[0:00] Here.

[0:03] I had burgers tonight.

[0:18] » All right. I'm calling the Village of Cross Plains Board of Trustees meeting

[0:23] for August 24th, 2026. The order roll call, please.

[0:28] » Trustee Henry. >> Here.

[0:32] » Trustee Brokish. >> Here.

[0:34] » Trustee Here. Trustee Brookman.

[0:37] » Here. >> Trustee Polmakowski.

[0:40] » Here. >> Trustee Kettlebaker.

[0:42] » Here. >> President Huff.

[0:43] » Here. Please stand for Pledge of Allegiance.

[0:47] I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America

[0:52] and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with

[0:58] liberty and justice for all.

[1:04] All right, we are at public comment. This is an opportunity for anyone to

[1:07] address the Village Board on any issue. Please observe the time limit of 3

[1:12] minutes. While the Village Board encourages input from residents, it may

[1:16] not discuss or act on any issue that is not duly noticed on the agenda.

[1:21] Do we have anybody that would like to speak?

[1:23] » We have Seth Johnson. >> Seth, come on up.

[1:28] » State your name and address if you could, please.

[1:30] » Sure. Seth Johnson, 512 North Century Road,

[1:32] Cross Comments are specifically on the items

[1:37] four six Um

[1:40] I don't know if I need to do everything, but um

[1:43] for the Park Street improvements, I saw on the the packet probably for the

[1:48] breakdown of the costs uh estimated costs and I had a little bit of a mirror

[1:51] there that our Park Street curb and gutter

[1:54] would be replaced. I just hoping that

[1:57] » [clears throat] >> the village is even this is an

[1:58] opportunity to connect connect for pedestrians and bikes and that we put

[2:03] half in our sidewalk in the entire length of the street for

[2:06] safety and then when we reconstruct the brewery.

[2:09] The right of way from post office west appears to be wide enough to do that to

[2:14] the to put it a path on one side of the street to the entire

[2:18] length. The block with post office and the EMS is it looks like it's a little

[2:22] narrower. You can certainly sidewalk in there but there's already sidewalk on

[2:25] obviously both sides of the street. So I hope the village doesn't miss an

[2:29] opportunity to create nice connection get the kids

[2:33] going to and from our school off the street so that's not as safe.

[2:38] Right now with the the street on the shoulder facing by the the government.

[2:42] So if the costs don't reflect that

[2:48] In general for when you're talking about capital improvement projects

[2:51] I know there's an item in there for street resurfacing every year.

[2:55] I'd like to see the village consider having that pot whether it's in there or

[3:00] a separate pot for spot safety improvements that may come up because I

[3:04] think there's a number of opportunities here in the village

[3:08] where we can make targeted improvements that aren't necessarily big budget

[3:12] items. And then they come up

[3:16] on short notice. I just want to see the

[3:19] like the village consider either increasing the the street resurfacing

[3:23] budget every year or have a separate pot for safety improvements.

[3:29] Thank you for your time. >> All right, thank you.

[3:34] Is there anybody on the internet? >> I do not see anyone.

[3:39] » All right. We'll go to consent agenda. On request

[3:44] of any trustee any item may be removed from the consent agenda for separate

[3:49] consideration under general business. Any trustees that would like an item

[3:55] separated? All right, do I have a motion?

[4:00] » I'll make a motion to approve the consent agenda.

[4:05] » Do I have a second? >> I'll second it.

[4:08] » I have a motion and a second. Any discussion?

[4:12] All in favor say I. >> I.

[4:15] » All same. So moved.

[4:20] All right, we're having board of village officers.

[4:24] Uh village president just uh two items. One, you notice that you are not

[4:30] receiving the base budget at the end of tonight's meeting, which is generally

[4:35] our our process. Um because of not getting We don't

[4:41] believe we're going to get the tip for money's for next year.

[4:46] We have to go to plan B, which was a zero base, and all increases have to be

[4:52] placed on a supplement budget request form.

[4:56] So to give staff more time because they submitted budgets with a 2% increase. So

[5:02] just to rework that, so you'll be receiving at the first meeting in

[5:06] September, and then we'll have the discussion at the second meeting in

[5:10] September. So that's number one. Number two, I've extended, reluctantly, the

[5:16] deadline for committees to get their changes to the comprehensive plan.

[5:23] Uh the deadline was September 1st. Well, I've moved it to October 1st, but we

[5:28] need to get that stuff in

[5:32] so we can put our draft uh comprehensive plan

[5:36] uh together. Plan and sustainability have done theirs.

[5:40] And again, you don't have to do all nine chapters. There's certain chapters that

[5:45] are applicable to your committee, so those are the ones you should be looking

[5:50] at. And, you know, Sarah for like parks and rec, you can certainly refer to the

[5:55] 5-year plan instead of rewriting everything that's in there. But, there

[6:00] needs to be the sections that uh we do that in cuz that is due

[6:06] uh we have to have it by 2018 uh 2018. >> 2020

[6:10] » Oh, 2028. >> The last one was 2018.

[6:14] » So, please get your committee to uh put that on the agenda and let's try to get

[6:18] that in October. >> And I'll send an email that includes a

[6:22] link to the document. We have a working Word document with all of the changes so

[6:26] far, so you can just add those changes to the document. So, look out for an

[6:30] email from me tomorrow. >> All right, that's all I have.

[6:34] Village Vice President >> Um just an announcement. Um

[6:39] Hillen Bailey will be out of the park in a couple weeks. I think November 19th or

[6:43] something like that. That will be over there. We have two anniversaries. We

[6:47] have Jill Hedge. She's here at 3 years on August 9th.

[6:51] And Matthew Hester, who's given us his resignation, but he would be here at 3

[6:55] years on August 7th. >> Perfect.

[6:58] Thank you. Other trustee reports?

[7:04] All right, Village Administrator >> Yeah, I just have the one um just keep

[7:08] updating on those Bear Street poles, those um um poles that MG&E owns. Um so,

[7:14] all of them have been All of those extra poles have been removed except for two.

[7:18] Um and MG&E is pushing for removal of those two extra poles. So, that was just

[7:22] something that had come up at a past meeting, but that's all I have.

[7:26] » Okay, thank you. Village Department Heads Okay, I got

[7:30] Bobby, then the Chief. >> Um just another reminder, Board of

[7:34] Review is September 16th at 5:00. Um because of reassessments this year, we

[7:39] are I'm um people to show up for a hearings.

[7:43] Since I've been the clerk, we haven't had any, so

[7:46] that should be interesting. I did pull out some older videos that we have, but

[7:51] people want to refresh themselves on what they can be expecting for that. I'm

[7:55] also going to put together kind of a

[7:58] 101 for you guys to just kind of update your

[8:04] see what kind of things we should be expecting or looking for, things we can

[8:07] or can't do. Just a little brief.

[8:10] » Okay. >> Instead of a question, I don't know if

[8:12] this is the time to ask it. So, if they came to repeal or appeal

[8:15] before, could they lower get a lower before?

[8:19] » Yeah, but so and they still have an opportunity to do

[8:22] that for the next couple weeks to change their assessment. It's if you've already

[8:26] worked with the assessor and you still don't agree with them, then this is the

[8:30] the first step in appealing. This is, you know, kind of like a quasi-judicial

[8:34] thing where you guys are essentially like a jury.

[8:37] » That makes sense. >> Yeah.

[8:40] » Is there you have someone who's been trained?

[8:45] » I I did the certified train for this year.

[8:48] » Okay. >> Um and I think probably he's going to

[8:50] watch a video. I did have another one here, also.

[8:52] » Yeah, I told you. I'm going to watch I I I was trained what, 3 4 years ago,

[8:57] so >> I've been trained a couple times and I

[8:59] just sit in there >> Yeah, I just want to refresh. That's

[9:01] what I'm doing. I'm just going to watch the video.

[9:03] » When you get done with that, can you just give me a call and then I can pick

[9:06] it up and watch it? >> Yeah, I think these ones here are like

[9:08] the 2020, so they're a little bit longer, but it's just a

[9:12] » The basics are the same. >> Yeah, the basics are the same, yeah. And

[9:15] who's running that meeting? Who's chair? >> Whoever we vote.

[9:18] » Yeah, that gets taken care of that night.

[9:20] » Well, I know, but okay, who are we thinking?

[9:24] We should give them a heads-up. If you >> So, like

[9:26] » Generally, I think in the past it's been the person who's had the

[9:30] » The training. >> The training.

[9:31] » Right. >> Well, I I don't want if it's all of a

[9:34] sudden dumped on me, I want to prep for it, all right? I don't want to be at

[9:37] 5:00, especially when we got lots of people, because this year I agree there

[9:41] will be people. So, we should be well informed on how this works. And I

[9:46] » I can do it. I've done it. So, if you don't want to do it,

[9:50] » If no one wants to do it, that's fine. If you want to take it, we I mean, we're

[9:53] not going to nominate now. So, if you're willing, then yeah, then I'm not going

[9:57] to fight you for it. Oh,

[10:00] we're not going to have a vote on that. >> The only thing I wanted to mention is

[10:05] normally because we don't have anybody show up, we like bring food in and like

[10:09] take a pause and eat during the 2-hour thing. I don't know if we'll have time

[10:12] for that this year, so we see beforehand. I'll

[10:16] » Yeah, I agree. >> I'll bring in some snacks in case we do

[10:18] » And the difference is we're not voting this up against the board meeting.

[10:22] » Yeah. Yeah. >> This is just for the that night, for

[10:26] that. So, that's understandable. >> And then

[10:29] um oh, so if it goes over 2 hours, you got plenty of time.

[10:33] » Yeah. >> Okay.

[10:35] » I have two questions. >> Go ahead.

[10:39] » Um are all trustees supposed to be at this?

[10:44] » Yeah. >> Yeah.

[10:44] » Yes. >> Okay, I wasn't unaware of that.

[10:47] Um second question, what do we do if a trustee uh is contesting

[10:52] one? >> That's a good question. I'm going to

[10:54] bring that up at the staff meeting uh with the attorney, cuz um for sure

[11:00] you're not going to be able to vote on your own case, but I could also see that

[11:04] there's a conflict all the way through. So, I will ask that question to our

[11:09] attorney at the staff meeting, which is the first Wednesday. So, we'll we'll

[11:13] send something out on what the attorney has to say.

[11:17] » Okay.

[11:23] » All right. Anything else, Bobby? >> Uh nope, that's all for

[11:27] » Chief? >> Uh just real quick, we had a great Uh,

[11:30] National Night Out, it was all attended. Um, nothing but positive comments. Um,

[11:35] and then two things we uh, we gave an award to Taylor Figerson at our last

[11:41] public safety meeting for his enforcement on traffic. It's definitely

[11:46] our number one problem and he does a great job working on that proactively.

[11:51] Uh, and then secondly, uh, we awarded uh, Zach Esser a life-saving award. He

[11:57] and I responded on June 8th to a pulse-less non-breather and we brought

[12:02] him back and so I I awarded him a life-saving award.

[12:06] That's just one of the little points. Thank you.

[12:08] » It And that was a very nice event, National

[12:11] Night Out. By far the best.

[12:13] » I agree. I agree. >> Yeah, it was really cool.

[12:16] All right. Anybody else? Okay. Elizabeth and then Hank. Hank.

[12:22] » Oh, I was just going to say too that Matt Esser returns two weeks. Um, we

[12:26] swore him in last going to Meridian home, so.

[12:29] » Yeah. >> So, thank you.

[12:30] » All right, thank you. Elizabeth?

[12:32] » Yeah, I just wanted to give a quick recap of summer reading. Since we

[12:35] wrapped that up, we haven't had any this year

[12:38] since I've been here. Uh, made a 40% increase for the adult

[12:42] program, which is huge. Um, circulation is up almost a thousand since the last

[12:46] July. Um, programs have been up a lot.

[12:50] Yeah, a lot of new programs. Our program library is up super fun. We have some

[12:58] » Very good, thank you.

[13:02] And that should get just about everybody, right? Matt, you got

[13:05] anything? Okay.

[13:07] » I'm the one that did. >> Yeah.

[13:09] All right. General business. First one, consideration of

[13:16] recognizing 2026 as Hunger Action Month in the Village of Cross Plains.

[13:21] Sarah? >> Okay. Um,

[13:24] would Do like me to go ahead and read it to

[13:26] » Well, why don't you introduce who's here and and a little bit of background on

[13:31] it, I guess. >> Okay. So, we have Leslie and Beth here

[13:34] from WayForward and they'll speak in just a moment. But, um

[13:40] So, Hunger Action Month is something that they have had and I saw the city of

[13:44] Middleton had declared this and I thought since WayForward is serving the

[13:49] village of Cross Plains, I'd like to see us get more involved

[13:52] with WayForward. So, that's why we've decided to do the proclamation.

[13:56] Um and then in the village, we are having our um the Can-tastic Sculpture

[14:01] Contest. In fact, the library and the EMS actually both have entries. And if

[14:06] you stop by Culvers, you'll see their setup. And um also, we have Century 21

[14:13] Primrose, Glacier Creek staff, and a neighborhood group. So, um

[14:17] so, you'll soon see the voting come up for that. So, it's just a way to get us

[14:22] um more connected with WayForward and so that our residents can know that this is

[14:25] a good service that they can access. >> Very good.

[14:29] » All right. So, I will go ahead and read it. So, uh

[14:33] So, this is the proclamation to uh declare Hunger Action Month for the

[14:38] month of September 2026 in the village of Cross Plains, Wisconsin.

[14:44] Whereas, 32% of Dane County households struggle to afford the basic necessities

[14:49] of housing, child care, health care, food, and transportation. And whereas,

[14:54] 10.7% of Dane County residents and 17% of children in Dane County are food

[15:00] insecure, meaning they lack reliable and consistent access to nutritious food.

[15:05] And whereas, food insecurity can affect individuals and families facing

[15:09] challenges such as rising living costs, housing expenses, unemployment, and

[15:15] low-wage employment. And whereas, a lack of access to nutritious food can

[15:19] contribute to increased risk of nutrition-related health conditions. And

[15:24] whereas WayForward Resources in Middleton operates a year-round food

[15:27] pantry that provides nutritious food at no cost to area residents, including

[15:32] residents of Cross Plains, supplementing food that individuals and families are

[15:37] able to purchase or grow on their own. And whereas the food pantry provides an

[15:40] important resource for people experiencing food insecurity, including

[15:44] families, senior citizens, people with disabilities, and individuals of all

[15:49] ages. And whereas WayForward distributes the equivalent of nearly 133,000

[15:55] meals per month, approximately 3.5 times the amount of food we distributed 5

[16:00] years ago. And now, therefore, be it resolved that the Village Board of the

[16:04] Village of Cross Plains hereby proclaims September 2026 as Hunger Action Month in

[16:10] the Village of Cross Plains. And be it further resolved that the Village Board

[16:14] encourages residents to learn more about food insecurity in our community and to

[16:18] support organizations that provide assistance to Cross Plains residents in

[16:22] experiencing hunger through donations, volunteerism, and other forms of

[16:26] community involvement. >> Thank you.

[16:29] Would you like to invite someone to speak?

[16:31] » We would like to invite her up.

[16:39] Thank you for having us here tonight. We are excited to be here, and we

[16:44] appreciate you putting forth this proclamation and declaring Hunger Action

[16:49] Month this September. I'm Leslie Hubert, I'm the Vice President of Strategic

[16:54] Engagement at WayForward Resources. And this is Beth Johnson, our Community

[16:57] Engagement Manager. And you just already heard some of the

[17:01] basics of WayForward. We've been in our community for over 45 years, and during

[17:07] that time we have been focused on bringing the community together to

[17:11] create housing stability and food security. And um

[17:17] we Our food pantry serves all of Dane

[17:21] County. We're one of the largest food pantries in the county, and our housing

[17:24] services serve Cross Plains, Middleton, and West the western part of Madison.

[17:31] And those focus on helping keep people in their homes to avoid the trauma of

[17:35] homelessness. Our food pantry is open 5 days a week.

[17:40] And as was said here, we have seen a huge increase in demand over the past 5

[17:45] years. So, we are giving out 3.5 times more quantity food than we were just 5

[17:50] years ago. And we often say to people, imagine if there were 3.5 times as many

[17:55] kindergartners at the school as there were 5 years ago,

[17:59] uh what a struggle that would be to keep up. And it has been a struggle for us to

[18:02] keep up with that increased demand. Um and that's why Hunger Action Month is

[18:07] so important, because hunger isn't something we can always see right around

[18:12] us, but it is something that is in every community, including the community in

[18:15] Dane County, and including here in Cross Plains. It is a community problem, and

[18:20] it requires a community solution. And that's really what Hunger Action Month

[18:23] is about. It's about people coming together and working to address the

[18:28] situation. And we're particularly excited to have

[18:32] Cross Plains be part of this this year. Um we're excited about the proclamation,

[18:36] and we also appreciate Sarah for the work that she's done.

[18:41] We're all excited about Canstruction, and to share some of those photos out

[18:45] for our social media and our newsletters. And we appreciate the

[18:48] library for hosting this event. And we think it really demonstrates what the

[18:53] community can do when they come together. And that very visible display

[18:59] will help to remind people and help them to think about something that again is

[19:03] easy for it to be invisible. There are a couple of other ways to be

[19:07] involved in Hunger Action Month. I've handed you all a postcard. We will have

[19:12] businesses throughout the community and also school groups and part of Back to

[19:18] School Night this year. Uh we have neighborhood groups, school

[19:22] sports teams who will be organizing all kinds of fun. Food drives, we have one

[19:27] business that has a goal and if they reach the goal, they may have a dunk

[19:31] tank where they dunk the president in it. So, all kinds of creative ideas that

[19:37] we'll be sharing and well as well as we'll have lots of statistics out to

[19:41] social media and our newsletter that we're encouraging people to share. And I

[19:44] did want to re-extend our invitation for our kickoff which is on September 2nd.

[19:50] We would like to invite all of the village trustees to join us on that day.

[19:54] And that's a week from Wednesday from 12:00 to 2:00 at WayForward. We're

[19:58] receiving a donation of 35,000 lb of food.

[20:03] Um and we're kind of using that as our um

[20:06] backdrop to kick off our month and we have We're going to have the media

[20:10] there. We have representatives um Mayor Lisa Heinel will be there as well

[20:15] as all the various from Middleton, from Madison, superintendents from Middleton

[20:19] and Madison will be there. We'll have some local businesses and we'll have

[20:22] representatives from the county, state, and federal government who will be there

[20:26] that day. We would love to have Cross Plains representative there, too. We'll

[20:29] be taking photos. It's about a 10-minute commitment. You drop in, we have our um

[20:34] flora that will take your picture of the community coming together. This is to

[20:38] show our community that this is the issue that we're all invested in. So,

[20:42] if you are interested, you can respond to my email or reach out to Beth or me

[20:46] and let us know that you'll be coming and what time period. Again, you can

[20:49] just drop in for a few minutes. And the final thing I'd like to invite

[20:53] you to is our panel discussion that will take place on September 30th. This is

[20:57] free and open to the public. And we'd love anyone sharing it with

[21:01] other people in Cross Plains, too, so let them know that they are invited. And

[21:05] it will be creating food security challenges, insights, and solutions. You

[21:10] can sign up through the Milton Public Library. We have four

[21:15] experts that we're really excited about that will each bring a different lens to

[21:19] share information about why is there this increase in demand at food

[21:23] pantries, what's happening with food insecurity. We know it's been in the

[21:25] news a lot with the SNAP cuts. They're going to help kind of pull this apart

[21:29] and um explain to people what's happening and why. So, you can

[21:34] sign up through the library or shoot back an email or you can you can take a

[21:37] picture of the sign up, too. So, again, thank you for your commitment

[21:41] to your community and to food security. And we know that we have seen when our

[21:48] community comes together, that's how real progress is made. If we put

[21:51] together, we can help create more food security for our neighbors.

