation in terms of, we have an engine that's in the CIP for 19, you know, for discussion

[1:26:20] though, it's part of, and to keep you making kind of, you know, cutting from the library,

[1:26:25] it's something like when you authorize your purchase of a truck or you order one to go as

[1:26:29] to do require a down payment to basically start that process.

[1:26:33] So would be original intended to start in that process in 19

[1:26:35] that could take up to a year to a year and a half for them

[1:26:37] from a time to place the order for that truck

[1:26:39] to be ready to come in the service?

[1:26:42] So part of what we had kind of had a conversation about

[1:26:45] is really a first kind of front mode that the design work

[1:26:49] of the, because it's kind of entirely unique.

[1:26:52] The fight for home needs to go through and say,

[1:26:53] what do they want in the next engine,

[1:26:54] what are the design components, kind of look through

[1:26:56] do all that kind of, you know, front end work to make sure they're doing the right and

[1:27:01] be a call, the right piece of equipment that I'll ask them for the next 20 years.

[1:27:05] I think originally, the team that I talked about doing that work kind of later on in 18 with

[1:27:09] preparation for bringing the Dalperate in 19, over kind of giving this new South Circumstance,

[1:27:14] that we're kind of on somewhat aspect a little bit on about time with this thing, and I

[1:27:19] think we'll be okay, you know, in talking with the HRSA, this will bridge us to in the

[1:27:24] like it arrives, there's been in the discussion points of kind of fast tracking that design

[1:27:29] work on the five public side, which could potentially have the design work done in 18

[1:27:34] while all in us to get that order placed with the order by the end before 19.

[1:27:40] My advice for anything you can do to kind of exploit that process could help get that truck

[1:27:45] in service here and in the city earlier, you know, because you can catch a met-up, you know,

[1:27:50] could save some time on delivery. The issue kind of becomes, you know, I guess they kind of

[1:27:55] type which are the consequences point is, how comfortable would you be if we frontloaded

[1:27:59] the design work, everything done, and those borrowers wanted to advance the half-down payment

[1:28:03] into 18 versus so we could decide the CAP from 1918.

[1:28:09] I'm actually, you go through that building phase which take a couple months to decide what

[1:28:15] you'd want in the truck, you'd order the cabin chassis and that takes six months to deliver

[1:28:20] and at that time then the dumping will do. So this would be all in name.

[1:28:24] Oh, that's all in name. Okay, so that's new information I got. So this would be what I just said.

[1:28:29] I never, I never said that was all information. Well, yeah, when I, when I, when I

[1:28:33] impact 20 team budget, something that we're going to bring up to the Joint Fire Board to get this

[1:28:39] process, I don't want to get the car before the horse, was to just verify that this is something

[1:28:46] that the council wants to move forward with on 19, and then if it is, then we'll start putting

[1:28:53] together that truck committee and fast-track that, because everybody that's on the department's

[1:28:59] all paid on call, so to put that committee and put all those hours together to come up

[1:29:05] what the design and build, we don't want to do that until we're for sure that we're probably

[1:29:11] going to move forward with the CIP purchase.

[1:29:20] When it comes to the fire equipment, I know it's specialized, but I think more than one company

[1:29:26] that you've been against, or how does that work?

[1:29:28] Yes, you put it out to bed.

[1:29:30] You basically will speck out what cabin chassis you want, and then what you're looking for

[1:29:35] home capabilities, equipment, and then you would send it out to the four or five main builders,

[1:29:43] and then they would come in and basically do sealed beds, you'd open them up and then

[1:29:50] whatever lowest bid or the company that's capable of building what you're looking for, they

[1:29:57] would get the award, and at that point, then you'd order.

[1:30:00] For that cabin chassis, that's about six months out, and it's about six months to build.

[1:30:05] So typically, your truck committee takes about six months to call different manufacturers, research,

[1:30:13] everything, come up with a plan. We kind of want to put all the hours together pretty quickly,

[1:30:19] and try to cut that down to two or three months instead of six months.

[1:30:25] So I've got a couple of questions.

[1:30:30] To me 20 years seems like a too long time to have something valuable as a fire truck.

