[0:00] Then they it went back down. This year it is increasing to 15%. But capital

[0:06] projects still require 20%. Which is what the buses um require. So in past

[0:12] years we have always tied service to the purchase of buses. Um that typically is

[0:19] on a five to sevenyear cycle dependent upon the size of the bus. Um Wash's bus

[0:26] is the smaller one that we have. So, it's cost 400 and that is typically five

[0:31] to six years. Um, but it's weighted. It it's based on miles, um, the condition

[0:37] of the bus, repairs, um, different things like that. And then

[0:42] Mindbot comes back and says, "We're going to approve 15 buses this year."

[0:46] And so once they open it, everybody has to submit what vehicles you're looking

[0:51] to be replaced. And then everybody's gets ranked. So, even if you put it in,

[0:56] doesn't mean you're going to get it. When COVID hit, we went through a 5year

[1:01] span where we didn't get any buses at all. Um, so we had communities that had

[1:07] been expecting buses that never never came and what does anybody do when they

[1:12] have money that they don't spend, they spend it. Um, and so and we did the same

[1:17] thing. So, um, it really puts everybody in a bind. Um so that's why we have

[1:24] chosen we are no longer tying the service to buses. It is um basically a

[1:30] fee for service. So every community that we operate in um will be contributing

[1:36] every year. So it is a set amount of money that you everybody can count on

[1:41] get it in your budget rather than you know five years ago when a bus came in

[1:46] it was barely $100,000. new buses that we're looking at for next year um are

[1:52] about 215,000 for that they actually just worked out the contract. So they're

[1:57] looking at the base level about 175,000 for advis 400. So they were able to to

[2:02] work with our our um vendors and get that priced down. So still almost done.

[2:08] I mean that's a pretty substantial um and if you're looking at 20% that that's

[2:13] a big chunk of change. So, we had communities that um got three buses in

[2:19] and that when you're not counting on it um you know and you take the buses when

[2:24] you haven't got a new bus in 5 years um and we have at our peak we have 22 buses

[2:30] on the road um throughout our community. So, and we had we have 31 in our fleet.

[2:35] So, when you have none and then all of a sudden you get them in you really don't

[2:39] want to turn them. So um that is where theou comes into play. Uh we are looking

[2:46] at as we had mentioned um when we met with

[2:52] Emily we are looking at some alternatives for Wavesaw um possibly a

[2:58] smaller uh van type. One of the issues that we have um in our rural communities

[3:05] is the big buses can't turn around. they there's it really the new buses are

[3:11] really nice but the turning radius is even worse than the the old ones. Um so

[3:17] that is something that especially when you're transporting um you know

[3:21] individuals with disabilities mobility devices they they they can't walk as far

[3:27] um and when the bus can't back up because there's no room to back up um or

[3:33] it's a company policy. We don't allow buses um our buses to back up especially

[3:39] in residential areas just because you never know what you're going to

[3:43] encounter. Um so we have um started looking into vans. Uh Vindot did uh add

[3:52] vans onto the state contract. So um some of the more rural communities if they

[3:58] would like to go away from the bus then you can purchase a van. They will still

[4:02] be handicapped accessible. Um, but we also just came across another bus um

[4:08] that is it's actually it will fit the same amount um as our current bus, but

[4:16] it's on a smaller chassis. It's actually on a Dodge.

[4:21] » Yeah. >> Um so it looks like more of a van. It's

[4:25] just a lot larger. So you can still fit um it still has the the two um secured

[4:33] locations for the the lifts um for the wheelchairs and and stuff like that. So

[4:38] those are pricewise and would be a little bit less expensive. Um the only

[4:44] thing that that would do is basically lower the cost of operating in this

[4:48] area. But neither um actually affects the theou and the fee um that that we

[4:56] are asking uh the city of Wshaw for. Um does anybody have any questions on

[5:02] theou? >> Correct me if I'm wrong. I think we've

[5:07] not performed well in use by students or children in Wshot. I think there's maybe

[5:12] going to be a change because our Head Start kids are no longer in WASHA.

[5:14] Correct. >> Maybe you can explain that a little bit.

[5:16] I think that's maybe an area we could hope to see growth.

[5:19] » Yep. Yep. And Tracy and I are looking to um uh get an appointment made with the

[5:25] school district so that we can get in and talk with them. We do do

[5:28] transportation for the um ski group and we also this summer we did

[5:34] transportation for the summer school to Lake City. Um but in the past there

[5:40] hasn't been a lot of interest for school age children. How do we have

[5:45] » I think the school district has a policy that if you have a sibling in school you

[5:49] can ride the bus and that's one of the reasons why they do bus transport for

[5:53] four year olds in other districts but not here.