[21:56] Thank you. >> Yeah, thank you very much.

[21:59] Appreciate it. And good luck with your event.

[22:02] » Yeah, thank you. >> thank you.

[22:06] All right, do I have a motion?

[22:11] » I'll make the motion to cons uh through the proclamation recognizing

[22:16] September 24th, 2026 as Hunger Action Month in the Village of

[22:21] Cross Plains. >> Well,

[22:24] » I'll second it. >> Okay, I have a motion and a second. Any

[22:26] discussion? Bill?

[22:29] » Okay. So, I fully support the purpose of what

[22:34] we're doing here and and I really support what you guys are doing. I think

[22:37] it's fantastic. I think it's great. My [clears throat] concern

[22:42] uh is this resolution becomes a legislative

[22:46] piece of document within the Village of Cross Plains.

[22:50] And in the resolution it says, "Be it further resolved the Village Board

[22:55] encourages residents to learn more about food insecurity in our community." Which

[22:58] I did because I wanted to learn more about this before we came to the

[23:02] meeting. What I found were discrepancies in the

[23:07] data. Um

[23:10] I couldn't find I couldn't find the 32% I couldn't I found the 10.7%

[23:16] but I found it between Alice I found it between uh

[23:22] Feeding America. Uh and so I guess my only point I'm

[23:27] going to make from here is that if this is because this is a legislative record

[23:32] and you're wanting people to look into it, I think having at least the data

[23:35] sourced and I and the data that I found looked

[23:39] like it was from 2023, 2022, 2023. So I don't know if that data is current

[23:45] or not. Again fully support and I'm going to approve

[23:48] I'm going to vote yes to this, but I just I really would like to see that

[23:52] data sourced within the legislative document within

[23:57] the Village of Cross Plains. Would that make sense?

[24:01] » And I'd be happy to provide those sources. We have our whole document that

[24:05] leads to that where they came from. The Alice resource only comes out every few

[24:08] years. So the most recent one may have been 2023. The Feeding America comes out

[24:14] We haven't gotten 2025 yet. So the 10.7 and 17% are from Feeding America. And

[24:19] Mine's from Mine the Meal Gap and that most recent

[24:23] source is 2024. So I'd be happy to provide those links and be happy

[24:28] » Cool. Yeah, so and all I'm asking for is that again

[24:31] I I I I love what you guys are doing and I

[24:34] fully support what we're trying to do here. I just would like to see the

[24:38] legislative record at least be accurate and be sourced.

[24:43] And I I think we can pass this tonight, but

[24:46] uh but if somehow we can get sourced in

[24:49] there for the record at the next meeting, I think I'd be okay.

[24:53] That's my comment. >> Okay.

[24:56] » Judy, did you have your hand up? >> No. Well, I was just going to explain

[24:59] the cans, but I think I was just going to say are these places like the library

[25:03] and then where they all ask you for donations for cans of now that we know

[25:06] who's all the owners. Are they >> They So, that's how people will vote for

[25:10] their favorite one is they can they can donate a can or they can Yeah,

[25:15] I mean gosh.

[25:18] » Did you want to say something, Jed? >> No.

[25:21] » Okay. >> All right, any other discussion?

[25:27] All in favor say aye. >> Aye.

[25:30] » All opposed same. So moved. Thank you.

[25:38] All right, number two, discussion and possible action regarding acceptance of

[25:43] the resubmitted Marchstone deed restriction.

[25:47] Jed, do you want to come up? Answer any questions that

[25:50] » I can I can just do the overview here. Um so, this was So, back in January, on

[25:56] January 26th, is when the board approved the Marchstone development declaration

[26:01] of covenants, restrictions, and easements. Um so, since then, um the

[26:05] developer has submitted some proposed revisions to the approved declaration

[26:09] based on some builder feedback um and is looking to provide some additional

[26:13] flexibility in the design. Um and so, the redline is in the packet along with

[26:18] the proposed um final product.

[26:25] » All right. Does anybody have any questions for Jed?

[26:33] Go ahead, Michael. >> So, it's just why did you

[26:37] why did you decide to have some of the stuff about houses with

[26:42] same colors and all of a sudden curiosity.

[26:46] » A lot of builder Oh, sorry. A lot of builder

[26:50] input after that we furnished them the original set.

[26:54] Uh, there's a lot of redundancy also in the original document, so we

[27:00] uh, try to get rid of as much of that as possible.

[27:03] Uh, but it was more or less a lot of the stuff we had put in there.

[27:07] Um, I'll just honestly what we do a lot of

[27:11] times is we look at other deed restrictions from other subdivisions,

[27:15] common base, and uh, it's not always the smoothest, and

[27:19] we're not builders, and once we get it over to them, they

[27:23] say, "Well, you know, this is fine, but this is wrong, and you really can't do

[27:27] this, and like post is Yeah, that's a big thing about colors,

[27:31] and they're all worried about that and too late, and they're all or not

[27:36] allowing two white houses or or something, so we just try to clean it up

[27:40] best we could with the people that are dealing with it every day.

[27:46] » Yeah, that's sort of what I thought. I mean, you guys are still going to have

[27:48] that committee cuz you can still You got chance to bend a little things you don't

[27:52] like. >> Absolutely. If you're not going to let

[27:54] those fly, like, "Okay, this isn't going to fly." or something like that.

[27:57] » Exactly. So, you know, you still have control but you're losing some control

[28:02] of it. >> So, yeah, it still has to be approved by

[28:04] the architectural control committee and

[28:08] » That's >> And you

[28:10] are allowing dog houses now, huh? >> I thought I mean, I read that.

[28:16] » I don't think we are. >> No, I thought that was

[28:19] » I think it's the dog house thing was struck out

[28:22] there. >> 5.12 Dog houses are all lined out, so it

[28:27] looks like you are. >> Meaning we're not allowing it.

[28:29] » No, the the thing that's lined out is the line that says you're not allowing

[28:33] them. >> Which means

[28:35] » Something. >> That you are allowing them.

[28:37] » Okay. >> I guess the committee will review

[28:41] those. >> Yeah, I mean, it's in the new the whole

[28:44] other thing about the dog houses is like struck in the now, so

[28:49] » I'll be asking them unfortunately caught him there. This was his uh off.

[28:53] » [laughter] >> The next item was more of me. This was

[28:57] Kyle's, so I apologize. >> No, no, that's all right.

[29:00] All right, do I have a motion, please?

[29:07] » I'll make a motion to approve the substance of the resubmitted Markstone

[29:12] deed restrictions. >> I'll second that.

[29:14] » I have a motion and a second. Any more discussion?

[29:19] All in favor, say I. >> I.

[29:21] » I. >> I.

[29:23] » All opposed, same. >> So moved.

[29:26] » Thank you. >> All right, discussion and possible

[29:31] action regarding Markstone phase one Thinnes Street water main and utility

[29:36] requirements. >> I can kind of kick this one off, and

[29:40] then we'll have Matt, Brian, and Jeff, whoever wants to

[29:44] help chime in. So, this was um we just wanted to bring this to the board, so um

[29:50] obviously have um the board has approved the new Thinnes water main um because

[29:56] they'll be working in the area anyways. It's an old main. It's an opportunity

[30:00] for um for the village to get this done um at a reduced cost. Um

[30:06] so we were approached by Jeff's team with a request to tap the current

[30:11] Thinnes main um that's in there now this fall. So, they

[30:16] had requested to tap it this fall, and then install the new main in the spring.

[30:21] Um and so, upon some conversations with staff, we're concerned about the

[30:26] viability of the old main getting tapped 12 times um for all of the um zero lot

[30:33] line homes that are along Thinnes. Um and also concerned about the winter um

[30:38] because there are water main breaks that happen along Thinnes, um and you're

[30:42] making it weaker by poking holes in it. So then also comes you know the addition

[30:49] of two full road closures. So you would have one in the fall

[30:54] for probably about a month and then you'd have one again in the spring for

[30:57] about a month. So with that we kind of said you know

[31:02] we're not in favor of this this you know there's a lot of different things going

[31:06] on here but Jeff's team kind of came back and

[31:08] said you know this negatively impacts the development

[31:13] you know we want you to reconsider. So that's what we're here tonight to kind

[31:17] of discuss the pros and cons of that if there are

[31:21] other options I know a couple of options were thrown around too this all happened

[31:25] later last week so that's why I don't have anything in

[31:27] the packet about it but we wanted to bring it to this to the board just

[31:33] because you know staff kind of said no thanks and they're kind of pushing back

[31:36] on us. So I don't know if Brian or Jeff do you want to come up first Jeff?

[31:42] Go right ahead.

[31:46] » Brian can either confirm or not confirm there's my understanding

[31:52] the original plans and specs that were approved by the

[31:57] village always included tapping into the old

[32:00] main. And it was after the fact

[32:05] that then you can confirm or deny after the fact that the village cuz it

[32:11] was after the fact you guys approved the new water main

[32:16] and then last week through discussions is my understanding

[32:23] it was thought that it it it would make sense

[32:26] to wait and tap or put in the new water main which our contractor does not have

[32:33] time to do. And that's the reason it's not going in

[32:36] this fall. So, I think the way our take on this is

[32:42] this is something the village is doing after the fact

[32:46] and all 12 of those lots are sold and we need to close on.

[32:51] We can't wait for next spring. So, that's my take on it.

[32:56] » All right, can I just hold hold just hang on?

[32:58] I I I want to say something before Brian can get in.

[33:02] Because that's a little different understanding

[33:04] of my Let me ask you something. You're saying that the bank cannot close on

[33:08] those lots unless you're hooked up to water. Is that what you're saying? No,

[33:13] the lateral No, I'm asking is that is that the

[33:15] » Well, I'm If that's the case, will the village

[33:19] will they give us building permits? Because if the lots aren't built for the

[33:24] approved plans and specs, the village probably's not signing off

[33:29] and therefore we can't get building permits. If we can't get building

[33:33] » No, I'm just trying to figure out the the issue here. Cuz that we can control,

[33:38] right? Now, I know phase you know, here's my understanding of

[33:43] this. We had phase one and then you came to the village and said we want to split

[33:48] phase one into phase 1A and phase 1B. The south side we're going to go and get

[33:54] things rolling so we're ready for fall. Uh northern part we're going to wait on

[34:01] that. So, the the whole push was to do the southern area. Okay. Well, that's

[34:07] I'm just telling you how I remember this. And it's if correct me if I'm

[34:11] wrong, there is no gas or electric going to any of those lots on the southern

[34:17] side of it right now, right? And you're still going to close those lots out,

[34:23] right? And you're you're going to want the village to give

[34:28] permits even though there's no electricity or gas going to them. Is

[34:33] that correct? First of all, we never said we're waiting on phase two.

[34:37] It's always been our goal that was going to It's still going

[34:43] to be achievable. Phase two of phase one is going to be done. They're putting

[34:47] curb in Monday. Okay. So, and they wanted to get latrines on

[34:52] tennis this week. And really, the way phase two is going,

[34:57] it'll be bumped up >> in October. But that's wasn't the plan

[35:01] back in February. >> No, we never said we were going to close

[35:05] phase two in the spring. No. I mean, why would Why would you go spend all that

[35:10] money and then have it sit >> Well, I think things are moving a lot

[35:14] faster than you expected. And you asked us to split it because

[35:18] at the time for you to open up and for us to give permits, you would have had

[35:24] to have everything done in phase one. You wanted it separated so you could get

[35:28] everything done on the southern so you could start building on it. Now, it just

[35:33] so happens everything's appears to be moving at a faster pace now. So, now

[35:39] you're kind of Again, to me, you're changing this here. And I think we have

[35:43] a If If your only concern is

[35:48] uh that you I'm not really sure besides the builders not being able to hook in

[35:54] until spring. But are you saying that you think the

[35:58] lots are going to be sold and the buildings are going to be up and ready

[36:01] to be uh sold by the spring and that's

[36:06] Well, again, uh we can give you schedules.

[36:10] What that included all lots being done this year. Okay? So, there's no way we

[36:17] ever said Talk to our bank. I mean, Well, I think I think Brian will just

[36:22] Let me finish, please. Brian will probably

[36:25] After that, I'll let him speak. But bottom line is then gas and electric is

[36:29] not a requirement for the village for building permits.

[36:33] » I agree. I'm looking at the banks, though.

[36:36] » Well, you brought that up for a for >> Well, yeah, I'm looking at that's not

[36:39] our totally complete I'm one that was my first question was are the banks is the

[36:45] problem the banks not going to let you close because there isn't a lateral

[36:50] to water when they're going to close on lots when you don't have gas and

[36:55] electric. That was my question. I wanted to know what the pressure was.

[37:00] » So, you know, ultimately it's >> You know, you said this is going to hurt

[37:03] you financially. >> That's right. Well, if if they don't

[37:06] give us the bucks, we can't close on it. >> Well, I'm trying to ask. So, you're

[37:09] saying a bank's not going to allow you to close because the lateral isn't

[37:13] hooked to water. >> No, I didn't say that, Jim.

[37:15] » Okay, I Jim, what I said was the village won't give us a building permit.

[37:20] That's what I said. I said what I said about the bank is we need to close on

[37:24] that million bucks. >> Okay, and you can do that.

[37:28] » Well, then the village is going to have to make an exception to their ordinance.

[37:33] » Okay, go ahead, Brian. >> Um

[37:37] Both similar. Um The the thinnest edition was back in

[37:43] May. But it's after everything. So, so it's

[37:46] not a last-minute change, but it isn't

[37:50] anything that was going to proceed. Um

[37:53] For J and N Builders Um

[37:56] I would have known The developer's agreement was a bit

[37:59] silent on either

[38:05] or guarantees regarding schedule. It's pretty just silent.

[38:10] Um I would have agreed

[38:13] um from the staff side, we've got the village

[38:17] practice and policies and ordinances which

[38:20] do state that the development cannot be accepted until all the public

[38:25] improvements are Um

[38:29] So, that's We're really going in that world where

[38:33] it can't be accepted and if it's not accepted, you can't get a building. So,

[38:36] just right there. Um He's also right

[38:41] uh that

[38:43] you don't have to sell the whole lots, right? Um at some level

[38:47] having those lots sold starting does does help the village to get in.

[38:53] And those tax donations help. Uh so, hot off the press, Matt and I

[38:57] were banging our heads together back there.

[39:00] » Can I just clarify one thing? Did you just go

[39:03] The original The plans that we have were approved by the village. I lost for lost

[39:08] tapping into the existing water. >> That's right.

[39:12] » Thank you. >> The if the village is

[39:16] So, it's mostly a procedural thing to say you cannot have a building on an

[39:20] empty until all the public improvements are

[39:23] completed. >> And the intention there is that we have

[39:26] » Many communities have that. The intention is

[39:29] you don't want some new family moving into town, buying for

[39:35] all the world they think is a um

[39:38] parcel, getting a basement going, and they're ready to move in on Christmas

[39:41] Day and there's no water. And that's what you're trying to avoid.

[39:45] Um

[39:48] So, that that's why that rule is there. If

[39:53] the village is up for electing that you know, special case.

[39:59] Now, we just seem could

[40:03] extend enough pipe from the parcel towards getting this.

[40:09] At least enough to get the sidewalk. You won't be able to fire up to get the

[40:13] curb. That was

[40:16] But if the sidewalk and poor sidewalk is falling out.

[40:24] From staff standpoint, he'd he'd be okay with the technical aspects of that.

[40:29] Cuz then in spring when this was torn up,

[40:32] it'll save time. Instead of tearing it up twice, we'll tear it up the same time

[40:35] in spring. They just dig down find that end,

[40:39] go all the way to the pipe in the street, then pour the pyramid concrete.

[40:44] Parallel with lot sales and building permits.

[40:48] So, from a technical standpoint,

[40:51] staff's comfortable with that idea. You would take a it's just a decision by

[40:57] this group to make an exception that Jeff can so I'm just ready to

[41:02] finish his portion of fence which is the

[41:06] curbing gutter and repave both feet. All right, thank

[41:10] you. So, I wanted to toss that out there as a

[41:13] potential compromise. I know those 12 lots are

[41:17] only I mean, you do have

[41:20] Jeff money and financial surety in place

[41:24] still. And we would keep that in place until all the public

[41:30] improvements installed. So, you do have

[41:33] protection in case they go bankrupt or they cease

[41:36] to do things. You have the money to help.

[41:39] You have something. But I mean, it's 20 minutes away.

[41:43] So, nobody's heard of this in the minute.

[41:45] » I think our proposal is sound. But anyway, the only problem with that is

[41:51] there'd have to be a pretty good penalty against the village

[41:59] because the village is also

[42:05] obligation is the new water main. It's outside our

[42:10] requirements and plans. And so,

[42:15] again, I got Well, it doesn't matter. I like that idea.

[42:21] But, we couldn't go forward without some type of

[42:26] fine, if you will, of

[42:31] a date,

[42:34] because we can't proceed You know, you're worried about us going

[42:38] bankrupt, and I know you said that cuz and that's a reality. I get it. Goes the

[42:42] same way. We don't know the village is going to put the water main in.

[42:46] So, how do we know? So, we're trusting you, you're trusting us, but at least

[42:50] you have our surety if we don't do our work, but we have nothing against the

[42:56] village if they don't put the water main in.

[42:59] So, now, we have 12 lots, and we're right back to where we were

[43:04] today with an existing water main that was is

[43:10] planned to

[43:13] be receptive to our 12 water laterals until the idea

[43:19] came of a new water main, of which I fully agree with,

[43:23] but it's just the mechanics to protect us because this is a village change.

[43:29] It's nothing we brought up.

[43:33] » I don't know the for whatever it's worth, the village sometime

[43:37] was unless it changed their mind the last 30 minutes, was

[43:41] still planning on signing a contract with Houston to do the work

[43:46] this fall and sign down the contract to sign.

[43:49] » Oh, so you're doing the work this fall? >> That was the intention back in May,

[43:53] June, and July when we were talking to Houston and I had to

[43:57] wait and he came and he claimed he could get

[44:00] it done 2 weeks ago.

[44:02] » Okay. I mean, >> So, the village was planning

[44:04] talking with Houston, telling them going to do this. We've got twins that are 2

[44:08] months old. Like paper plants. Um

[44:12] and then I was going to sign a contract that he's going to sign across the

[44:16] table. So, instead of a contract, he said I

[44:19] can forget it. >> But again, that's not our

[44:23] negotiation. That was between you and Houston.

[44:26] » Correct. >> Mhm.

[44:29] » So, how does that affect this? I guarantee for you.

[44:32] » Well, it it doesn't because it's not again, it's not getting done this fall.

[44:36] » No, I mean >> If the contract says it's done in the

[44:39] spring, the delivery is guaranteed. >> But the problem

[44:42] » Houston. >> So, just from Tommy's stand.