[1:30:39] I mean, our police guys are in and out of here in three years.

[1:30:43] So do they have programs, buybacks, anything poor, maybe, you know, this vehicle would then go to a smaller city,

[1:30:54] department that doesn't have the budget we do so we can have newer modern equipment, maybe

[1:31:02] every eight or ten years and still at 20 or 24 years to replace something like this.

[1:31:08] I'm not really aware of any programs like that, most departments when they purchase a truck

[1:31:13] will use it right out to the end of the life cycle, you know, obviously with like department

[1:31:20] like St. Paul or Minneapolis that are running a ton of different runs, they don't get the

[1:31:25] 20 years out of a vehicle, smaller departments like ours, we normally do.

[1:31:34] These two trucks have just not been great trucks from the start.

[1:31:38] Had they not had all the issues they had, we'd probably get even a couple more years out

[1:31:44] of them.

[1:31:46] We're very good with our maintenance, we keep up with annual maintenance, plus monthly maintenance,

[1:31:52] and that does make a difference when you look at the expense and maintenance from the other trucks that we have.

[1:32:00] These two are just expensive to maintain.

[1:32:04] So I hear you're saying it.

[1:32:07] It's all a good plan, and it'd be nice to have a newer truck less than every 20 years,

[1:32:12] But I'm just not aware of any programs that are out there.

[1:32:15] I can ask a couple of manufacturers if they're aware of that.

[1:32:20] I mean, it would be nice to be able to, I guess, both of these trucks are vital.

[1:32:27] There's no question about that.

[1:32:29] And for both of them to be in that 20 plus year range.

[1:32:34] And yes, we have to replace them, but we're going to be in that same position 20 years down

[1:32:42] And it would be nice to have on every eight or 10 years or you'd have that spread out so that, you know, you know, we got a fresh truck available.

[1:32:55] We need to look at that or you know, I suppose even.

[1:32:58] Now you have different designations and this one's an engine tender.

[1:33:03] I don't know how that, I don't need to know how that works in there right now, but you know,

[1:33:07] If this is where we need to be in the future, I mean, obviously you've got more calls than ever,

[1:33:15] but less calls for fire and more for the rescue or so, you know, evaluating that equipment.

[1:33:21] And making sure we have the right equipment, I think, is part of that too, because I'm sure you're going to be needing to add something with the mom calls for getting.

[1:33:34] And then just last point was, you know, learn from our mistakes,

[1:33:40] but, you know, this truck is

[1:33:41] rushing underneath, you know, there's not going to be any changes coming up in the future.

[1:33:46] So, if this frame on the next trucks can be galvanized or stainless steel, if it's an option,

[1:33:53] but, you know, something to help with that corrosion, but I'm just as concerned about

[1:33:58] electronics, there's more modern electronics on these things and computers and everything else

[1:34:03] and they're not going to hold up for 20 years, I just, you know, there's going to be issues

[1:34:10] going down the line with all that type of stuff.

[1:34:14] So, I think you struck out, are you a capacity weight-wise, can you get a bigger tanker?

[1:34:19] I don't know.

[1:34:20] That's a lot of capacity for those trucks, if you start getting into bigger tankers,

[1:34:26] to get into length issues and getting into tighter driveways

[1:34:32] becomes a bigger issue.

[1:34:37] And let's ask them to get a fixed, pretty affordably.

[1:34:41] I just think what the safety aspect on that one.

[1:34:45] I've worked on with rental myself.

[1:34:46] I understand that when he's dressed in area,

[1:34:49] that breaks not the only point.

[1:34:54] Kind of a long line of the earlier placement.

[1:34:55] that do we currently go through any of a purposement or move a body on a new cabin chassis

[1:35:02] halfway through the life and have it refurbished? Is that something that we're doing?

[1:35:07] We actually have, we have a 19e5, 4 9000, which is just a tender by itself. That's in Columbus.