[44:45] Okay. So, the village allows building permits

[44:50] when everything else is done except finished work.

[44:54] And we go and sell to everything you just said. We just go sell the builder

[44:58] A. They start construction.

[45:01] We're going to have to go out on a limb and give them some guarantees that

[45:06] there's ultimately going to be water to their lot.

[45:09] Well, because there is water there, right? All we're

[45:13] talking about is replacing a pipe. It's not like we're saying we're going to

[45:18] remove the pipe and there's no water there. So, your big thing, let's say

[45:23] that the village goes bankrupt and they can't put the pipe in. There's still a

[45:27] pipe. You just connect it to the current pipe.

[45:31] There's no risk there. It's not like we're pulling the pipe out and saying

[45:35] there's no water there anymore. What we're saying is we want to put in a

[45:38] newer one. >> Well, it's going to

[45:40] » That's what we're talking about here. If if if you make it sound like we're

[45:44] pulling the water and now you may not have water to hook up to. You're always

[45:48] going to have water to hook up to. >> Well, then your attorney is going to

[45:51] have to draft a pretty strong contract that we sign with all these guarantees.

[45:57] » I I don't know what the guarantee you want

[45:59] that there's going to be a water main there.

[46:01] » No, that if not done by a next date, the city or the village is going to pay us

[46:06] » Okay, but >> $1,000 a day.

[46:08] » Why would we do that? Why would we do that to the builder?

[46:10] » Cuz you guys are changing the game plan. I have approved old plans that will hook

[46:15] up to your existing water main. >> And you can still do that. We're not

[46:20] pulling that water main out. What we're saying is you may have to wait till

[46:24] spring to do it. >> Well, that's not part of the deal.

[46:27] » I don't think anywhere in that Nowhere in that agreement are there dates and

[46:32] times when any of that stuff has to be done.

[46:34] » Out there. >> I think there's not.

[46:36] » No, but I'm just >> Cuz that's not a common thing. Cuz it's

[46:39] construction. So, it's not something that's in there that says we told you we

[46:44] were going to have you hook it up on September 5th of 2026.

[46:50] » It doesn't say that. I would go to any court of law saying in the industry we

[46:54] have approved client. >> You do have approved and we have a lot

[46:57] of money to give you. >> I want to use them.

[47:00] » And that's fine. It doesn't matter the date. It's irrelevant. We have time to

[47:04] do it yet this year. We're going to do it. We have We don't want it done

[47:08] because it's going to cost us a ton of money and we have to give a permit and

[47:12] we don't want you tearing up our road right now.

[47:14] » Listen to what you just said. You don't want to do it.

[47:16] » The village. That's exactly right. >> I do and you already approved it.

[47:20] » No, we approved you hooking up to the water mains and we're still going to

[47:23] hold true to that. >> No, the plan

[47:25] literally shows the lateral hooking up to the 6-in. That's our approved plan.

[47:31] » But it's not a date and time on it. >> matter.

[47:34] » Sure it does. >> I can put those in anytime I want.

[47:37] » No. >> Brian, is it not standard of the

[47:40] industry if you have a set plans that are approved by the municipality the

[47:44] developer just does it? >> I mean, I've been doing this for over 40

[47:49] years. I've never had a municipality tell me, "Oh, by the way, you can't

[47:52] complete the project that we approved your plan."

[47:55] » And we are not saying that. >> We'll go to court on that, Jay, all day

[47:59] long. >> Well, Jeff, just let's just say you're

[48:01] going to be coming up next month, right, to extend one of our rules of moving

[48:05] dirt on September 15th. So, should we hold it to the line and say, "No, on

[48:11] September 15th, you got to shut down your project." Would you like that?

[48:15] » You can't cuz we'll be done. >> You'll be done by the 15th, so you won't

[48:19] be asking for that. Okay. Well, that's good to know, but you were planning on

[48:22] that anyway. We probably still would. >> But if you turn us down, we'll still get

[48:27] our work done. >> Well, you know, we've been very

[48:31] cooperative and we have banned a lot of things for this project. I think this is

[48:37] a very small ask from the village to ask for you to wait

[48:45] whatever amount of time it is to put in so we can put in a new pipe and we don't

[48:50] have to shut shut down our road during school

[48:55] to accommodate 12 laterals going in when we

[49:00] could do it in the spring all at once and not make hassle twice and tear up a

[49:06] street twice. It just makes common sense. And we're asking you

[49:13] to just play along and do a compromise. And like I say, the lab the water's

[49:19] there, so even if this all goes south in between, you still have a lateral.

[49:25] You'll still be able to hook up to water. There's no worry for any of those

[49:30] construction people. The difference is the timing of it.

[49:33] » Well, and that's that's what we're talking about. So, how do I tell the

[49:37] builder, "Oh, you need a building permit, but you know what? I don't know

[49:40] when you're going to get one." >> Well, you that Well, you don't want to

[49:43] say that. You're going to get the water is coming in in the spring.

[49:46] » What are you telling the people with the MG&E not having electric and gas? What

[49:50] are you telling them now? It'll be done. By

[49:53] by >> Man, when is it going to be there? Right

[49:57] after Labor Day. And it's going to take a while.

[49:59] » Okay. >> It'll be done.

[50:01] » All right. So

[50:02] » And when are they going to get into phase two?

[50:04] » We're not asking for that. >> So you're asking for water but not power

[50:09] and electric at this time. For that for that lot.

[50:12] » So >> No, I answer the question. Are you

[50:15] » Yes, we can follow our schedule. When finish is done, the electrical will

[50:19] be done. Cuz the lots are 80% graded.

[50:25] » Okay. >> By the end of this week, it's going to

[50:27] be Look, the phase I mean, we're putting curb in in phase two on Monday.

[50:31] That's how far along we are. >> Yeah, I know.

[50:34] » So >> But that has nothing to do with MG&E.

[50:37] » And why do I don't know why you keep bringing up MG&E.

[50:39] » Well, it's just Well, it's just taking us 9 months to get it to our to our new

[50:43] building. So >> Well

[50:44] » I get it. You know. >> They're paying. I get it. I agree with

[50:47] you. So Well, here's the deal. You give me a

[50:50] contract or agreement with a financial guarantee we need, we'll sign it.

[50:56] With short of that, we want to hook up to the existing

[50:59] set of plans that

[51:04] We want to bait court, but that's where it's going to go

[51:08] if you don't give us some a financial guarantee.

[51:12] » Which is totally >> You guys are going back on the game

[51:14] plan, Jay. >> No, we're not. We're There's nothing

[51:17] changing here except for we're asking to just delay that. But what which isn't

[51:24] even We're not even asking to delay. We're We're just saying we may not give

[51:28] you all street permit to tear up the street. That's all. In the contract, it

[51:32] doesn't have these dates in there that you're

[51:35] referring to. All right? And so I don't think we're breaking anything here.

[51:41] We're trying to be reasonable to our taxpayers and everybody else.

[51:45] » I >> Right? And

[51:46] it's just common sense. In the last 40 years I've put in as many single family

[51:51] lots except maybe two people in this town. I don't know. I agree. Okay. Yeah,

[51:56] I have never had this discussion. >> But you never had this situation before.

[52:02] And we haven't had any problem with you. Yeah, we disagree. Yeah.

[52:07] I'm not going to debate anymore. We have a

[52:09] approved set of plans that does not say you can't go and do your

[52:15] There's no date. There's nothing for the village that says you can't do it.

[52:19] What it does say is if you do what the approved set of plans are, you can

[52:24] proceed. Dates are irrelevant.

[52:29] I've never had a contract that flat out said you're going to tear up. I agree.

[52:35] I agree with you on that. We all agree. >> That was definitely

[52:39] » All right. Bobby, Judy. >> I was going to ask so the lots have all

[52:43] been sold. But do you We anticipate all four lots are going to pull building

[52:47] permits day one? >> No. Don't know.

[52:50] » Okay. Yeah, I did not have an idea of how many would be there.

[52:55] » All right, Judy. >> Um as far as the road closure goes, like

[52:59] how long when they do go do it? Um this is really When they do go to do these,

[53:04] how long do you think the closure is for the village?

[53:07] I mean are they going to do one lane at a time? I mean like does that whole road

[53:11] get closed so they have to go like around I mean like the whole road gets

[53:14] closed? >> I don't think you'd have to close this.

[53:18] The whole whole thing. >> Didn't we do this on Fiddler's about 4

[53:21] years ago where we closed Fiddler's for

[53:24] » Airport Road was closed when Township Airport Road Yeah, Airport. But

[53:29] you're right, Fiddler's was closed. >> It's going to be a heck of a piece of

[53:32] work. >> So it's totally closed. It's a detour.

[53:36] And what do you think the time frame might be on that kind of

[53:39] » I think if it were done all at once, probably six weeks.

[53:44] Uh if it were to done in two steps, probably four weeks each.

[53:48] » Well, well we could we could get our work done in probably a week.

[53:52] A week to do. This took about two weeks.

[53:58] » It It quality, that plus the curb plus full asphalt.

[54:07] Sorry. >> Go ahead.

[54:07] » And then my other question is this, um the reason we don't want him to do what

[54:11] he wants to do is because he has a tap and we are worried about main breaks or

[54:16] we're guaranteed main breaks or like that.

[54:19] » Well, that's one of it, but the main thing is we're putting in a new pipe.

[54:23] » Right. I just want to know I know but she wants

[54:25] » I bet Is it 100%? No. I would say 0%? No, either.

[54:30] » Right. >> Uh so there's this

[54:33] some chance that this breaks

[54:37] jam. Okay?

[54:39] Um that's kind of a

[54:43] on the ability side that's something we're concerned about.

[54:47] So I can't tell you this this might happen.

[54:49] Um so if I find out the thing I was kicking

[54:52] around at staff level was

[54:56] an ideal where we must don't want to

[55:00] regress. I was willing to take down that risk.

[55:06] That was not something we were looking for.

[55:09] » Take a risk of >> Are you guys being mean or

[55:11] » Yeah, but yeah, but they fix the main breaks if they happen in January 3rd.

[55:15] » Well, we wouldn't do that. I mean that's >> Do I think it's

[55:18] » Wait, wait, can you let me ask one more question for you? Um as a I'm just

[55:21] thinking as a consumer, how do I feel about buying a lot that I'm not sure

[55:25] about water? I don't know. I Do you think you're going to have a trouble

[55:29] selling those and getting You won't have a trouble selling them. You're just

[55:33] worried about the building. >> No, cuz the way our offers are

[55:37] structured is closing will occur within 30 days after the village signs off.

[55:44] » Okay. >> And would And would allow a building

[55:46] permit. >> Okay.

[55:49] And we could do a building permit with a water getting there, knowing we will get

[55:53] there. But do you feel like your consumers your your buyers will be okay

[55:57] with that? >> Only with a financial guarantee.

[55:59] » Okay.

[56:02] » There's a another alternative which is the craziest and and

[56:05] Brian already shot it down. I don't know what I thought.

[56:10] We will sell you

[56:13] those of all lots and then you guys

[56:18] can deal with the builders and you guys then can do finish whenever you want it.

[56:25] Our risk is gone and the village takes on all risk.

[56:30] And it doesn't It'll cost them money up front but they recoup it

[56:36] uh as soon as the building's home closed. The whole

[56:40] There's a little bit of profit only cost.

[56:42] Um but that way then the village controls everything.

[56:47] But Jeff, you already told me you can close on all these lots. So, there's no

[56:51] financial risk you're taking. You said that earlier that you can close without

[56:56] having the laterals hooked in. >> With the building

[57:00] » I didn't sell. I just said we need a building permit and Right, but there

[57:04] there'd have to be a whatever from the village to allow us to

[57:10] get building permits. But then I went on to say if that is the scenario, we need

[57:15] some financial guarantee that we can pass on to our buyers because God forbid

[57:22] it's like Brian explained right away, okay, we're going to we're going to

[57:26] guarantee our buyers they'll have water May 1,

[57:31] June 1, pick a day, right? So that our builders can construct

[57:36] knowing that, and then all of a sudden, if the village

[57:40] hasn't got their work done, the village can't get us water or our builders

[57:44] water, we're going to have to compensate those builders,

[57:49] and we don't feel it's fair that comes out of our pocket.

[57:54] Because we have approved plans to tap into the existing water main.

[58:00] So this shouldn't cost us a penny. I agree.

[58:06] » That's fine. I'm just not seeing where the penny is going to cost you. That's

[58:10] where I'm having a hard time. >> I just There's two scenarios. Number

[58:14] one, they don't close because of the uncertainty. And number two, they close

[58:18] and we don't get them water. >> See, I just two examples. I just don't

[58:21] understand and maybe it's just I'm too dense to understand this. There's water

[58:25] there already. What we're talking about is replacing a pipe.

[58:30] One that's already there. So the water's there. So I'm not sure where you keep

[58:34] coming out they need guaranteed that there's going to be water. I just don't

[58:38] see us saying we're going to pull that old pipe out and we're going to tell

[58:42] everybody on Finister they no longer can have municipal water and we don't

[58:45] replace the play the pipe. That just doesn't seem like a scenario we would do

[58:50] just like we would not buy the lots. As long as that's in the agreement, that's

[58:53] fine. >> Yes, sir. I don't you know, we're not

[58:57] here to be difficult, but the reality is we have approved plans with the village,

[59:03] and we have all 12 lots to close. Now, the village needs to come up with a

[59:08] scenario to protect us. That's all I'm saying.

[59:12] We're not saying no, just protect us. >> So what if

[59:16] » Okay, I have something to and Bill and Jed.

[59:20] » Okay, so I'm not an engineer.

[59:24] And I'm trying to follow what's all taken place here.

[59:28] But right now we have a main going down Venice.

[59:33] Is that going down the center of the street or is that kind of one side or

[59:35] the other, do you know? >> Mostly north.

[59:38] » Mostly on the north side. Okay, so it's close to where the development is.

[59:42] » No, it's the opposite side. >> It's almost on the south side of

[59:46] » Okay. So, to connect into that water main

[59:50] what what Jeff wants to do

[59:54] who would be responsible for putting that T in that goes over to Marston?

[59:59] Marston, you see. Okay. So, you're responsible for

[1:00:04] doing whatever surface work to do to pull up the the

[1:00:09] uh dig that hole

[1:00:11] put that T in there, put the water main down down through Marston.

[1:00:15] » No, no, no. It's going to be each house. >> What

[1:00:19] That's the lateral. >> Right. That's all that we're talking

[1:00:21] about. Everything else is done. We're just tapping into those

[1:00:25] » We're not responsible for any main. >> But you're coming

[1:00:29] So, you're taking you So, you're going to take the main coming out of Venice

[1:00:33] and you're going to tap 12 lateral out of that?

[1:00:38] All the way down going >> Yeah, east and west.

[1:00:42] » from

[1:00:45] » Yeah, the lots that that that open up to Venice is what we're talking about. All

[1:00:51] the infrastructure in there is already done and good to go. What he's talking

[1:00:56] about is the 12 lots that open up to Venice Street

[1:01:02] that would the lateral would tap into not new piping

[1:01:06] » Okay. >> but the current pipe that's in the

[1:01:08] ground right now.

[1:01:12] » I got you. Okay.

[1:01:16] That makes more sense. Now, I understand where you're at now. Okay.

[1:01:21] Thank you. >> Yeah, go ahead, Chad.

[1:01:23] » Yeah, I'm just not comfortable with any of this. I mean, there's nothing in the

[1:01:26] packet about this. Now, we're talking about buying properties and needing

[1:01:29] attorney guarantees. So, I make a motion that we postpone this to the next

[1:01:33] meeting.

[1:01:36] » Uh Well, if you made that motion, is

[1:01:39] anybody going to second it?

[1:01:43] All right, there's no second, so the motion dies. I think, Chad, it's

[1:01:47] important while the information is not there, cuz it's obviously very fresh,

[1:01:53] this this concern came up, that it's important for everybody to at least hear

[1:01:58] the background. Um, I

[1:02:01] I agree, there isn't going to be a decision tonight because of where the

[1:02:07] differences are between the village and the developer. So, we're going to

[1:02:12] clearly have to uh obviously refer and and talk about

[1:02:17] it, but I I want to make sure that everybody here has an opportunity to ask

[1:02:24] the questions with the engineer and Jeff and understand what we're actually

[1:02:31] talking about here. Bill.

[1:02:35] » Just one one one more thing. >> Um

[1:02:38] » Seeing as Jeff brought this up, um I think we need to staff needs to bring

[1:02:43] Paul in. Seeing as you want to bring this to a

[1:02:46] legal issue. You say you wanted to bring it to the courts if you don't get your

[1:02:51] way. So, I think we need to bring Paul in.

[1:02:53] » Absolutely. >> Well, and let him let him look at the

[1:02:55] kind of track and let him evaluate it quickly, right? With your lawyers

[1:03:01] and figure that out. I think that's the the right thing to do.

[1:03:03] » So, has anybody talked to Paul? Cuz our attorney has.

[1:03:10] And he flat out said, "This isn't your problem. You have approved plans."

[1:03:14] » Who said Who you that to what? Pass all that to our attorney.

[1:03:19] » Well, let's just Yeah, I I Yeah, but here's the problem

[1:03:23] right now, Chris. You know,

[1:03:26] again, in over 40 years, I think I've been to

[1:03:30] court twice. So, take my comment very lightly cuz

[1:03:33] we don't do that. But,

[1:03:36] it's not like we're in June. We can't wait a month.

[1:03:40] Okay? There's a laptop that's closed, things like that. So, you know,

[1:03:45] honestly, you know, I I nothing's going to happen

[1:03:49] tonight. I I get that. Uh the first call I'll do on the way

[1:03:53] home is talking to our attorney because this has to get settled very

[1:03:59] quickly because we need to get this work done

[1:04:03] or that legal agreement signed very quick.

[1:04:08] And again, I have the lawyer with the experience would tell me we we will sign

[1:04:14] approve the plan, we have the right to do that.

[1:04:19] » I just Like I said, I I'm not going to argue that legal point, but before you

[1:04:24] can do that, the village, my understanding, needs to give you a

[1:04:28] permit to allow you to damage our roadway. Correct?

[1:04:34] » I think there's more that we need from the village, but yes.

[1:04:37] » Okay. So, I'm just going to play that out that that's still in our domain.

[1:04:44] Right? And is it to ours that in fact there's a

[1:04:48] delay? >> That's all part of what we'll be

[1:04:51] talking. >> Yeah, I think there's a lot of lot of

[1:04:53] issues here. Um and I think we do need to sit down

[1:04:58] and look at this and try to come up with a compromise. I don't think it's that

[1:05:03] difficult to do.

[1:05:06] But, I do think that uh the village has been very

[1:05:14] open to making modifications to certain things to help your

[1:05:19] development along. And I don't think we've asked for very much from you on

[1:05:25] this. And this is an ask.

[1:05:28] Even though it may be clearly legally that in that uh

[1:05:33] developer's agreement you can do that, right?

[1:05:38] We are asking for something that will benefit the

[1:05:43] village and its residents. And I think you need to go back and

[1:05:49] think of all the positive things we've done as a village to help your

[1:05:53] development and maybe it's time to look what you could help us on on something

[1:05:58] like this. And yes, did we foresee this? You know, a year ago, two years ago, no.

[1:06:05] It came up, it was an idea, it made sense, and just I think it makes sense

[1:06:11] to everybody. It's just the timing of it.

[1:06:15] So, >> I guess Brian a question.

[1:06:18] » Sure. Just want a little I just want a little bit more clarity on what you were

[1:06:22] talking about. So, I assume what the delay till spring would be is they

[1:06:25] didn't build that frontage down to the sidewalk, don't put in the curb, so that

[1:06:30] allows us then in the spring to go and tear things up with the main and then

[1:06:33] finish the road with the curb. And that's what all that was alluding to.

[1:06:36] » Right. So, it's a single closure. >> Single closure in the spring, don't

[1:06:41] put the curb in cuz >> Right.

[1:06:43] » you're going to come back and do that, but you do

[1:06:46] the whole replacement in the spring with the water main. And then at that time

[1:06:48] when the road's locked up, that's when you put connect the lat rails to the new

[1:06:52] water main idea. All that. >> Right.

[1:06:57] Right. >> That

[1:06:59] You're looking for a good solution, that's the one that sounds great.

[1:07:04] » And you know, again, we're in favor of that with a surety

[1:07:09] of some financial >> I don't understand your fear. The

[1:07:13] village isn't going to do this. That's why it's not going to happen.

[1:07:16] » Well, but I can look at it as a consumer. Would I want to buy that

[1:07:19] property? >> Not sure.

[1:07:20] » I mean, how many of us are thinking as a consumer?

[1:07:24] » But I think as a consumer, it's in the best interest to

[1:07:27] have a new water main. Because then if I'm coming to like take a look and I see

[1:07:33] that oh, there's a water main break or you know, I hear about this and I feel

[1:07:36] like that'd be in the best interest of the builders also. Like you're getting a

[1:07:40] new water main. Also, you still have access to water if we didn't. So that's

[1:07:44] where I agree with Jay. So >> And the obligation is the village has to

[1:07:48] supply municipal water and sewer. We can't just tell you not to do it.

[1:07:52] You know, I I like I said, I'm not seeing that fear factor, but we let's

[1:07:57] just Um I I just don't think we take any

[1:08:00] action on this and I think we need to set something up and

[1:08:05] see if we can work these things out where everybody's happy with it.

[1:08:10] » Yeah, one other question. >> Yeah, go ahead, Michael.

[1:08:12] » So there was a discussion about whether or not electrical and gas were going to

[1:08:16] be making it to these northernmost phase one. And there was a little discrepancy

[1:08:20] on whether or not there was. So you're making it sound like all utilities are

[1:08:24] going to be hooked to all the houses in all phase one but phase B. Like there

[1:08:29] isn't that utility delaying of electrical or gas.

[1:08:33] » No, we we met with MG&E I think it was the week before Friday. We can do

[1:08:36] Monday, it doesn't matter. Um because it's hasn't been fun dealing

[1:08:41] with MG&E. Um but we had

[1:08:45] some pretty important people there. Um that's where we got the date of the

[1:08:49] first phase um

[1:08:51] starting around Labor Day. It's going to take about a week.

[1:08:55] Um and then the good news is they're very

[1:08:59] receptive and open and knowing now that they kind of dropped the ball on phase

[1:09:03] one and they will share with us phase two will be very shortly later on.

[1:09:09] » Well, so this is phase two of the

[1:09:12] » phase >> of phase one. This This is what you

[1:09:14] would have said. >> It is.

[1:09:15] » It's phase two of phase one, but that is they've done like, "Okay, we're going to

[1:09:20] do this one before whatever."

[1:09:22] » Yeah, I think they might even said when they they're already doing phase one

[1:09:26] depending on where we are. They might just do phase two.

[1:09:29] » Okay, they might not know for a long what's going on.

[1:09:32] All right, okay. That's cuz there was some

[1:09:34] I wasn't sure if there was going to be other utilities making up these lots.

[1:09:38] Yep, this fall. >> Most of it's our intent to you know,

[1:09:42] again, it was our intent since day one that all these lots

[1:09:47] serviceful, completed, village happy

[1:09:52] by the end of year. >> Thank you. Can we

[1:09:55] Can we just fix the semantics because in the project there's phase one, phase

[1:10:01] two which is different whole different part of the area of Marshall area.

[1:10:06] Uh I'd really like the 1A, 1B. That makes more sense and it's all the

[1:10:11] clarity when you're trying to understand this from the notes and

[1:10:15] looking forward in a year from now. So, if we can just I think Jay brought that

[1:10:20] up. Phase 1A, phase 1B.

[1:10:23] That at least that that keeps everything straight. That's all. Just the semantics

[1:10:28] thing.

[1:10:32] » All righty. I think we've gone as far as we can on this. We'll clearly be in

[1:10:37] contact with you. Hopefully see if we can work something out.

[1:10:42] All right. Number four, discussion and possible action regarding phasing cost

[1:10:48] scenarios for Park Street improvement. Brian.

[1:10:54] All right, who wants to can a summary of >> be Brett and Matt'll do it. Matt can do

[1:10:58] it.

[1:11:05] » Okay. And I think what we should We're staying focused on here are the

[1:11:09] scenarios that we kind of talked a little bit about after the last meeting.

[1:11:15] Uh Michael brought it up of instead of doing it in three phases, doing it in

[1:11:19] one and all the pros and cons. That's what we're talking about. We're not

[1:11:22] talking about the money part right now or to approve. That'll come in the CIP.

[1:11:32] Go ahead and Yes, what are we

[1:11:35] Well, I I think Michael Michael you had a couple You had some

[1:11:39] questions. You know, let's let's talk about you asked me the

[1:11:43] questions and I didn't know. Okay, I'll help remind you. The engineering Has the

[1:11:48] engineering been done on all of Park Street?

[1:11:51] » It is not. >> Would it be possible to have it done

[1:11:55] by the time we would start? >> Yes.

[1:11:58] » All right. So that was one of your questions. You remember that? You

[1:12:01] remember your second one cuz I'm not able to answer all of those. Go ahead.

[1:12:05] » I don't remember. Well, let's

[1:12:09] » All right. So when we're looking at it uh just uh to confirm, it's basically a

[1:12:15] 5% savings if you did it all at once.

[1:12:20] » Approximately, yes. >> All right. Now

[1:12:24] I don't remember if we had this discussion, but Seth brought it up.

[1:12:28] Did we ever talk about putting a path or a sidewalk along Park Street when we did

[1:12:35] this? Cuz I know that scenario that you have where you gave us cost does not

[1:12:40] include that. >> It actually does.

[1:12:43] » Oh, it does? >> Yeah.

[1:12:44] » Okay. >> level

[1:12:48] Uh forgive me if I was too forward. At At level when we do our budget

[1:12:51] estimates, we just kind of kick ideas around the

[1:12:54] staff. I mean, is there any chance there's going to they're going to want a

[1:12:57] sidewalk on this? So, we In those budgets, we do have one sidewalk,

[1:13:02] sidewalk, not both sidewalks. >> Okay.

[1:13:05] » Just just to be conservative. >> No, that's good. I'm glad you said that.

[1:13:09] » Cuz that's very good. And you can pull it off. Just cuz it's in the budget

[1:13:12] doesn't mean you can >> No, no. I I think uh

[1:13:15] I think that's brought up, and I'm glad Seth did, cuz then I've been looking

[1:13:19] more at the cost of the sewer and water and then not even thinking of the road.

[1:13:24] So, I do think that is a critical place to have a sidewalk or a path.

[1:13:30] » If we do it both on just one side, so they're not crossing.

[1:13:34] » Yeah, I see. >> We didn't go into that far detail.

[1:13:36] » Okay, okay. >> No, but I agree with you. We And if we

[1:13:39] can do it in the roadway, I think the southern part would be the best to hook

[1:13:43] up to where the post office is, cuz there isn't too much after that, and

[1:13:47] that's more open lots, you know, parking lots and stuff. So, that where it gets

[1:13:52] tight, it would be easier to take from those empty lot sidewalk than the other

[1:13:59] side that already has a part of it, but you got a retaining wall and everything.

[1:14:03] I'm not sure why when we allowed those two duplexes, we didn't connect the two

[1:14:08] sidewalks. >> I'm thinking there's utility poles all

[1:14:10] over on that side. >> You would do

[1:14:13] layouts for the group as I said. >> Yeah.

[1:14:15] » Okay. >> All right. Either you or you decide.

[1:14:17] » No, no, no. I >> Money's in there.

[1:14:19] » Oh. >> And I think there's a bunch of like safe

[1:14:21] walk to school grants, so. >> Yeah.

[1:14:26] Okay. So, that that's good. That answers your question, Seth. We do, and it's in

[1:14:30] the budget, so that's great. Um

[1:14:36] So, let's uh I I guess maybe there isn't uh I would

[1:14:42] like to hear from people here what they feel of the idea of doing it

[1:14:47] all at once versus two.

[1:14:54] Bill. >> So,

[1:15:00] we save save 5% ish one way to go there.

[1:15:06] Uh we'll have to take out a loan earlier than later to do the work.

[1:15:13] So, mathematically are we still saving that 5% having to

[1:15:19] pay whatever interest we have on that money

[1:15:22] that we're taking out before 2027 or 2028 whenever we're doing the second

[1:15:28] part of that road. So, instead of doing

[1:15:31] part one of Park Street, part two, and taking out two separate loans, right,

[1:15:36] and getting deferred interest when we do the second, we take out one

[1:15:40] big loan to do all Park Street to save the 5% in construction fees, but do we

[1:15:46] do we at least not pay a 5% interest through that first year?

[1:15:53] » That would only come into effect if we had the money and we were making

[1:15:57] interest on it, but we're not making There is no

[1:16:00] » No, we're not making We're paying We're paying interest to

[1:16:04] the bank to whoever's giving us the money for the loan.

[1:16:06] » No, it's going to be always the same. How's that change?

[1:16:10] » It's going to be a >> I get what you're saying.

[1:16:12] » I understand what you're saying, but as a caveat to that, if we wait a year and

[1:16:16] the cost of metal pipe to put in the water main goes up 4%,

[1:16:20] » Yeah, you're right. >> just

[1:16:22] saved all the first >> Or if interest rates go up 2%, there's

[1:16:25] no saving. >> I understand that. But that was my

[1:16:28] point. If Are we thinking about I the interest on the money

[1:16:32] » My my big thing is affordability. That that's the number one for me. And

[1:16:40] and I might as well speak now because I'm going to be saying it during the

[1:16:45] other discussion on capital law together.

[1:16:48] We're going in We just borrowed 4.1 million bucks.

[1:16:53] We just had the average home went up 67% in assessment. So, that means any of you

[1:17:01] that done your calculations, if you're over 67%,

[1:17:05] your taxes is going up. Right? If you had 67, it should stay the

[1:17:10] same if we don't make any more. But, anything over 67, you're paying a bigger

[1:17:14] bigger share of it. So, for me, I'm up 91%. So, I'm going to go up 30-some. My

[1:17:20] My taxes is going to go up because the average went up 67%. So, if you're over

[1:17:25] that, if you're under that, your taxes goes down if you're looking at today's

[1:17:29] numbers. So, that's hitting people. We're talking

[1:17:33] about raising water rates. So, that's coming

[1:17:38] out of some of their out of our residents. So,

[1:17:42] you know, the the question to me more is affordability and how much this is going

[1:17:50] to cost. And, while I hear what you're saying and

[1:17:55] I'm all for saving money on projects, where I thought you were going is the

[1:18:01] cost of doing it all at once is going to be a huge increase

[1:18:05] in debt. So, that means a huge increase on what we have to pay. It doesn't go

[1:18:09] against the levy, but we still got to pay that debt off. If you stretch it,

[1:18:14] then you're slowly moving it up instead of hitting everybody

[1:18:19] with a big hit right away. It would take a little bit more thought

[1:18:24] because I got to figure out when we're going to make the big hit for water and

[1:18:28] when we're going to make some of these other improvements that

[1:18:33] uh are out there. Um so, that's where my thing is, can

[1:18:39] the residents afford doing it all at once?

[1:18:42] » Well, there's another alternative to that, too.

[1:18:46] Maybe is, you know, one of the things we're

[1:18:49] going to be talking about later is capital.

[1:18:52] » Yeah. >> Right? And if some of that can be

[1:18:55] delayed >> But the original plan was over 3 years.

[1:18:59] It's three phases. >> Right.

[1:19:01] » That's the original plan. That's what's in the CIB. Yeah.

[1:19:03] » Okay. >> Right.

[1:19:05] » Yeah. Yeah, it is. And then that's And I think that the reason is it gives

[1:19:10] an easier >> Right.

[1:19:12] » take on people's property bill. Go ahead.

[1:19:17] » Okay, so I understand you're talking about a one-time hit, but people will

[1:19:21] whether they pay for it in 1 year or they pay for it in 3 years, they're

[1:19:24] still paying for it the whole amount in in a 3-year time period. So, there isn't

[1:19:28] really any affordability savings if it's happening anyway in 3 years.

[1:19:32] » Well, it's still going to cost the same. >> And so then when you have then a 5%

[1:19:36] savings on a 300 and $3 million project, that's $150,000.

[1:19:41] What that means is that savings then then the next year when we do our $150

[1:19:46] street savings things, guess what? We just saved $150,000 by doing Park Street

[1:19:49] the first year. That $150,000 we saved then that's a free paving job for the

[1:19:54] village by doing it all at one time. >> All right, Sarah then myself.

[1:19:58] » I think what you're saying is I I just was thinking that it helps us to budget

[1:20:01] more because because we're going to be looking at each year, it's

[1:20:06] it's right there in the forefront of our mind. We're thinking about that versus

[1:20:09] like if you did it all at once, then I feel like we might start thinking

[1:20:13] about other projects. >> Yeah.

[1:20:16] Michael, I think uh your while your numbers are correct

[1:20:21] that after 3 years you're there, >> You're right.

[1:20:23] » but there are a lot of people in this village

[1:20:28] that are on that line and over 3 years they may able to do it

[1:20:33] because they can maybe save this or they get a raise at work or they do something

[1:20:40] like that to compensate for that. But there's a point where you raise it

[1:20:45] so high, it's almost impossible for someone

[1:20:50] to cover. >> I've got something next.

[1:20:53] » Okay, you know, so I I think while again, when you look at it logically and

[1:21:00] numbers-wise, you are you are absolutely correct. But what you're not looking at

[1:21:05] are people's ability to pay. And if you can stretch it out, and that's why

[1:21:10] people take car loans cuz they can't come up with the cash right away. They

[1:21:15] spread it over 5 years cuz they can make that. So,

[1:21:20] um I just wanted to point out that that's the other side of the coin.

[1:21:25] All right, Jed, you wanted to say something?

[1:21:28] » Yeah, I agree that affordability is going to be a big issue. Um, you know,

[1:21:32] besides the things that were mentioned with tax assessments, I mean, I I've

[1:21:35] heard lots of residents talking about, you know, maybe having to sell their

[1:21:39] house if their tax assessment goes up that far because they're already at that

[1:21:43] margin. Um, we also have the school district trying to do the referendum,

[1:21:47] which may or may not raise the taxes. It may keep it equivalent, but now you've

[1:21:51] got another tax, if you will. Um, so I would be in favor of doing it

[1:21:56] in three phases. >> Okay, I got Michael and myself.

[1:22:01] » All right. So, if we go to a three-phase thing, you're returning Park Street 3

[1:22:05] years in a row. You're causing all kinds of headache on Park Street for 3

[1:22:08] summers, street and road, rather than just the one shot. And we've already

[1:22:11] done sewer and water, we've done it in one shot, man. We did Church Street, the

[1:22:14] entire thing, one year. We just got it done. If we're talking about concerns

[1:22:18] about affordability, why did we build an $8 million new village hall if now

[1:22:22] everybody all of the sudden nobody has any money to pay for anything?

[1:22:26] That's what I don't understand. >> Well, I agree with you. Oh, hang on.

[1:22:30] » Let me say that because if this makes sense financially to do it all in one

[1:22:34] year because we save money, but now it's but now that every single time something

[1:22:38] that makes sense on paper to save money is not you can't afford it because it's

[1:22:42] too much of a lump sum, how are we going to convince people that we're putting in

[1:22:46] paying for a giant water tank over in Marston? There's no affordability thing.

[1:22:50] There's a one-time thing of what, $4 million in the CIP? And this is an

[1:22:54] opportunity to actually actually really save money by doing a project all at one

[1:22:58] time. >> Okay, Michael. I think you have a very

[1:23:01] narrow look. Let's talk about the Village Hall since you pointed that out.

[1:23:06] Sure. We have spread that cost over 5 years. We bought the lot.

[1:23:12] We then paid for the the architect. Now we're paying for construction over 2

[1:23:19] years. Over 2 years.

[1:23:22] And we timed it where we took things off debt, so there was space. That first 3

[1:23:28] million people didn't notice it because we pulled off we had completed debt. So

[1:23:33] that replaced it, so it stayed neutral. So I'm going to disagree with you.

[1:23:39] Village Hall was well planned out for the whole thought of not jumping up

[1:23:45] the cost of people's property tax. All right? So that that's one thing I want

[1:23:50] you to correct. Now let's talk about the reservoir you talked about. That

[1:23:54] reservoir we're getting someone to pay 57%.

[1:23:59] I'm we as a village are saving 57% on a reservoir. We're not paying 100%.

[1:24:07] Now if you can get Park Street someone to pay for 57% of it, I'm all for doing

[1:24:13] it all at once. But you're not there. I just want to make sure you've got to

[1:24:17] look at big picture here and look at the planning that has gone into some of

[1:24:23] these major projects. All right. So,

[1:24:29] I'm I'm understanding where you're coming from. I'm just

[1:24:34] Well, no. There's no way they actually have a chance

[1:24:38] But Michael, I brought that out as one of the things that should be taken into

[1:24:44] consideration. I'm not saying that I'm even for breaking it into three. I'm

[1:24:49] just giving you the feedback on why it would make sense

[1:24:54] to break it out. And that's the main reason. All right. It also would make if

[1:25:00] you ask me, I'd like to postpone the thing until we really know what's going

[1:25:04] to happen next year with a number of projects that are already going.

[1:25:09] » Well, I'm fine with postponing. >> So, but we have the people here. And

[1:25:14] again, this is a discussion that we need all of our input in and looking at the

[1:25:20] different one. There is not one solution to this. And we all probably have

[1:25:25] different ideas on where we weigh weigh things. You know, I'm all for saving

[1:25:30] money. Absolutely, 100%. I'm just wanted to point out the other side of it where

[1:25:37] that can be a problem to some of our residents. That's all.

[1:25:41] » Bill. How many water main breaks do we have on

[1:25:45] Park Street? >> Um I believe there's

[1:25:47] » Per year or so? >> Uh there's 20 documented. Um the pipes

[1:25:53] was put in in 1959. So, we don't really have a whole lot of

[1:25:57] information prior to 2000. But >> But even in the past couple years, we've

[1:26:02] had quite a few >> There's about one a year.

[1:26:05] » About one a year? >> Yeah.

[1:26:06] » And what's it cost us to to fix to fix that?

[1:26:09] » Uh but I thought it was only 5,000. >> Yeah, it's like I did a rough estimate

[1:26:13] of, you know, 5,000. >> Who would pay for it?