[1:35:17] We did a full body of restoration, 8 or 10 years ago, and that trucks don't serve us an

[1:35:24] would expect that truck to be in service probably for another 10 years even though it's

[1:35:31] I think it costs us $1,100 for annual maintenance and service last year, so it is actually

[1:35:38] our least expensive truck and probably most reliable, no electronics, but it doesn't run

[1:35:45] for me miles a year, because for that to get down the road, you have a pretty big need

[1:35:53] board and the other two twins that were looking at replacing, they had a whole body of frustration

[1:36:01] I think five years ago and it started to rust through in some of the areas that were just

[1:36:10] repaired not too many years ago.

[1:36:12] So we actually do go through that process and try to extend the length of the vehicle.

[1:36:19] If you have mutual aid calls with these two, some of the trucks that would go out or what

[1:36:24] all depends on what the mutual aid call is.

[1:36:28] If it's a large structure fire, 41, 27 or 10 or 1 out of Columbus, that does go out for

[1:36:34] those.

[1:36:36] We try not to empty all the trucks out of our areas, we still have coverage in porcelain,

[1:36:41] typically a tender engine and then a tender, but it's a fairly large fire, and then we'll

[1:36:49] to airboat on some brush trucks of a grass fire. So it all depends on what the call is,

[1:36:56] but I heard some you had mentioned about buying the late trucks. One of the things that we're

[1:37:03] looking at is 41-20, which is our rescue squad, with increase in vehicle accidents, medical calls.

[1:37:10] That's a command center vehicle, so it's fairly large, so we'll move around and medical is,

[1:37:15] for a lift assist, we're sending that truck out and so they, a lot of departments have done

[1:37:22] as they started going with a smaller, pretty much utility, utility vehicle, it's built on a

[1:37:29] one ton or a 450 frame with a box and they put their extrication tools in that and they're

[1:37:35] medical tools out on that and so their heavy rescues that run around $500,000 to replace,

[1:37:43] They can buy 150 to $200,000 a pickup truck type vehicle and run in those on the majority

[1:37:51] of the small-type calls to extend the life of that rescue squad considerable amount of time.

[1:38:00] Yeah, I'll make sense.

[1:38:04] Any other questions for the chief?

[1:38:08] All right.

[1:38:10] Good job, Bill.

[1:38:14] All right.

[1:38:17] Open on to nine.

[1:38:18] Other

[1:38:21] public things.

[1:38:23] And maybe Dave, this is more for you than anything.

[1:38:27] But you can get in complaints about significant increase traffic on some of their

[1:38:34] roads due to road construction, and can we put calcium chloride down, or whatever the mixture

[1:38:44] is, and it's not in our budget,

[1:38:50] but staff wants any feedback on that, or if we can get pricing

[1:38:54] or see if there are some roads that definitely would benefit from it.

[1:39:01] The price-wise, it's about three bucks a gallon and you apply it at whatever, 0.3 gallons per

[1:39:12] square foot, so about $4,300 to $5,000 per mile

[1:39:21] country block is $5,000 a slot and that's

[1:39:26] a time per ton.

[1:39:30] Depends on when you apply your first one, if you apply it later on, you can maybe get away

[1:39:37] with one, but typically two, you do one in May, and then one in August, early August.

[1:39:45] I got, I got, right, enough for a mile.

[1:39:48] So for the city, if you figured 30 miles, it'd be $130 to $150,000 per application.

[1:39:54] If you did all of our railroads.

[1:39:57] Well, I've just talked a couple of them that are seeing a lot of, you just want people to really call me, don't you?

[1:40:05] Why did you spray on the crest and not my road?

[1:40:08] I got a second or an email. I didn't get the initial and all I asked for. How many miles are we talking here?

[1:40:14] Let me really complain about.

[1:40:17] I had to have that up, but five miles, ten miles probably would be having to deal with.

[1:40:22] You made your complaints, sir.

[1:40:24] Elmcrest, Fenway, 180th, 180th, 180th.

[1:40:30] Keith,

[1:40:33] it's about here. One's right there. Those chunks.

[1:40:37] All of those other restrictions because of water shed requirements and any of those areas are burning.

[1:40:46] All of them are eligible for it.

[1:40:48] Not for calcium cleria, because it doesn't run off, you blend it in when you're in six to the go.

[1:40:56] Yeah,

[1:41:00] just kind of curious to be able to put this in a line item for Jane to work on it on one project maybe.