[1:26:16] » But I think the main reason we're looking at part three is more to the

[1:26:21] sewer side of it because it's very old piping in there and it's clay piping and

[1:26:28] the water's getting into the pipe and then that goes to the

[1:26:33] sewer plant which affects capacity and affects that clear water that we get

[1:26:39] graded down on in those reports. So it needs to happen. I don't get me wrong. I

[1:26:44] am not arguing that it doesn't. I'm trying to piece everything together that

[1:26:50] makes sense and keep it in an idea that

[1:26:55] there's so much uncertainty next year on how this all works with

[1:27:01] this big assessment. Everything's going to be tied to that. So I just want to

[1:27:06] make sure we have a good decision here and like I say

[1:27:10] I may you know, I'm kind of saying if like

[1:27:14] just let's get it all done with, but I do need to know what the total impact is

[1:27:20] going to be on our residents and it's you know, we're working hard to see what

[1:27:26] the budget and what salaries and base budgets are for that part of it. Then

[1:27:31] we're looking at borrowing and we got to realistically look when we do the CIP

[1:27:38] what we're doing there because while it doesn't hit levy limit, we still got to

[1:27:42] pay for that debt. >> Okay, so I got one more question.

[1:27:45] » Yeah, go ahead. >> So then

[1:27:46] » These are important. >> Yeah. So

[1:27:50] what is what is the impact on water sewer if you wait a year?

[1:27:55] A year then. >> Well, the impact is $2 to $5 per

[1:28:00] thousand gallons treated. So that means just that more much more I&I going to

[1:28:06] the sewer plant that needs to be treated that shouldn't happen.

[1:28:09] » Do you have a guess on what that cost would be? I know I've tried adding this

[1:28:13] together. >> I know it's a guess.

[1:28:18] » So it would maybe Well, at the high end it would be $1,000

[1:28:22] but the low end is $400 for the elbows. Two per thousand gallon. You're doing

[1:28:27] Well, if you're if you're doing 250, two is 500 and five is 1250 a day per rain

[1:28:33] day. This summer when you rain days are >> It's I think I estimated about 100 rain

[1:28:37] days and it was around $70,000. >> Okay. Okay.

[1:28:42] I mean this summer we probably haven't added too many though.

[1:28:44] » Uh June was >> They rained every day it seemed like.

[1:28:48] » They hang on for a day or two after >> I think it's rained then. But I don't

[1:28:51] know. We've had pretty dry spells this summer.

[1:28:55] » Yeah, July was very dry.

[1:28:59] » All right. So this So if we delayed this by So if we delayed this for a year,

[1:29:04] figure the cost is going to be in the neighborhood of

[1:29:09] You could say >> 70. That's a firm 70. 70 grand.

[1:29:15] » Okay. >> That

[1:29:16] But I I don't want to keep throwing things in but the other problem that is

[1:29:21] I'm not It's There's more of a chance of interest

[1:29:26] rates going up than down. 10-year uh government notes are at the highest

[1:29:32] level since uh for the since the last decade. And a lot of long-term mortgages

[1:29:38] are tied to that. So that's

[1:29:42] I don't I don't want necessarily we have to play that game but

[1:29:46] » and >> I know it is. I'm just throwing that out

[1:29:48] there. I'm I'm trying to read everything here.

[1:29:50] » Right. I get it. >> And try to put all the pieces together

[1:29:53] for us. >> I have one question.

[1:29:56] » Go ahead, Jed. >> If we delay that for a year, I mean

[1:30:00] we've got the wastewater treatment facility updates for $2.7 million

[1:30:05] dollars the following year in 20 28 for the water infrastructure at 3 and

[1:30:12] 1/2 million dollars. I mean, are we even able to push that off or we pushing then

[1:30:16] other things back down another year? >> Well, the

[1:30:20] sewer we'll wait for that report and I am

[1:30:24] hoping it's going to be here the next month or two. That'll give us a really

[1:30:28] good idea but that's a separate thing cuz that's a utility.

[1:30:32] Um and that one if you remember we're in really financially that is probably in

[1:30:38] the best shape of anything in the village. If you remember with the

[1:30:42] auditor's report on the borrowing uh they like a one-to-one but we're at

[1:30:47] one-to-three a little over three it was 3.1.

[1:30:51] The water's definitely going to be uh

[1:30:54] a concern. Uh again that won't that'll be by the utility but you're

[1:30:59] right that's going to come out of people's pocket. Um

[1:31:05] and you're right that could be it's probably more likely two three years I

[1:31:10] would think. Don't you think Brian? Would you think in two years the

[1:31:14] reservoir would be up? >> Uh yes.

[1:31:18] » Oh, you do? You think oh, okay.

[1:31:23] » It'd be here winter of 28. Or fall 28.

[1:31:27] » Oh, fall of 28 okay. So, but we could do this in 27.

[1:31:33] That would spread it out. Those two projects.

[1:31:38] Right? >> Yeah, then

[1:31:41] even though we have the repairs on the sewer they're still

[1:31:45] that's >> Yeah.

[1:31:46] » that's all good. >> Yeah, I like I say I'm pretty

[1:31:49] comfortable >> Yeah, just project wise.

[1:31:51] » Yeah, yeah because of and and we'll have a better idea at the end of this year

[1:31:57] on sewer because then those rate reduction that we did will be 100%

[1:32:02] accounted for. But right now the sewer looks really well looks really

[1:32:06] good and the adding of the new houses and

[1:32:10] the uh

[1:32:12] connection fees and stuff were really kind of building up

[1:32:17] cash there.

[1:32:21] All right. Um are there any more questions on this

[1:32:24] cuz I don't I don't I don't want to vote on this until we get to the CIP.

[1:32:31] But this is your question to brainstorm on uh

[1:32:36] the scenarios that have been brought to you and have any questions

[1:32:42] answered. You guys uh Jed or Cameron you got any more questions on any of the

[1:32:48] scenarios or how they would work? >> No, I'm good right now.

[1:32:53] » I'm also good. >> Okay, very good. Um so we will continue

[1:33:00] this when we do the CIP.

[1:33:04] All right, good.

[1:33:11] Okay, five discussion and possible action regarding proposed

[1:33:16] bicycle ordinance amendments to section 51.14.

[1:33:20] Who's taking lead on this? >> Chief.

[1:33:22] » Chief? >> Cameron Cameron you can start if you

[1:33:26] like. >> All right, Cameron you're up.

[1:33:30] » Sure. Um so

[1:33:33] you know public safety took this matter well I

[1:33:36] don't know it was three-ish months ago four-ish months ago

[1:33:39] we we had quite a few meetings on it because it's coming up more and more

[1:33:44] across Dane County and other places. I mean in fact even since we had our

[1:33:48] original proposal for updating the ordinance, you know, I think UW Health

[1:33:52] has come out with a pretty prominent um safety study around e-bikes and and

[1:33:57] stuff. So, really applaud Chief Tony for having kind of the foresight and stuff

[1:34:01] for us to be be looking at this early. Um we did we came to the Village Board

[1:34:06] with a an original proposal out of uh Village out of Public Safety and um

[1:34:12] there were some concerns in particular about um parks and trails and, you know,

[1:34:18] what would be allowed there. So, we referred the matter back to parks. And

[1:34:22] then the matter matter came back to Public Safety uh this past week and what

[1:34:26] you're seeing now here I think is hopefully the final iteration after

[1:34:30] parks and Public Safety have taken a number of bites of this apple.

[1:34:34] Um do you want me to read it or can I go

[1:34:37] over some of the highlights? >> Uh

[1:34:40] what do you want? >> Well, I I would just add that not only

[1:34:44] has that gone through the committees, but it also has been seen by our Village

[1:34:49] Attorney twice.

[1:34:54] » Okay. So, why don't you go through the highlights uh Cameron?

[1:34:59] » Okay. I mean the the key highlights from when you guys last saw this

[1:35:05] um are the additions to um so, before we had said no e-bikes, no e-scooters, no

[1:35:11] nothing in any parks or trails or conservancy.

[1:35:14] Um we had that has been amended slightly here. So, now it's just class three

[1:35:20] e-bikes are not allowed on any of the um the trails in in paths.

[1:35:26] Class one and two uh and electric scooters are allowed,

[1:35:30] but they cannot exceed 15 mph. Um also in addition to the park land and

[1:35:35] conservancies, we um well, the parks committee um added sidewalks as well,

[1:35:41] which was good. Um we've added some stuff in for um you

[1:35:45] know, you know, if the Chief of Police or someone he designates put signs up,

[1:35:49] we could, you know, say, "Hey, no e-bikes here." That seems to be very

[1:35:54] similar to what Madison and Middleton has.

[1:35:57] Um And the we are suggesting not suggesting

[1:36:04] our ordinance will have that groups of riders on bicycles and e-bikes may

[1:36:09] operate two abreast instead of single file in the village that aligns with

[1:36:13] state law. Um

[1:36:17] I think the only other thing we really changed since the last time this group

[1:36:20] saw it is helmet requirements.

[1:36:27] Anyone riding a class three or I'm sorry, anyone riding an e-bike under the

[1:36:32] age of 18 um will be required to wear a helmet given

[1:36:38] that they go a lot faster.

[1:36:43] » I think this timing is perfect and I really appreciate all the work. I saw

[1:36:48] that not only on the local news but it made

[1:36:51] on the national news. So, it is a topic that's very current and I'm glad we're

[1:36:58] in the forefront of doing something. Did your I think this is great. I'm very

[1:37:03] supportive of it. The question I have for you is what

[1:37:08] did you discuss any things on strategies of getting the word out and educating

[1:37:13] the community on this? >> Well, I think for us it's going to be a

[1:37:17] lot of social media getting the the schools.

[1:37:21] We've already had one bike rodeo during national night out but doing another you

[1:37:27] know, bike rodeo during that time. I mean, these things are going to be put

[1:37:31] to sleep here within the next month or so. So, I think we're we're on the right

[1:37:35] trail. We'll just have to hammer it away, you know, put it in the paper and

[1:37:39] whatever wherever we can put it, maybe through flyers,

[1:37:42] posted everywhere and anywhere. Um I think that

[1:37:47] that will be uh for sure. And you're right, it's not only it's making

[1:37:51] national news, but it was just it was in the local municipality was talking about

[1:37:55] it. I mean, everybody's talking about it. It's it's

[1:37:57] it's it's a it's a topic and um the

[1:38:01] I think that this was well thought out. I appreciate Parks taking

[1:38:06] a hard look at it. They even looked at it from the lines of public safety also.

[1:38:10] So, I think you know, we we saw some things. I mean, there's some things that

[1:38:14] you know, some disagreements, but that was all healthy and helped us come with

[1:38:19] this final product. Uh, I will add that um

[1:38:23] our village attorney had also in number 15 where it says electric bikes and

[1:38:27] electric scooters, he had put just bicycles. And I just felt that was just

[1:38:31] that's just too much to enforce helmets on

[1:38:34] regular bicycles. It just seems very heavy-handed.

[1:38:37] The other thing we will do is uh once this gets approved uh in whatever group

[1:38:42] whatever state it does, um we're going to educate our officers. They're

[1:38:46] well-versed in the state law of it. Um fortunate for us I have Matt as a member

[1:38:53] of the Traffic Safety Commission. So, he brings back a lot of topics from that.

[1:38:57] But also, we we've had uh education from other communities uh through PowerPoints

[1:39:02] of what they're doing, um incorporating that on their own village ordinance but

[1:39:07] how the state law works. Uh, we'll be very, you know, proactive on this, you

[1:39:11] know, when we Right now, we do a lot of proactivity on bikes, you know,

[1:39:15] giving if somebody's got a helmet on, we're giving them out,

[1:39:19] you know, tokens for ice cream and and just addaboys and high-fives and those

[1:39:23] kind of things. I think this will will come in handy. The village is There are

[1:39:27] village members who are are confused with state law and why don't we have an

[1:39:32] ordinance? So, I think this will help guide them. You'll also see that there's

[1:39:37] some stuff embedded in here um that is already state law, but we we

[1:39:43] put it in here so people could read it. Much like the fireworks ordinance, if

[1:39:47] you remember, the reason we added some language is because you can always lean

[1:39:51] on numbers and say, "Well, you can look at, you know, state statute, whatever."

[1:39:55] But the ones that we saw for sure need to be abiding, and we added them to our

[1:39:59] ordinance, even though they're already even though they're part of state law.

[1:40:03] So, it's just to give some some language for the people to read.

[1:40:11] » Okay, go ahead. I had a question. >> Go ahead.

[1:40:14] » You were first. >> Okay.

[1:40:15] » And then >> Um

[1:40:17] So, if I read this, I'm just wrapping me. Are bicycles not allowed on

[1:40:22] sidewalks? >> Bicycles are allowed.

[1:40:24] » They are? >> They are allowed. So, I am

[1:40:26] » We just have to give >> We're just adding this to the bicycle

[1:40:29] ordinance. Bicycle ordinance already exists.

[1:40:31] » But the bicycles won't have to give right of way.

[1:40:34] » Right. Right. But I'm just thinking I thought it was no bicycle and I'm

[1:40:37] thinking my little 4-year-old granddaughter, she's on Actually, I want

[1:40:39] her on the sidewalk. You know what I mean? It's on the sidewalk. She can be

[1:40:41] on the sidewalk. >> As long as she's as long as she's not

[1:40:45] going over 15 mph, Judy. >> Um the other thing you'll see here is

[1:40:50] there's some that seem kind of

[1:40:55] weird that we wouldn't enforce like racing, for instance, right?

[1:41:00] Two bikes can't race. Well, we're we're not specifically talking about like two

[1:41:04] 8-year-olds racing their bikes down the street or they're on the sidewalk.

[1:41:08] That's not what we're talking. We're talking about kids that can go on the

[1:41:11] e-bikes really fast racing down the sidewalks

[1:41:15] I mean, we've been passed by some of those bikes um in our SWAT times, and I

[1:41:20] have to educate people already because we have state law. So, that the spirit

[1:41:24] of this law is not to enforce it against those little kids having a good time

[1:41:28] outside with, you know, It will be very well monitored

[1:41:34] and how in compliance will be the most important.

[1:41:39] Uh this is more, you know, if you've got a couple kids racing down Main Street at

[1:41:44] 20 miles an hour on their e-bikes, that is

[1:41:47] covered by all means for the law. That is all.

[1:41:52] » And there's going to be a big educational part.

[1:41:54] » educational part of that. And we'll hammer education

[1:41:58] before them. >> Bill.

[1:42:01] » I really appreciate Safety and Parks taking the time. This has been an

[1:42:06] ongoing issue and so I am going to

[1:42:11] make a motion that we approve the ordinance to repeal and recreate section

[1:42:16] 551.14 of the Village of Cross Plains Code of

[1:42:20] Ordinances concerning bicycles.

[1:42:26] » I will second. >> All right, I have a motion and a second.

[1:42:30] Any other discussion? Now, this is one of those ordinances we should put on our

[1:42:35] website that it's a change.

[1:42:39] And did you did either of the committees do a public hearing on this at all?

[1:42:44] » I think we asked that question. >> Paul said we didn't need to cuz it was a

[1:42:50] change. >> No, no, there's legally you don't have

[1:42:54] to. It's just sometimes we do it like when we did the ATV UTV, we had public

[1:43:00] hearings just so people don't accuse us of doing things behind their backs.

[1:43:06] » I think the first time, if I remember correctly, that we had this on the

[1:43:10] agenda, we did have kind of an additional public hearing. Do you

[1:43:13] remember that, Jay? >> I

[1:43:15] » [laughter] >> Okay, maybe not.

[1:43:16] » It's just a matter of months.

[1:43:18] » But yeah, I don't think anything happened at at the committee.

[1:43:22] » we have to do it. I'm just asking so people

[1:43:26] ask me or >> Yeah, it might have been at the

[1:43:28] building. >> That if we did if we could if we did one

[1:43:32] brave if we didn't find >> I'm pretty sure we did one. I just cuz I

[1:43:36] added in an additional public hearing and I remember you saying why did we do

[1:43:39] that and I was like just in case somebody had something to say.

[1:43:43] And I believe Jill Hedgecock said something came up and made a remark.

[1:43:48] » That's right. >> Yeah.

[1:43:50] » So if we did one that's that's fine. I just want to like I said I'm just

[1:43:54] asking for information that it's not a critique in any way.

[1:44:00] All right. Any other discussion? All in favor say I.

[1:44:04] » I. >> All opposed same.

[1:44:08] » Thank you. >> Yeah, thank you. Good job.

[1:44:12] All right. Six discussion and possible action regarding the new Village Hall

[1:44:17] Police Department. >> All right. Want to start with

[1:44:20] technology? >> Yeah, why not?

[1:44:23] » All right. So I'll just give you brief history even though it's not actually

[1:44:27] that brief on the technology bids. Um so this was back the first time we

[1:44:33] came to the Village Board with bids was June 22nd and then after those getting

[1:44:39] reformatted and split into a separate security bid and an AV bid

[1:44:44] we came back on July 27th. Um and so the board chose to award the AV bid and not

[1:44:51] the security bid. So it's been another month and so now tonight we have

[1:44:57] security bid options for the Village Board to consider.

[1:45:01] Um and so three came in. Um all relatively close so those were

[1:45:07] all opened on Thursday at 2:00. So we had Omni Technologies

[1:45:12] out of Oregon, Wisconsin, Community Enginee- Communications Engineering Co

[1:45:17] or CEC that is who the AV bid was awarded to.

[1:45:23] They do have a Madison office and I think their headquarters are in Iowa.

[1:45:28] Um, and then Advanced Technical LLC out of New Berlin, Wisconsin, um, came in as

[1:45:34] well. So, there are three pretty close bids here, um, tonight. The low bid is

[1:45:39] Omni Technology at $157,223.

[1:45:44] Um, however, your second closest is CEC, who is also doing the AV bid at 160,

[1:45:51] um, thousand 114. Um, so, roughly, you know, under a

[1:45:56] $3,000 difference between the first two bidders. Um, so, the recommendation from

[1:46:00] Wold is the low bid, um, without the alternate, so just the base bid at

[1:46:05] 157,223. And I do believe Matt Bickel's on the

[1:46:10] call as well.

[1:46:16] » Yes, I'm here, Carli, if there are any questions.

[1:46:19] » All right. I just have one question. How closely are together

[1:46:26] is the security system with the AV, the audio-visual part of it? Do they use the

[1:46:33] same software? Do they use the same hardware?

[1:46:37] Um, is there going to be where they need to

[1:46:40] talk to each other? I

[1:46:46] » Generally no, Jay. I mean, they will have some pieces of equipment that live

[1:46:49] in the same environment in terms of the server room or IDF, but, um,

[1:46:56] in terms of the the systems themselves, they are

[1:46:59] independent. >> Yeah, and the reason I asked that, we're

[1:47:03] looking at the difference of, uh, basically a little over 3,000 to have

[1:47:09] the same company, which would avoid any finger pointing

[1:47:14] if we have a problem, if they're connected enough that that could be a

[1:47:19] problem. If they're two separate units, and that is not a concern that I'm fine,

[1:47:25] but I have no problem spending extra 3,000 to help if if that's going to be a

[1:47:31] problem. They just don't want to have to fight, you know, it could have cost us

[1:47:35] more in the long run. Is there a chance of any type of

[1:47:39] finger-pointing on this stuff?

[1:47:43] » I would anticipate not. Again, it's they're they're they're not running on

[1:47:47] the same cable. Um you know, they're different pathways, different conduits.

[1:47:52] Um No, it it should There shouldn't be any

[1:47:56] risk of that. >> A question I would have is would they

[1:47:59] be, you know, ordering things at the same time from similar companies, like

[1:48:04] the timeline of things arriving? Would would that be a benefit to having them

[1:48:10] both? Having the same company provide both?

[1:48:16] » Um I I think that any benefit that

[1:48:22] you would potentially have gained from having them together, we

[1:48:26] sort of proved out when we um

[1:48:30] when we bid it as a combined package. Um the

[1:48:35] the opportunity for um

[1:48:38] that economy I think is would would have been in, you know, some of their

[1:48:45] site supervision, project management, that type of thing. Um

[1:48:50] In terms of the, you know, equipment that they're ordering, you know, I don't

[1:48:54] know that there's any significant savings from sourcing it

[1:48:58] combined or separately.

[1:49:05] And to that point, um I think CEC had that opportunity in bidding it the

[1:49:11] second time to to realize that since they had already

[1:49:15] been awarded the contract for the audio visual package that they perhaps had

[1:49:19] some economy. So, I would have expected that to have been reflected in their

[1:49:24] bid. Um

[1:49:26] you know, if that were the case. So, my guess is that they sharpened their

[1:49:29] pencil as much as they could, um you know, based on that

[1:49:33] reality and that's what you see reflected here. So,

[1:49:39] » Bill, why are we not doing alternative number

[1:49:43] one service maintenance option one or two?

[1:49:47] » Great question, Bill. So, um the base bid includes a 3-year

[1:49:53] um main- maintenance expen- extension. So,

[1:49:56] that's a service agreement and an extended warranty

[1:50:00] uh for both the audio visual and video surveillance components of the project.

[1:50:05] Uh we bid alternates number one and number two to give the village some

[1:50:09] um exposure to what uh that

[1:50:13] a continuation of that cost for an additional 3 years, so 6 years in total

[1:50:17] would be. Um

[1:50:20] but I I don't know that at this point um it's kind of like the uh

[1:50:27] the uh the service protection that they offer you at Costco or Best Buy or

[1:50:32] wherever you buy your technology, right? Um you know, it it's kind of that added

[1:50:37] warranty that probably doesn't get used um a heck of a lot. So, um

[1:50:44] to go the extra 3 years, um we don't think it's probably worth it

[1:50:48] at this point. >> Great. Thank you. I appreciate that.

[1:50:52] » Do you have any other questions? >> Cameron, your thoughts, please.

[1:50:59] » Um I think I don't think we would need to combine them. I mean,

[1:51:05] I agree with everything that was already stated on kind of

[1:51:08] we would have seen, you you economies of scale if that were the case, um I would

[1:51:13] go with the first one. The two-per one.

[1:51:18] » And what about uh since you're in this business, the

[1:51:21] warranties and stuff? What Bill was bringing up.

[1:51:25] » Oh, I agree with him completely. They're

[1:51:28] unlikely to be used. Um Yeah.

[1:51:33] » Okay. Perfect.

[1:51:35] Chad, do you have anything uh you want to comment on this since part

[1:51:39] of this is kind of what you do for a living?

[1:51:42] » Uh I guess my only question was, >> [snorts]

[1:51:45] » you know, adding in another contractor, I mean, I guess that's the concern with,

[1:51:50] you know, now the project manager has to deal with

[1:51:54] somebody else. Do we have any issues there or is it the same kind of verbage

[1:51:58] here that they should have bid it if they C E C wanted it and it is what it

[1:52:02] is?

[1:52:06] » Or the >> Yeah, I mean, I think a lot of times, um

[1:52:09] and what we saw when we bid it the first time was that

[1:52:13] and I I don't know with Omni specifically.

[1:52:16] Um you know, Communications Engineering

[1:52:19] Company is an outfit that does both audio visual and security.

[1:52:24] Um

[1:52:27] Often times, you will have companies that specialize in audio visual and they

[1:52:32] would have had to bring on a subcontractor anyways to do the

[1:52:34] technology or vice versa. Um

[1:52:37] so, I I I I don't think it's uncommon that you know, you would you would see

[1:52:41] separate vendors in these uh disciplines

[1:52:45] on the same site at the same time. >> Okay. Thanks.

[1:52:52] » Any other questions? Go ahead, Michael.

[1:52:57] » I don't know if I have a question, but yeah, I I really don't know. I mean,

[1:53:02] having the one company do it sometimes I mean, the one company do it. Like what

[1:53:07] do were saying. Are there things there, other people

[1:53:10] there, other sub contractors there that are the

[1:53:13] I don't know if that's worth $3,000 or >> That's where it's like

[1:53:18] It is dealing with one person and not two people and something happens cuz

[1:53:21] they are both contractors. Hopefully, unless they're two

[1:53:25] independent divisions of a company. I don't know. I don't know.

[1:53:29] » Well, I think that last point, we don't know cuz

[1:53:33] it could be where they're uh

[1:53:37] the one that we have for audio visual might be their main and they just are

[1:53:41] subbing, you know, for the bid part. I don't I don't know.

[1:53:44] I I guess I'm I'm comfortable going with

[1:53:48] the lowest unless there's But that is a the valid point, but it seems like most

[1:53:52] people don't think that's going to be a problem.

[1:53:58] » No one else? >> Go ahead, Bill.

[1:54:00] » I'll make a motion that we approve Omni Technologies for the Off-Plane Village

[1:54:06] of Ball Police Station security package for $157,223.

[1:54:12] » Second. >> All right, I have a motion and a second.

[1:54:15] Any other discussion, Sarah? >> I just wondered, is there anything on

[1:54:19] like the village's end that having the two separate companies is going to add

[1:54:22] more uh hassle? >> Well, it should be that this is just an

[1:54:28] install. >> Okay. I mean, we'll have to do like the

[1:54:31] like new customer paperwork and kind of like the onboarding that we had to do

[1:54:35] with CEC already. I'm assuming we'd have to do that with Omni as well.

[1:54:39] Um but I don't know like what to what extent that might look like for that

[1:54:42] company. Um I guess yeah, the benefit would be

[1:54:46] that we're already kind of an established customer at this point now

[1:54:49] that we've filled out all the paperwork for CEC.

[1:54:52] But >> But for the $3,000 savings, do you think

[1:54:56] it's reasonable? >> I I just don't know. Like yeah, I can't

[1:55:01] anticipate. I mean, the the other thing I could think of is

[1:55:06] yeah, the extra like extra group on site. I know things are getting pretty

[1:55:11] tight as far as walls getting closed up as far as like running conduit and

[1:55:15] things like that. Um so, like these both companies are going to have to work

[1:55:20] really closely with Brickel Brothers to get things moving. But, I mean, we don't

[1:55:25] know we have no way to anticipate how that's

[1:55:29] going to look, I guess.

[1:55:34] » Carly, I I excuse the

[1:55:37] um unknowing question, I guess, but is there a local ordinance that allows you

[1:55:43] to take a non-low bid?

[1:55:46] » That's what I was wondering. >> Uh yeah, cuz this is a service. It's not

[1:55:51] We follow uh state statute, and then we have

[1:55:55] » our own purchasing policy. >> Yeah, purchasing uh policy, and we've

[1:55:59] got all of that. >> So, we do have the option, yeah.

[1:56:03] » Yeah. But, generally, you want to go with low

[1:56:05] bid unless you can come up with a really good reason. And to me, if there was

[1:56:10] shared server or software, that would be automatic 3,000. I would definitely do

[1:56:16] it to prevent the pointing of fingers if something doesn't

[1:56:20] work. That for sure would have been a

[1:56:23] no-brainer for me. >> Yeah. Does that change anything for you,

[1:56:25] Matt? Like any of >> No, I just wasn't aware of how you were

[1:56:31] going to go about making that uh motion. Um

[1:56:37] it'll be unusual in my my world, but

[1:56:44] » All right. Anything else? All right. All in favor, say I.

[1:56:49] » I. >> I.

[1:56:50] » I. >> All opposed, say so moved.

[1:56:58] » All right. I think you're up next again, Matt.

[1:57:01] » Want me to keep going, Carly? All right, great. Um

[1:57:04] Sounds good. Uh so, we do have change order number two to present to the board

[1:57:09] this evening. Um

[1:57:13] there are three items that comprise this change order.

[1:57:18] Uh the first one is by far away the largest of the three.

[1:57:23] Um so, I will do my best to explain it and then answer any questions.

[1:57:28] Um so, as

[1:57:30] I assume everyone knows, um during the design of the project, uh a decision was

[1:57:36] made to um uh delay installation of an emergency

[1:57:41] generator for the project as a cost savings measure to some point uh in the

[1:57:47] future. And so, the project was designed with

[1:57:51] that future uh generator reality um you know, sort

[1:57:56] of contemplated. Uh that means that the spaces um you know, planned for it on

[1:58:01] the site, the you know, conduits are run out to

[1:58:05] um the pad. Um you know, there is space in the electrical room for the automatic

[1:58:09] transfer switch, uh etc. Um in doing so, um we also

[1:58:17] um included in the project a what's called a docking station.

[1:58:21] Uh that is basically, you know, an umbilical that uh in the event that

[1:58:26] well, you don't have a generator, you find yourselves in a prolonged period of

[1:58:32] power outage, uh and you want to bring a portable

[1:58:34] generator onto the site, you can do so, plug into the building, run the building

[1:58:39] off of that portable generator. Uh the added secondary benefit of that um

[1:58:45] docking station is down the road, once you do have a generator, if you need to

[1:58:51] do some type of maintenance on that generator or replace that generator and

[1:58:55] again are without the generator for some period of time, you can use a portable

[1:58:59] generator as a backup for the building.

[1:59:03] Um it's a little bit atypical and so

[1:59:08] as the project was designed went through the shop drawing phase

[1:59:13] where the contractor was submitting their you know sort of you know

[1:59:16] schematics for what they were planning to

[1:59:19] purchase and install it came to everyone's attention that

[1:59:24] there is sort of a component of

[1:59:28] this that is lacking. So um

[1:59:32] essentially when there is an automatic transfer switch that is intended to flip

[1:59:40] the power from you know your primary power to your generator or from your

[1:59:45] generator to your um

[1:59:49] your docking station or portable generator

[1:59:52] that provides you know the necessary isolation between the

[1:59:58] various power power sources

[2:00:02] because the automatic transfer switch was planned as a future component along

[2:00:07] with the future generator we don't have that mechanism for

[2:00:10] isolating it and so that needed to be added to the project. Um so that's

[2:00:16] what's the cost here the $29,145

[2:00:21] is to add the component that makes that sequencing

[2:00:26] work. A couple things that I will mention

[2:00:29] there's really no other way to do it short of

[2:00:33] buying the future transfer switch which would be

[2:00:36] a more uh significant cost

[2:00:41] and you would be paying for this at that time anyway. So that the same component

[2:00:45] is going in now into the panel would be a component that you would need when you

[2:00:50] had that transfer switch. Uh so it's a little bit of now or then

[2:00:54] uh situation. The second part is uh when the cost was

[2:00:57] originally submitted by Brickel Brothers um through their electrical contractor,

[2:01:03] uh the cost was actually closer to $48,000

[2:01:06] um and so through meeting with them, through kind of talking through what it

[2:01:11] is that they were proposing to do, uh we were able to

[2:01:15] um you know, recognize a reduction of that cost down to the 29 145. So um you

[2:01:21] know, we do believe that this is the the fair value for it. Um it is required to

[2:01:26] make uh the emergency power systems work uh as intended. Uh and so that is why um

[2:01:33] you know, we're asking for this to to be included

[2:01:37] in Brickel Brothers contract. I'll pause there and answer any

[2:01:40] questions before I move on to the other two items.

[2:01:47] » Well, I I got a question, I guess. And this is just for the board. Why

[2:01:52] wasn't that put into the original document since from day one we knew we

[2:02:01] were going to need this? And so, you know, it's been

[2:02:07] on my mind is why wasn't that in there? It certainly wasn't the village

[2:02:13] uh neglecting to say what our future plans

[2:02:17] were. I mean, it was from day one we were planning on doing this. And now

[2:02:21] I think it's a little unfair that we have to add this on because it

[2:02:26] wasn't part of the original plans which was bidded on.

[2:02:35] » Well, um I mean, that's that's a a fair question, Jay. Um it it

[2:02:41] was not included in the specifications for the project again

[2:02:46] I think because of the atypical nature of the configuration

[2:02:50] and so it was something that should have been included

[2:02:54] and should have been part of Brickel Brothers bids from day

[2:02:59] one but it wasn't included in the specs and so they they didn't have that

[2:03:04] covered in their bid and that's why it's a change order to their

[2:03:10] their contract.

[2:03:16] » So I I

[2:03:17] I'm still I'll I'll be honest with you man. I'm still because you know, I'm

[2:03:21] tolerant for errors. Everybody makes errors and stuff but there's been a

[2:03:27] number of things that have not and this is one that's a little frustrating on my

[2:03:33] part because this was so well documented in our

[2:03:38] discussions that we were going to do this. I just don't

[2:03:43] understand why we have to pay 100% of of this.

[2:03:50] Cuz we really quite frankly have no

[2:03:55] no thing in here that would cause us to have cause this

[2:04:00] to happen.

[2:04:02] » So you should get it for free. Is that what you're saying?

[2:04:06] » Well, that would be my starting point. Yeah.

[2:04:10] That would be my starting point but >> Well, let let me say this Jay for the

[2:04:14] sake of moving the conversation forward. Um

[2:04:19] whether you think that the village should be responsible for paying for it

[2:04:23] or not the reality is that Brickel Brothers is

[2:04:27] due this amount um due to the fact that it was not in

[2:04:32] the specifications. So I would I guess recommend

[2:04:38] that the change order needs to be approved in order for the work to get

[2:04:42] done, for the project to be completed. And so, I guess, if there's

[2:04:48] you know, other discussions that need to happen beyond that, I guess, let's let's

[2:04:53] have those conversations, but I don't think that not approving the change

[2:04:57] order to Brickel Brothers is probably an option that you have.

[2:05:02] » No, and I would that would not be my option at all. I

[2:05:06] I I agree with your statement 100% and we certainly can't

[2:05:11] do I don't want to have any responsibility in slowing this project

[2:05:14] down at all. I just want you to know that at least from my perspective

[2:05:23] and uh

[2:05:24] we can approve this with the understanding and the verbage that it's

[2:05:29] under protest and then we can uh have discussions later on

[2:05:35] on on this. So, I kind of agree with you, but I just wanted that

[2:05:40] you to know that this is at least where I'm coming from.

[2:05:47] And we'll see what the board wants to do.

[2:05:50] But, I agree with you, we need to approve it. It's it's needed in the

[2:05:55] building. I don't know if they've already ordered it. I'm hoping they have

[2:05:59] because I know what these delays are, but I just want to make it very clear

[2:06:03] that we you know, I'm going to ask the board to do it under protest.

[2:06:13] » And just to answer your question, the we communicated to Brickel that this was

[2:06:18] going to be included in an upcoming change order. Um and so, with that

[2:06:22] acknowledgement, um you know, they did go ahead and release

[2:06:26] it as to not cause any delay. >> Perfect. Thank you.

[2:06:31] All right, any other questions on this one?

[2:06:37] All right, why don't you go ahead with the next two then? Thanks.

[2:06:41] » Yep. Um so the second item is um there's an area in the lower level

[2:06:48] uh in the toilet room that has a shower in it.

[2:06:52] Um there was some plumbing piping to

[2:06:56] serving the shower uh that um needed to be routed

[2:07:02] um along uh the port and place concrete foundation wall could not be obviously

[2:07:06] poured or or put into the wall. Uh and so as a field condition, they had to fur

[2:07:12] out that wall um so that the piping could be concealed

[2:07:16] within in the wall and make the the toilet room work. Uh that was an add of

[2:07:21] $623.79.

[2:07:26] And the second item was at the high roof of the main entry.

[2:07:31] Um there's kind of a three-sided parapet wall along that sort of sloped upper

[2:07:36] roof uh that drains to a kind of a gutter on the fourth side.

[2:07:41] Um during the

[2:07:44] structural engineering shop drawing phase,

[2:07:47] um it was discovered or indicated uh that

[2:07:51] they needed to add a little bit of steel reinforcement or steel kickers

[2:07:56] uh to um add to the rigidity of that uh assembly. Uh and so that was a

[2:08:04] an add uh in the amount of $835.92.

[2:08:14] Did anybody have any questions on this?

[2:08:25] All right, Jed, Cameron.

[2:08:30] » None for me. >> Nope.

[2:08:34] » All right. Do we have a motion? Would you like me to do it?

[2:08:39] » Maybe he's got it. >> I make a motion

[2:08:43] uh to approve uh

[2:08:46] the change orders. Uh the It's just change order two.

[2:08:51] » Number two. >> Yeah, change order number two

[2:08:54] with the understanding that the um

[2:08:59] docking station connection is under protest.

[2:09:05] » I'll second that. >> I have a motion and a second. Any

[2:09:10] discussion?

[2:09:15] All in favor say I. >> I.

[2:09:17] » I. >> All opposed say

[2:09:21] So moved. All right. We will go Thank you, Matt,

[2:09:26] for coming to the meeting. >> Thank you.

[2:09:31] » All right. We are now at discussion and possible

[2:09:35] action regarding the 2027 capital improvement uh project. What

[2:09:41] we're going to do is we'll go through this

[2:09:44] uh each line

[2:09:48] and um vote on them indiv-

[2:09:52] individually. I'll have Bobby to start the process,

[2:09:57] kind of explain what the red means and

[2:10:04] and what all else you want us to know before we start this discussion.

[2:10:08] » Yeah, so the projects in red um are ones that are kind of up in the air right

[2:10:12] now. The flood mitigation project we actually got an email today from

[2:10:16] Wisconsin Emergency Management. >> Mhm.

[2:10:19] » Um so this This one where we were told that there might be additional

[2:10:23] grant funding to increase the project. Um so I think that she said we could go

[2:10:27] ahead and submit something for that. So again,

[2:10:31] these numbers will likely change before this is up for vote.

[2:10:34] » Right. Can I just comment? When she's talking about the changing of the

[2:10:38] number, ours will stay the same at 25. It's the 200,000

[2:10:44] that may go up if Brian's still here. At least 100,000 if I'm right. Or is it

[2:10:48] 200,000? >> It was 100,000.

[2:10:51] » could go up to 300,000. >> He asked for the full amount.

[2:10:54] » Which was 300 or was it

[2:10:56] » the total I think he asked for the total cost of the project.

[2:11:01] He He just sent that email today. >> Okay, I guess I missed it.

[2:11:05] All right. But I thought we still had a do a match

[2:11:08] of 25,000. But Well, we can check, but generally the money that I My

[2:11:13] understanding we were trying to get more money from FEMA. And uh

[2:11:18] through emergency bill. >> And then obviously Park Street,

[2:11:22] we haven't decided for sure what we're doing there.

[2:11:25] And then I highlighted in red the annual street resurfacing just in case

[2:11:29] you know, depending on what we do with Park Street, we want to do an additional

[2:11:32] project in that.

[2:11:36] I think that's kind of curious to work to the

[2:11:39] Oh, and then on the second page, the

[2:11:40] Marshall water infrastructure.