[1:41:07] I

[1:41:10] definitely see the benefit, I mean, the heavily traveled roads, but also I mean if you're gonna throw $300,000 a year at keeping a dust on a gravel throw $300,000 a double chip ceiling and knock out three miles of gravel roads and double chip ceiling.

[1:41:26] And those three miles are good for six years without really any maintenance.

[1:41:30] I mean, I think there's maybe a part calcium chloride in a part of the average increase.

[1:41:37] I mean, because I double-chipsing that for sure to sell that great.

[1:41:40] There's a couple of hot holes that we're going to patch in.

[1:41:44] And I mean, you made it through a whole winter.

[1:41:46] I think that's...

[1:41:49] If I were to be spending the month, it was my money.

[1:41:52] I would spend it on double-chipsing.

[1:41:54] You want to focus on chipselling.

[1:41:56] Maybe these roads that are going to be beat up.

[1:41:59] because of the project structure.

[1:42:02] Yeah, I mean, even the double chip, so 1.9, you know what I mean, basically we'll have it

[1:42:06] from here all the way to 61 and all 61 almost the fin wake as it'll be millions in there.

[1:42:11] So all that will be double chip, so I mean, kind of what we're doing and still the chip

[1:42:15] sign is just going in these places as well.

[1:42:17] And we're coming up on here all from 1.80 up to up to 2 curves.

[1:42:23] So we're kind of systematically attacking these roads that we get the complaints on, you know.

[1:42:30] The system doesn't work well, you know, of course you've got it.

[1:42:33] Too, I wanted to take it and do the process, not that I should prohibit this, but, you know,

[1:42:36] if you're shutting down somebody's alternative route.

[1:42:39] To do the calcium chloride of the double chip sealant, that will keep the sealant.

[1:42:42] They just do one way out of the time to set black tap and so I'll spray one side and chip it

[1:42:46] and then open it up and then spray the other side.

[1:42:49] So you shut down the lane, basically closing the lane off for over a long ago.

[1:42:57] You'll have a lot to give you that.

[1:42:58] The contact heal will be if you're wanting to see it this year when they're doing it.

[1:43:02] It's pretty neat to watch them do it, it's pretty fast and it's amazing how hard I'll

[1:43:09] set up against almost immediately.

[1:43:12] That's good.

[1:43:12] That's not right.

[1:43:13] I'm able to score any.

[1:43:17] It's on the radar, but they don't have any that they're not ready to use them in their own.

[1:43:24] They're using it for the reason I think for the bridge and things like that right now.

[1:43:30] Contractors don't like it too when we tell our world projects we don't want to give it up

[1:43:34] be it.

[1:43:34] It's odd commodity.

[1:43:36] It's worth it.

[1:43:37] Put your creativity.

[1:43:38] So anyways, I'm sure.

[1:43:41] Not as much on these two projects because the road is so down on the Northwest part and then

[1:43:45] hey we're that we can't pull straight millions, we're just reclaiming the road and it'll

[1:43:49] be like a blend, you know, 50, 50 blend, which is better than nothing but it's I mean

[1:43:58] If you used to just throw it away, I mean they tear up a rod and just discard it, thinking

[1:44:01] it wasn't worth anything.

[1:44:02] And I mean, I'll dump it back in and make new rolls with it, plus use it for base.

[1:44:07] And it's a high commodity.

[1:44:10] Then we'll work now along.

[1:44:12] Yep.

[1:44:17] Last question for me at the airport.

[1:44:20] It's seen very annoying.

[1:44:24] And what's the schedule?

[1:44:26] I mean, along the runway, obviously, you need to get more and more than others.

[1:44:30] is earning just more, everything at once or I was at that. Typically, once a week, once a week

[1:44:37] until July and that's all down, that's once every 10 days to two weeks. It's sort of

[1:44:43] more on the entire airport like that.

[1:44:48] Seems like I don't, sort of way we can adjust that

[1:44:53] to where, you know, around the runways gets more but the others can leave it a little bit

[1:44:58] So we're not

[1:45:00] How many hours in the home?

[1:45:02] I guess the only downside is if you had to go, then you'd have to use different equipment to try to cut that other stuff down.