[2:11:44] And then, you know, those

[2:11:47] numbers might change. Well, you know, on in the wastewater

[2:11:51] treatment, obviously we won't go for once.

[2:11:55] So we could tentatively approve projects or just

[2:11:58] » Well, I I can tell you what I'll When we get to the water treatment one, I'll be

[2:12:02] asking to postpone that to the first meeting in November.

[2:12:07] So that way we can get that report and have time hopefully to uh review it

[2:12:12] weekly. We'll have some >> And again, approving this CIP plan

[2:12:16] doesn't mean we are doing the projects, right? It's just

[2:12:20] It's a part of plan to do them. And then they will be put on the budget

[2:12:24] and then we can approve or deny them on the budget again.

[2:12:27] » Yeah, they can come up, but I I would ask that if we approve that means we're

[2:12:31] pretty much in support of it, yeah. >> But what was she just meaning that we

[2:12:36] approve it? >> So it's

[2:12:38] What what what the What she's saying is we approve this

[2:12:42] and then when we come time to borrow, if there's a crisis somewhere and it needs

[2:12:47] to go somewhere else, we can say we're not going to borrow for this.

[2:12:51] » Oh, so you would mean that? >> What I mean is if we approve If we

[2:12:55] approve that Whatever we approve tonight, I put on the capital fund

[2:12:59] budget. >> Right.

[2:13:01] Oh. >> So then when we approve the capital fund

[2:13:03] budget in November, you know, something changes, you can

[2:13:08] » We can change it. >> change it in that.

[2:13:09] » Of the capital fund >> Yeah, but I mean we can change it until

[2:13:12] we actually buy the item. >> Right.

[2:13:14] » No, I I understand. >> Yeah. Okay.

[2:13:17] » I was just trying to figure out what he meant.

[2:13:19] » All right, so let's just let's just start at the top. The flood mitigation.

[2:13:23] Everybody's still comfortable with that commitment of 25,000.

[2:13:27] And if it disappears, that's even better.

[2:13:30] Any questions on that?

[2:13:34] All right, let's do a motion on it, please.

[2:13:40] » I motion to approve the What did he say the year? Just one flood

[2:13:45] mitigation project in 2017. >> Yeah.

[2:13:49] » I'll second it. >> All right, a motion and a second. Any

[2:13:52] discussion? All in favor, say aye.

[2:13:57] » Aye. >> Aye.

[2:13:58] » All All opposed, same. All right.

[2:14:03] We're at the next one. Replace the 2007

[2:14:09] with used vehicle.

[2:14:14] » I didn't know we had a 2007 Dodge Caravan.

[2:14:17] » It's that maroon one. >> Yeah.

[2:14:19] » It's an old van. Um currently it's sporadically used for

[2:14:23] water meter reading. That's about the only thing it's used for. I know it

[2:14:27] I'm going to say 3 years ago in the capital plan Mike had proposed

[2:14:32] trading it in and getting some grant money for an electric vehicle, but that

[2:14:36] grant money fell through, so we never did that.

[2:14:39] And so it's kind of those things like, you know, what would you do with it

[2:14:41] again? And so then we had an idea that we'll go

[2:14:46] to Papa. >> Well, it's just uh

[2:14:49] you know, sending guys to class, sending guys to on the east side of Madison for

[2:14:53] water samples, just have a different vehicle rather than a 2500 or 3500

[2:14:58] truck. You know, um and then Becky can use it.

[2:15:02] Uh staff can use it to go to trainings and just kind of have a

[2:15:06] a normal vehicle rather than these big trucks driving them.

[2:15:11] » Go ahead, Judy. >> And then like let's say they didn't use

[2:15:14] it, we would just reimburse them on their If they use their own vehicle,

[2:15:18] that's more reimbursement for their gas. That's right.

[2:15:20] » Right. >> Yeah. My question

[2:15:21] » So we would push to use this more used reliable vehicle

[2:15:25] than a the minivan that we have.

[2:15:28] » Do you think this could wait a year?

[2:15:32] » The minivan isn't getting used now, so whether

[2:15:37] it's not going to get used if it waits a year, but we there's an essentially an

[2:15:40] empty spot there.

[2:15:44] It would be ideal to have.

[2:15:46] » So So it isn't Do we have this vehicle or did it get sold? You said it's not

[2:15:50] being used currently. >> Uh we took it up to auction because it's

[2:15:54] just wasn't It It It won't hold a charge. It had some mechanical issues.

[2:15:59] » So we don't really own this. We don't have it anymore. It's

[2:16:02] » Well, that's what you're saying. We don't have a place. We don't even have

[2:16:04] it. Have it. You want You want You're

[2:16:06] actually asking to buy it. >> You need a vehicle.

[2:16:09] » Yeah. >> Mhm.

[2:16:11] » Okay.

[2:16:14] » And do we know how much you got for the van?

[2:16:17] » Uh it it hasn't hit auction yet. If we get a thousand dollars, I'd be

[2:16:21] impressed. >> Good.

[2:16:25] So, what is Becky using to leave?

[2:16:29] » a personal vehicle. >> Personal Otherwise, she'll like if

[2:16:31] there's a truck available, she'll use >> She used the blue truck for a while.

[2:16:35] » We're not up there.

[2:16:40] » And how many miles did we put on that van when you were there?

[2:16:43] » How close to use? Uh well,

[2:16:46] » In recent years, not often not much at all.

[2:16:49] » Was that It was Jerry's vehicle. >> It was uh back in the day.

[2:16:52] » Was that just because of its reliability or just because it didn't It didn't have

[2:16:57] » We travel to big towns. We're in Corbet.

[2:17:01] It's only in that park. >> All right. So, it doesn't sound like it

[2:17:06] was being used that >> No, it

[2:17:08] » No, it It had only been being used for Becky to

[2:17:12] do water rounds. But then it got to the point where every time she shut it off,

[2:17:17] » the battery died. >> The battery died. We'd have to We'd have

[2:17:20] to go out there and jump it. Just It was not a safe reliable vehicle that I felt

[2:17:24] comfortable her going in. So, then we started making sure trucks are available

[2:17:29] or you know, even sending guys, you know, we even did class up in Green Bay.

[2:17:32] We had to take one of our 3,500 trucks, you know.

[2:17:35] Ooh, a Silverado 3,500 or 2,500. That's just not very economical.

[2:17:41] » And how often do you go out there to change it?

[2:17:43] » You know, once twice a year or >> Um a couple times a year.

[2:17:47] Um they're usually up in Plover for the water, the sewer. Um water you need 18

[2:17:52] credits every 3 years. And then you got a sewer that's another 18 credits every

[2:17:55] 3 years. Plus the other

[2:17:58] trips. >> How How about

[2:18:02] Here's a suggestion. I would say

[2:18:06] uh we take this off and we look at what we have at the end

[2:18:12] of the year to go into the fund balance

[2:18:17] and if we're over our 20% we can just pay cash using that instead

[2:18:23] of the borrowing of it.

[2:18:27] » So you could like like not put it on the like on our budget but do like a bunch

[2:18:31] of them then. >> Yeah, we do we do it we'll see what it

[2:18:35] is if we have that extra cash because that we kind of always use for capital

[2:18:40] this way again knowing what happens it's not

[2:18:44] necessarily there and it can come back and you guys can actually come back with

[2:18:48] an actual vehicle saying we'd like to purchase

[2:18:51] this vehicle. I just think it would clean things up a little bit and why

[2:18:55] borrow on that. >> I talked to Dean and just get a rough

[2:18:58] number of what a used used vehicle would cost and it's once we had an amount I

[2:19:03] was going to go to him and say hey can you keep your eye out

[2:19:05] for this price range. >> What are people's feelings on that?

[2:19:11] » I'm with you on that one. I don't want to I think we got so many vehicles right

[2:19:14] now. >> Okay.

[2:19:15] » Anyway. >> I don't want to do it right now either.

[2:19:18] I feel like we can get by with reimbursement and gas for now. I mean

[2:19:21] they're you know maybe they could do that for now cuz we don't get paid very

[2:19:25] often. >> Okay.

[2:19:27] Um do you want us to put this to a vote or

[2:19:30] are you comfortable with what is being said?

[2:19:33] » Yeah, that's >> All right. Jared and Cameron are you

[2:19:35] okay with just pushing this off? >> Absolutely.

[2:19:41] » Yes. >> Okay.

[2:19:43] All right. So then we're look at what I would I'm kind of with what Bobby had

[2:19:50] mentioned earlier. Generally when we do a large street project we don't do

[2:19:56] uh the smaller annual street resurfacing.

[2:20:00] So, I'm just going to flip those two. Let's talk about the Park Street

[2:20:05] reconstruction. >> One of the things I left out last time,

[2:20:11] just like we did with Creekside Way, there is some alert money. So, this next

[2:20:15] year we'll have $59,000 to put towards that. A benefit to splitting that,

[2:20:20] whether you do it in one year or not, at least splitting the names of them into

[2:20:24] the two projects and that will allow me to go

[2:20:27] This year is another alert year that I can go and apply for some match

[2:20:32] money for that. What that ends up being is we'll be up in the air to actually

[2:20:36] show that. >> So,

[2:20:39] you're saying it would be better than to for that for looking at that, it would

[2:20:43] be better to split the project than do it all as once. Is that what I'm

[2:20:46] hearing? >> Just naming wise. It and

[2:20:49] uh >> Are you talking about the street

[2:20:52] resurfacing at Park Street? >> No, just Park We're talking

[2:20:55] » about Park Street. >> Okay, we're talking about Park Street.

[2:20:57] » So, it just gives me a chance to apply for some alert money to put towards

[2:21:02] whether it's you can do them all in one year, it's just it'd be

[2:21:06] named two separate projects. >> Oh, so okay.

[2:21:14] All right, let's have the discussion on Park Street.

[2:21:22] I know we've already talked about Yeah, I know it's

[2:21:25] But we didn't I I want to know where people's heads are and what you're

[2:21:28] thinking. >> With one

[2:21:30] » Cuz this is where we're going to decide. Right now what they're proposing on this

[2:21:35] is a one-year phase one. Right? That's what's That's what we're

[2:21:41] here. So, that's what we're discussing. So, there if the motion wants to do all,

[2:21:46] we're going to have to up that, obviously.

[2:21:48] » I believe that's >> I want to I want to split it in three

[2:21:50] pieces. >> Okay, I'm hearing three.

[2:21:55] Equals Go ahead, Michael.

[2:21:57] » I spent a little Excel-ing while we were having other discussions and

[2:22:01] » You did? >> No, I did

[2:22:03] » I'm glad you did. >> I noticed like the numbers about

[2:22:05] crossing this project, so I was like, all right, let's see what

[2:22:08] I can come up with. So, basically, for the overall cost of the project, if we

[2:22:13] do it in phase like if Okay, if we do it all

[2:22:16] in 1 year, >> Yeah.

[2:22:18] » and this is combined general, water, and sewer total cost. It's about $360,000

[2:22:24] of debt. That's doing a 10-year general obligation loan, and I'm doing 20-year

[2:22:28] safe water, safe and clean water loans at a reduced interest rate. The general

[2:22:33] I did at 4%, the other ones I did at 2.75.

[2:22:36] » Yeah, but why did you do 10-year? Why won't you do 20 across the board?

[2:22:41] » Cuz a lot of times from this to 10 on >> No, they only do 10 on like cars and

[2:22:45] stuff, right? Most street projects are all 20.

[2:22:47] » Until recently, you weren't even allowed to do 20 on your bonds. The village

[2:22:51] wasn't allowed to. That That state law changed like 2 years ago.

[2:22:54] » Right, yeah. I'm trying to figure out >> It was It was It was like last year or 2

[2:22:57] years ago. >> Oh, okay.

[2:22:58] » We've always been 10-year general. That's why I did that. We've only used a

[2:23:01] 20 really on the village hall project. Like when we're taking out our loans,

[2:23:06] that's really the only one we've ever taken out for longer periods. So, I just

[2:23:09] was using the standard >> Okay.

[2:23:11] » 10-year. >> No, that's good. I I just wanted to

[2:23:13] understand it. >> So, basically, it's 360 per year if you

[2:23:18] do it on the 10-year general or the 20 on the others. If you break it out into

[2:23:22] three different phases, it's basically 120, 120, 120.

[2:23:26] Uh if you want breakdowns of specific things, most of it ends up being on

[2:23:30] general obligation of the project. I think the total cost in the packet was

[2:23:36] like 3 and 1/2 million and 2 million of that for doing like the whole thing.

[2:23:39] Like we're talking about the whole project.

[2:23:41] It's 3 and 1/2 million, but 2 million of it looked like it ended up on general

[2:23:45] because it was that and so on. Like we did this on general obligation

[2:23:49] » Yep. >> from how they have it structured.

[2:23:51] » Yep. >> So that's basically what's you're

[2:23:54] looking at. So over 3 years it's going to be a 120 120 120. So at the end of

[2:23:57] that third year, you're going to be at the 360 anyway, but you don't want those

[2:24:03] large hits like what you're talking about. That's basically what's going to

[2:24:06] happen. So then like now this is where it gets

[2:24:09] all funky cuz I don't know like new assessment values and etc. But there was

[2:24:16] a rule of thumb that I while ago I was able to use. When the

[2:24:19] village assessed value was like $500 million and you would have a $50,000

[2:24:25] house, basically because those divided really well, every

[2:24:30] dollar of debt was basically a direct transfer onto a $500,000 home owner.

[2:24:35] Meaning 120 You had a 120 If you took out an extra $120,000 of GO debt,

[2:24:40] basically said that home owner was paying an extra $120 that year because

[2:24:44] on a 500 $1,000 house, because the village was

[2:24:47] valued at $500 million like all the zeros just canceled. So you can just

[2:24:51] cancel those. Does that make sense?

[2:24:54] » Yeah, but I I think that seems high to me. I think 120

[2:24:58] for each phase is a little high because I thought

[2:25:02] when we had the chart up there, oh that was just water.

[2:25:05] » But that's 120 for GO water and sewer. So

[2:25:10] » I know that would be an increase of $120 on the property taxes.

[2:25:14] » No, that's not what I'm saying. >> No, that's the amount of loan that has

[2:25:18] to be. The village has The taxpayer has to pay Taxpayer

[2:25:23] have to pay $120,000 a year on GO and increased water and

[2:25:28] sewer rates. That's what that village

[2:25:31] » Did that make sense? >> Yeah, now now I'm following you.

[2:25:33] » I didn't break it out. I mean I can tell you like what it is individually like

[2:25:38] » No, no, that's I understand now what you're saying.

[2:25:40] » You know, it's uh uh

[2:25:44] So, these are just rough numbers. It is what it feels like I'm coming up with.

[2:25:49] Does that feel about right, Bobby? Like >> 10.

[2:25:52] » Okay. That's That's like what I think I

[2:25:55] remember. This is just off the cuff. That's why I didn't have it prepared,

[2:25:57] but that's about like

[2:26:01] what what it feels. >> Okay, but I I

[2:26:06] I'm sorry. I you lost me here. Okay, I know it's How much What's the impact? I

[2:26:10] guess I'm trying to figure out here. >> Okay. So,

[2:26:17] Now, this is cuz I don't have the new assessment stuff.

[2:26:19] » Yeah, I understand that. I I understand that. And that's one of the things that

[2:26:22] I'm >> kind of a thing where this is tough

[2:26:24] where I'm just kind of speaking out past knowledge.

[2:26:27] Okay, if we did Hart Street in in in phases in three

[2:26:31] phases, I took that as about $675,000 a year for each phase of general

[2:26:36] obligation debt. I'll just speak to that. 675

[2:26:40] loan, 675 loan, 675 loan in year 1 2 3 because over the 3 years

[2:26:46] that's $2 million. >> Yeah, I'm hearing I'm following you.

[2:26:50] » When you take a $675,000 loan over 10 years at 4%,

[2:26:55] you have paying and it's just a straight average pay, it worked out to $84,000 a

[2:27:01] year. This is what the what we have to pay on that

[2:27:06] on the 675, but that's just the first year. Like the next year then that turns

[2:27:09] into 160 and then the next year >> Yeah, yeah, I I'm I'm following.

[2:27:13] » So, in that first year if it's $84,000, because of that project is $84,000 a

[2:27:19] $500,000 house has to pay $84 extra, right? So, the next year, I have to pay

[2:27:26] 160 cuz >> But now that's just but the next year

[2:27:28] it's only going up $84 and the next year only $84 versus

[2:27:33] » when you do it all one time, you have $350 in that first year, but you're not

[2:27:38] getting the 5% savings by doing it all. >> Unless you subtract that 175 over 3

[2:27:45] years using logic, it's 60 under 60,000, right? So that's what we'd be saving out

[2:27:51] of that 600 and some thousand. Yeah, 610,000 basically.

[2:27:59] » So that was just with the numbers that >> So then can you if you could quickly

[2:28:04] throw that 610 place the 670 with 6 610 that'll give us the difference on or

[2:28:11] how much really the taxpayer would save. >> I don't know if I can do that.

[2:28:15] » Oh sure you just throw where it says 670 throw in 610

[2:28:20] and run your spreadsheet it's the same. >> fight is the 150 so you're wanting to

[2:28:25] win. >> No, I'm subtracting 60 grand

[2:28:28] from each year because that's what we're saving. Right, so I want to see from the

[2:28:33] $84 it's probably going to go down to the $82.

[2:28:38] » Yeah. Both of you.

[2:28:40] » Okay, that's that's that I'm just trying to point out that the savings when you

[2:28:44] say in a big lump of 175,000 it is a lot you know, dollar wise but

[2:28:51] when you talking about a 3 and 1/2 million dollar project

[2:28:56] it doesn't have that big of an impact. I'm just I'm not debating the savings. I

[2:29:01] just want you to do the numbers because it's only fair for people because if

[2:29:06] it's 84 and people think oh if we do it all at once it's going to drop down to

[2:29:10] 44. That's just not the case. >> No, it's not going to do that at all.

[2:29:15] » So I'm just I again I like you that you did that and I appreciate it but we got

[2:29:19] to look at what the other option would be.

[2:29:24] What are other people's feelings?

[2:29:30] » I guess I'd be more for split at least 2 years. That way on the second year it

[2:29:34] gives us a little flexibility if we get in a tough spot. Brian already did a

[2:29:37] safe drinking water I think for two phases.

[2:29:41] » Um >> And then September 30th is we can go is

[2:29:46] when the sewer one needs to be submitted.

[2:29:48] » Okay. >> Take that or

[2:29:51] » No, that could be a problem for my >> So Sarah, okay. Okay, I got the old down

[2:29:55] bill Sarah. >> Oh, so

[2:29:57] and this is what I was thinking about in our earlier discussion is why are we

[2:30:02] Did we already decide on I know we didn't decide but was three

[2:30:06] years kind of like the goal or why aren't we looking at two years?

[2:30:10] » Well, we did three years for the one reason of affordability. To spread it

[2:30:15] over three years. That was the main reason for that. Cuz it cuz the

[2:30:22] engineering, you know, we paid for earlier this year for the first phase.

[2:30:28] You know, Brian has said earlier that he they can do the others but yeah, we

[2:30:33] could break it into two but the reason we did the three years was for

[2:30:38] affordability. It didn't hit the property taxes as

[2:30:43] hard. >> That's going to be an issue this year.