[1:45:08] If you stay up with your progressive and your ground master, you constantly moan at that three inches.

[1:45:12] If you'd like to grow up to a foot, then you can't use those doors anywhere and knock it down.

[1:45:17] So you're changing the behavior, or something all you need to do?

[1:45:22] I don't think it'd be a conversation. The airport commission could have with tailors and see if there's any other land there that they would like to crop.

[1:45:29] I mean, that's completely fine.

[1:45:32] Don't forsake the reasons you want to keep that not a track of the wildlife, right?

[1:45:37] That's part of it.

[1:45:39] But yeah, it's just a safety thing, too.

[1:45:42] We'll go on.

[1:45:43] But I'd have to agree, and it seems to me that even kind of let it go.

[1:45:48] It's just going to make it tougher in the next time to do it, you know?

[1:45:53] But maybe cost you more even.

[1:45:55] I don't know.

[1:45:55] Yeah, that's why I'm asking.

[1:45:57] I understand more than parks on a weekly schedule, but there's no activity.

[1:46:05] I mean, the runways are there, but I'm not a pilot.

[1:46:10] I don't know.

[1:46:11] That's why I'm asking the questions very quickly.

[1:46:13] I would just think that we could save the 110 hours a week or whatever.

[1:46:18] No, the one thing I just want to make sure, Dave, that, you know,

[1:46:22] the lights there, the hands and that area, we should, the city should not be mowing any of that.

[1:46:28] I mean, that's all to the innovative light owners or whatever you want to call them.

[1:46:33] And I think the airport commission said letters, I'll make sure that everybody's doing that part of it.

[1:46:39] Because they are really responsible for their own lights.

[1:46:41] I'm going to ask you a little bit of the commercial.

[1:46:44] Yeah.

[1:46:45] Absolutely.

[1:46:45] You know.

[1:46:49] We're not maintaining that.

[1:46:50] We're all of that.

[1:46:51] I think he's more concerned about just being able to get in and out of the hand here.

[1:46:55] You know, that kind of thing.

[1:46:58] Those individuals at Watts, we got to make sure that the city isn't spending time doing that.

[1:47:02] Yeah.

[1:47:02] It's been past practice that they've just kind of, you know, before a lot of them weren't purchased.

[1:47:07] You know, they weren't.

[1:47:07] Right.

[1:47:07] So we just kind of swan in and mowed all of them.

[1:47:10] And if they're all purchased on either.

[1:47:11] And we're also going to go and also.

[1:47:15] Plaza, no, we almost got the whole center mold.

[1:47:17] And if you've been out there lately, the center of the airport

[1:47:20] and the Queen of the Netherlands attacks you in.

[1:47:22] Yeah, almost all, but more down now.

[1:47:24] So that's the right old, that's a positive,

[1:47:30] a new mold.

[1:47:31] A new mold, a new mold.

[1:47:33] Very nice.

[1:47:34] You shaved about six hours in my life of the meetings.

[1:47:40] And we'll probably share what a half a day out of the airport.

[1:47:45] So, again, ten hours a week, you know the facts, lovely.

[1:47:51] Excellent.

[1:47:51] A little talk when your operator is at Big Rig Day, he said you're a nice,

[1:47:55] So, yeah.

[1:47:56] It's good to hear that it cuts some grass and it doesn't slow it on you.

[1:48:00] That it progressive that we have, you get wet grass and you'll just fog it.

[1:48:04] That's all just power it through it.

[1:48:07] Those anchors have torque.

[1:48:09] Those anchors have torque.

[1:48:10] Yeah, they do.

[1:48:13] All right.

[1:48:15] Anything else to bring up of the workshop?

[1:48:19] Come off you again?

[1:48:20] So moved?

[1:48:21] Oh second?

[1:48:22] I wasn't there either?

[1:48:23] Hi.

[1:48:24] Hi.

[1:48:37] There you are.

[1:48:38] All the last.

[1:48:42] Yeah.

[1:48:42] All right.

[1:48:43] All right.

[1:48:44] All right.

[1:48:46] All right.

[1:48:51] Thank you.

City Council Workshop

Transcript