[2:30:45] » This thing's going to be For some people it's going to be a huge

[2:30:49] issue. Others are probably not. Cuz if you're under that 67% you're

[2:30:54] going to be less if everything stays the same.

[2:30:57] » But they cut me back to 60. >> Well, I don't know. I don't know.

[2:31:01] » Because there's a whole bunch that are 80 and 90%.

[2:31:03] » Yeah, I'm 91 so >> That's crazy.

[2:31:06] » There's people that I'm balancing over somewhere. And that's what was the first

[2:31:11] thing that was a little deceiving because in the letter it said 62. That's

[2:31:15] community but when I went to open book I said, "Tell me what the resident one

[2:31:19] is." And it was 67. >> I want to correct myself. I said I said

[2:31:24] two phases. I meant He applied for I think, phase one and

[2:31:28] phase two. And then, phase three has not been applied for yet.

[2:31:32] » Oh, I see what you're saying. >> Right.

[2:31:33] » So, it would mean we could do 3/4 2/3 of it, and then give us a little

[2:31:38] flexibility on setting different other stuff or items.

[2:31:43] » Like if I had my my phone, put it through this.

[2:31:51] » Sarah? >> That's what I was thinking too, that I

[2:31:53] think taxpayers want They want the

[2:31:57] less of a burden. Like I think they would like the gradual and this year.

[2:32:02] » So, okay, it sounds like there's pretty much a majority that would go that way.

[2:32:06] The Okay, so then the question is, we're right back to this.

[2:32:11] Do we keep this, or do we want to move it off a year? And it sounds like may I

[2:32:16] say it's that may potentially be a $70,000

[2:32:20] cost, but then again, with Bill and all of us

[2:32:25] we're kind of looking at, we just don't know what this increased assessment and

[2:32:29] school district and everything else is going to be. And you saw tonight

[2:32:34] our Villa Char is going to cost us more than we thought.

[2:32:39] This phase we just what we just saw tonight

[2:32:43] with, you know, the little the

[2:32:45] audio, the AV, and the security that's way over what we originally

[2:32:50] planned. >> Judy?

[2:32:52] » I would be okay with pushing back a year. You okay with that?

[2:32:56] » I'm okay. >> It is

[2:32:58] obviously not my first choice or second or third choice, but

[2:33:01] » Yeah, yeah. >> I mean, you I get there's only so much

[2:33:04] money to go around, and I I would like with all the additions that we've added

[2:33:09] to the sewer plan, it'd be nice that we were at least

[2:33:12] doing one phase and working towards help correcting that development.

[2:33:16] » Sarah? >> I would be for starting now, so that we

[2:33:19] could have that nice gradual step up, versus if they started it next year then

[2:33:24] we're like, oh, we should do two phases. >> Oh, you're worried about the same thing.

[2:33:27] » Yeah. >> Bobby, as the finance director, you're

[2:33:31] going to have to help us out here. What are your

[2:33:34] thoughts? >> I I do like the three years.

[2:33:37] Um I guess thinking of the tip coming off.

[2:33:47] » So, you're but I I guess the I think I think the the most of us are agreeing

[2:33:51] with the three years. >> Yeah, this is the

[2:33:54] cuz your 127 is 127. >> Yeah, what are and you got a better

[2:33:59] idea.

[2:34:02] I I don't know what's been coming in for

[2:34:05] staff and everything. >> So, I is

[2:34:10] the water portion of it. And doing our full rate case with all

[2:34:16] the other water infrastructure. Like if we would actually have to do two

[2:34:20] rate cases if they just pay for this debt.

[2:34:25] You know, so if we Just the you know, the do you want to

[2:34:31] all the projects on one rate case rather than doing rate cases two years in a

[2:34:35] row. >> Well, I think we're going to probably

[2:34:39] get tied with that if you look at the our earlier discussion.

[2:34:43] I think there's no next year we're going to have to put in the thinnest pipe.

[2:34:48] There's absolutely no way around that. Right? I mean, we heard

[2:34:54] You heard that and if we want to keep Park Street next year, that's going to

[2:34:59] be in it. So, you're already looking at those two projects that I don't believe

[2:35:05] the water brings in enough even with the discounted loan on the one.

[2:35:10] But again, we're going to have to do it now. I don't think the revenue is there

[2:35:14] to cover that. >> So, that's what I'm wondering. that

[2:35:16] » Cuz we're at and we were at a 0.49, you know, and it's supposed to be 1.1.

[2:35:22] So, we're already way behind on what hell was

[2:35:26] » The 3% increase rate case today to get didn't get filed today.

[2:35:31] » Yeah, but I I >> Is that

[2:35:32] » The bigger one. >> that? I Again, not knowing the exact

[2:35:35] numbers on that, is that going to bring us up over one

[2:35:40] on that ratio? See, that That's That's my worry

[2:35:46] on this, but I don't see there's any way around unless the numbers are I'm

[2:35:52] missing something because of that painting maybe

[2:35:56] did something that doesn't I just don't know how

[2:36:01] we can pay with the current rate for the finish. And if we're going to go for

[2:36:06] finish, we might as well go for >> year one in 2027 to combine it with the

[2:36:12] finish. >> Well, if

[2:36:14] But, if the group and once we get that report, if we can get Park Street to be

[2:36:19] paid by sewer, then we don't have to worry about water rate.

[2:36:24] You know, >> I thought about that.

[2:36:25] » You know, and that is an option that we've seriously got to look at, but we

[2:36:30] can't seriously look at until we get that report um from it. But, like I

[2:36:35] mentioned earlier, though, in my opinion, the sewer utility is very well

[2:36:41] financed right now. Um and again, we'll see what they have

[2:36:47] as a layout on the timing, and I think we can actually time that out.

[2:36:54] Bill. >> So,

[2:36:57] can we in concept approve this as a three-phase

[2:37:01] starting in '27, and then

[2:37:04] as that sewer report comes out in 2 months,

[2:37:08] then will we look at the budget, So, kind of make a decision?

[2:37:12] » We can do it that way or what we can do is postpone this to the first meeting in

[2:37:17] November where we would have it and then cuz we'll approve the budget in

[2:37:22] the second meeting in November. That might be a cleaner way of doing

[2:37:27] that. That

[2:37:30] might be a cleaner way of doing it because then now we're not rescinding

[2:37:36] something that we passed. this item to the first meeting in

[2:37:40] November. >> I'm fine with that.

[2:37:44] » Bonnie, are you okay with that? Matt?

[2:37:48] » Yeah, that's

[2:37:51] » All right. I'll make that motion.

[2:37:54] » I'll make the motion that we

[2:37:57] that we postpone the Park Street reconstruction

[2:38:01] until the first meeting in November. >> I'll second it.

[2:38:08] » I have a motion and a second. Can someone look that up

[2:38:11] for me so I can >> What date for

[2:38:18] November, we're going to be there 9th and the 23rd.

[2:38:21] » Okay, the 9th, so >> Yeah.

[2:38:23] » Yeah, the 23rd. Okay. All right, I have a motion and a second.

[2:38:28] Any more discussion on this?

[2:38:32] All in favor, say I. >> I.

[2:38:35] » All opposed. So moved.

[2:38:39] All right, then let's go Do we want to do the same thing with

[2:38:43] Annual Street Resurfacing? >> Well, I had a I had a thought on this.

[2:38:48] » Okay. >> Um,

[2:38:50] we have things to do. Well, but if we postpone

[2:38:54] Park Street for a year, then I think we've got money to do the street

[2:38:57] resurfacing and we've always said in the past we try not

[2:39:02] to postpone resurfacing too much because

[2:39:06] then we get behind in the resurfacing, right? So,

[2:39:12] uh I However, with that being said, I think

[2:39:16] we postpone 2027. If we If we knew we were doing

[2:39:20] Park Street and finish, we would definitely I would definitely

[2:39:23] postpone. So, maybe we hold off on this >> Okay.

[2:39:26] » until November. >> Yeah, we have done both. Like when we

[2:39:29] did Brewery and Church, we did not do the annual surface.

[2:39:33] » Right. >> Yeah.

[2:39:34] » No. >> And we did

[2:39:35] » did it this year, too, with Katie. >> Mhm.

[2:39:37] » We We did Myrick Street. >> Well, that was That was 60,000.

[2:39:41] » Oh. >> Okay.

[2:39:46] » All right. >> that Sorry, but then that means it's 2

[2:39:48] years that we're postponing then and then we

[2:39:51] » Yeah. Yeah.

[2:39:54] » Do you feel like there's any major road right now that needs it?

[2:39:57] » London is really bad. Uh that needed to be done.

[2:40:01] So, if if Park Street gets postponed, that

[2:40:05] infra- So,

[2:40:08] over the last 10 years, we've done a lot of resurfacing, not a lot of I mean, I

[2:40:11] know P was done and Main Street was done, but a lot of

[2:40:14] infrastructure is aging underneath. But London, the infrastructure is actually

[2:40:18] pretty good, just the road itself is not doing great. Um there wasn't good

[2:40:23] compaction when they ran the lateral, so a lot of the curb has sunk. So, it'll

[2:40:27] need new

[2:40:29] replacement. And I don't think 250,000 is going to do it

[2:40:32] all, but it'd be a really good start. >> If we do Park Street in 3 years, so then

[2:40:37] are we doing like no road projects for 4 years then?

[2:40:40] » No, I I wouldn't say that. No, I would say we would do it. If we did it all at

[2:40:44] once, >> Then not

[2:40:45] » you know, I kind of look at how many blocks it's going to be.

[2:40:48] » Yeah. >> You know, if you do Park Street in 3,

[2:40:50] you're talking about two, three blocks a month.

[2:40:53] So, I I would say >> I just I like us moving forward on

[2:40:57] A Road and the three phases of Park Street and London are probably the four

[2:41:01] most important.

[2:41:05] » How's this case?

[2:41:08] » What was so wrong with This is so bulky.

[2:41:16] » I'm just going to make a motion that we approve the part that we approve the

[2:41:20] annual street resurfacing for 2027.

[2:41:24] » Okay, I'll second it. >> I have a motion and a second, any

[2:41:29] discussion? I'm going to go along with this, but if we make a change in the

[2:41:34] first week of November, I'll probably make a change in the capital in the

[2:41:39] second. >> I'm fine with that.

[2:41:40] » Okay. I just want to so there's no

[2:41:43] misunderstanding on where I'm coming from.

[2:41:46] » No. >> Can I have a reread of the motion?

[2:41:51] » Yeah, that we approve the annual street resurfacing for 2027.

[2:41:56] » Okay.

[2:41:59] » All right, I have motion and a second, all in favor say I.

[2:42:02] » I. >> I.

[2:42:04] All opposed same. So moved.

[2:42:08] All right, we're down to the 2024 skid steer.

[2:42:18] » Um this is on a two-year replacement, well we were a year late getting the one

[2:42:23] last time. So now it's just kicked to this year.

[2:42:27] » I seem last I thought the last time was only like 19,000.

[2:42:32] Are we getting a bigger one or something?

[2:42:33] » Uh it is a little bit bigger, well we we've had issues with

[2:42:37] lifting things and um

[2:42:41] salt's heavy, yard waste is heavy, main break stuff's heavy, so it's just we

[2:42:46] have other and traditionally we were smaller a little bit smaller before, so

[2:42:49] it was a lot of you going on the sidewalks. Now we have two or three of

[2:42:52] them machines that are able to go on sidewalks, so

[2:42:55] and we have more multi-pass now that are going to be instead of 4 or 5 ft.

[2:43:01] » Do you feel like if we get a bigger one this year then we can push it out? We

[2:43:05] don't have to do it every 2 years or 3 >> Um I Did I leave it every 2 or I thought

[2:43:09] I moved it to every 4? >> Oh, you left it at every 2.

[2:43:12] » Did I? >> Yeah, and I think that's because of the

[2:43:15] warranty. At least that's what Jerry's thing that you keep you you keep it

[2:43:21] until the warranty is almost all you trade it in and then you just are paying

[2:43:26] instead of getting that in and all of a sudden because that was been a

[2:43:29] discussion many times of just keeping it until you wear it out but then what are

[2:43:34] they about a quarter of a million bucks now?

[2:43:36] » What? >> A skid steer if you bought it

[2:43:40] outright? >> No, they're like 70 70

[2:43:42] » Oh. 70?

[2:43:47] I don't I thought it was 35,000.

[2:43:50] » Cuz we get about 25,000 30 for trade. >> Yeah, I know but why wouldn't we want to

[2:43:54] keep it until it didn't work? Cuz >> I I

[2:43:57] So my mistake, I think on my fleet plan that I gave you guys a few months ago, I

[2:44:01] think I moved it to 4 years. I don't know if I moved this to 4 years but we

[2:44:06] kind of Scott and I kind of talked and said that

[2:44:10] we should >> So do it 27 but then not again till 20

[2:44:12] » 31. >> Okay, if the skid steer the life of it

[2:44:17] is 4 years, right? Or is it probably longer than that?

[2:44:21] » Yeah, much longer. Yeah, but we we put a lot of hours

[2:44:23] » Yeah, but let's say it's you wear it down in 8 years. It still would be

[2:44:28] cheaper to buy a new one than to pay this extra

[2:44:32] trade in at 35 grand. >> It's also the cost of being down

[2:44:36] downtime for any major maintenance maintenance is

[2:44:40] down. >> I think

[2:44:43] Well. >> Yeah, that's sort of my question. Do you

[2:44:50] What Do we need to augment our old skid steer policy guess? Like what you were

[2:44:54] saying with the two year because like I remember it was like Jerry saying like

[2:44:56] the warranty is only three years old, so you're trading it with another year on

[2:44:59] the warranty because you get more for the trade-in but overall what we're

[2:45:02] doing it do you think that policy still be done? Because if we go to four years

[2:45:07] then it's like falling off warranty and then it's the trade-in like I mean it's

[2:45:11] » It's definitely just going to only go down in value.

[2:45:13] » Right. >> Um and we put around four or five

[2:45:18] hundred dollars on it a year. So it it gets a lot of use. It's one of our

[2:45:22] biggest use machine. >> Yeah and see I like I say I I

[2:45:27] it made sense when it was 19,000 because I'm thinking then you're basically

[2:45:33] renting a brand new one for eight grand eight

[2:45:36] eight thou 8,500 a year which is dirt cheap. But now that it's getting to

[2:45:41] almost half the cost of a brand new one it just seems to me that we're at that

[2:45:47] tipping point where it can >> Well that's why I was suggesting a the

[2:45:50] four year. >> Yeah. Yeah.

[2:45:53] » I think just how many hours is a useful life for a

[2:45:57] skid steer before it starts to have issues? Do you know that at all? Or

[2:46:01] » Okay, is that okay? Well then >> It really depends how you use it and we

[2:46:04] we put a lot of road miles on it. That's that's not necessarily the greatest

[2:46:08] thing for it. >> Cuz you're driving it to where you're

[2:46:11] using it you mean? >> Yeah and you know doing brush is it gets

[2:46:16] used for all the time.

[2:46:20] » Oh no. >> Yeah this has always been just a weird

[2:46:24] » You know what? I I guess I I think this is something that maybe

[2:46:28] finance could look at. I think we go ahead cuz we can't wait. But I would

[2:46:33] really now that it's getting up there in cost I think we really should do a

[2:46:39] cost analysis. Cuz if there's 70 grand I mean it just seems It's for me to

[2:46:47] you know, kick in 35,000 for just 2 years.

[2:46:52] » I think it should be in there. >> It'd be four.

[2:46:54] Well, I I know that's where we're going and

[2:46:58] then we'll see, but what I'm hearing is yeah, we're not going to get it it's

[2:47:03] going to cost us more in 4 years because it's 4 years old versus 2 years old for

[2:47:08] the trade-in. So, your trade-in is last so it's

[2:47:11] » So, is it is it like like is our trade-in going to be 10 grand versus if

[2:47:13] we're going to be buying a new one anyway? And why don't we just keep the

[2:47:16] one that we have if we're getting hardly anything on the trade-in?

[2:47:20] » And it has been a good machine and we haven't had a lot of issues with it.

[2:47:23] That might be >> See, that's why the whole two-year

[2:47:25] cycling might have to be more of a math-based decision if it's trade-in or

[2:47:30] not like idea rather >> I think we need to do a cost analysis on

[2:47:36] it, I guess. That's what I That's all I'm saying. I I And that we're not going

[2:47:40] to do that tonight, but I do think this is one thing that we really should look

[2:47:45] at. Cuz when it was 19,000, it was a

[2:47:49] no-brainer, but I thought they were over 100 grand.

[2:47:51] » But now I'm going to like okay, cuz you said taking the

[2:47:54] finance. If we don't know how long one of these is going to last because we

[2:47:59] don't know how much it's going to be worth in the year you're doing your

[2:48:02] longevity cost analysis on it, it's just all projection.

[2:48:05] » No, cuz >> I mean, you have

[2:48:06] » a machine right now. I can look at the miles and the hours put on this machine

[2:48:11] and kind of calculate what it is per year.

[2:48:15] I mean, we have a a pilot right now. >> Right, but the question

[2:48:19] » And then we're going to have a second one.

[2:48:20] » But the whole thing is is this machine that we talked about two Is it 2 years

[2:48:25] or 3 years or what? >> Jan- December will be 2 years.

[2:48:29] » So, in December it's 2 years, but and so we So, we're saying whether we use 500

[2:48:33] miles a year on it. You don't know if it's going to last

[2:48:37] another year. >> I don't Let's not get into how to do it.

[2:48:40] » I I I think it it is it is a little more this year because I'm I want to go to

[2:48:44] the big bigger machine. So, that cost should even back out.

[2:48:50] » Like I said, I don't want to do that tonight.

[2:48:53] There's an easy way of doing it. People do it all the time on costing what it

[2:48:57] costs of a machine, a car is. You can go to Consumer Report on everything. It'll

[2:49:01] tell you how much it's going to cost you on average. So, but anyways, the

[2:49:05] question is do we want to and I guess because we're going

[2:49:10] with the larger one, I'm I'm going to

[2:49:13] approve it cuz just on the point that if they need them

[2:49:19] a bigger one. Even though I see it's only

[2:49:21] a priority of four. >> I'm going to make a motion to approve

[2:49:26] the replacement of the 2024 skid steer in 2027.

[2:49:30] » I'll second it. >> I have a motion and a second. Any

[2:49:34] discussion? >> Wait, just ask

[2:49:37] So, why did you put it as a priority four?

[2:49:40] » Because I only adjusted the amount, not the priority.

[2:49:43] Cuz this was already typically in here. It was already in there.

[2:49:47] So, that's That was my mistake. >> Okay.

[2:49:51] » And you got to this $35,000 by calling down there and asking how much it is?

[2:49:55] » Yep, I got the trade-in values and price list from dealers.

[2:49:58] » So, that's what Yeah, but the old one is fine.

[2:50:04] » Okay. >> All right.

[2:50:08] All in favor say I. >> I.

[2:50:11] » I. >> I.

[2:50:13] » All opposed say So moved.

[2:50:18] All right. 2027 replacement of the 2004 leaf vacuum.

[2:50:26] » I thought we just replaced this a couple of years ago.

[2:50:28] » No. >> We can't have it a couple of We bought

[2:50:31] that from Minnesota for $17,000 on a year ago.

[2:50:35] » Yeah, it was on the pilot program.

08.24.2026 Village Board Meeting

Transcript