[5:57] » And I know too one of the things I looked into after I think the TAC

[6:00] meeting maybe I can't remember when we spoke last about it. When you look at

[6:04] the DAC times, we're dropping off at DAC in between 8 and 8:30 and then we're

[6:09] picking up at 3:00 in the afternoon. >> Same school.

[6:11] » Yeah, same as school. So during one of the tap meetings, I thought, oh, but

[6:14] there is that >> middle of the day.

[6:16] » Yes, the middle of the day, we definitely have availability if there

[6:19] was preschool and that's where Yeah. And that's hard because you know parents a

[6:24] lot of times what we find is they say, "Well, that's great to get them there,

[6:28] but how am I going to get them home?" >> Right. So, um, now I hear that from

[6:31] childcare providers that they could definitely see some of their, uh, kids

[6:36] remain partially in their care, but the transitive thing becomes a problem, they

[6:39] just ship them off preschool and don't look back, even if it's not really if

[6:43] even if it's a challenge already for all day preschool. Yep.

[6:46] » Yeah. And so it just because we are first time first serve um when you we

[6:53] don't get a request from a school and then when DAC approached us years ago

[6:58] and you know hey can you do this well you know it's still within the community

[7:03] of shops. So any questions for Diane Tracy? Thank you

[7:08] guys for clarifying this kind of coming up with a different paradigm I think for

[7:12] us to digest and be you know consistent with as you know both Carol and I were

[7:16] very surprised by the initial reach out I think we we weren't making you a

[7:20] priority not because we want to hear from you but because we have so many

[7:22] priorities and we thought it was more of a let's get to know your community and

[7:26] in reality it's a let's figure out how we're going to continue to work

[7:28] together. >> Yeah. And um there had been a question

[7:31] raised if some of our communities were seeking funding from um the counties. Um

[7:37] our agreements are all with the cities. If you guys choose and you want to go to

[7:44] the county, um you are certainly welcome to do that if you want them to to chip

[7:48] in. Um just a kind of a caution that will

[7:54] expand the service area. It could it could I should say um because if if

[8:00] they're going to contribute then they might say well how far out are you going

[8:04] to go and right now everything is kind of based um when we're in the dialer

[8:10] communities it's not really distance based it's based more on availability um

[8:17] we don't like to tell anybody no so is included in Wabasha but you know

[8:22] potentially that might mean um you know go farther that way or

[8:29] this way. So, um if there's anything that we can do to help you on on that

[8:33] front, if you want specific statistics or anything like that, by all means,

[8:37] reach out and um you know, we can try to provide you more information.

[8:42] » Yeah, I don't recall the county ever reaching to us and saying, "We need more

[8:46] assistance for our clients." >> Right. Yeah. So,

[8:52] » be a hard pitch if they feel like they're satisfied with

[8:56] » Yeah. There's um agencies that have a joint powers have more success getting

[9:02] funding from their counties um than other agencies. So,

[9:09] » thank you. We appreciate you recognize the the new uh model, I guess, and we

[9:14] look forward to the new vehicles. And I think it's good that we have an option

[9:17] that might be a little bit more flexible for that. That's the only complaint I do

[9:21] hear is sometimes, well, they can't come into my driveway or they can't come

[9:24] quite to the curb and why can't they? So, you know, or you have to drop a

[9:29] three-year-old off half a block from their daycare provider, which nobody

[9:34] wants. Yeah. >> Yeah. And that's, you know, if we do

[9:38] look at a smaller vehicle like a van, it kind of locks you in. I mean, we can all

[9:42] we always have spare vehicles in our fleet, but we don't want to go purchase

[9:46] a a brand new van specifically for here. And then, which would be very good news

[9:52] if the ridership all of a sudden doubled or quadruple, but then the van isn't

[9:58] going to be accessible. It's not gonna we're going to be at capacity all the

[10:02] time. So, um, thank you. Well, so we're going to discuss this later in the

[10:06] meeting. So you guys are free to hang out or enlist in the discussion or we'll

[10:10] probably I think if anyone had a question, they asked it. So

[10:13] » yeah, we'll just get out of your >> Okay. Thank you.

[10:19] » All right. Now we will take public comment. If you are online, if anybody

[10:22] online, if you're online or present here at city hall, you can uh join us in the

[10:27] podium. State your name and residence for the record and let us know a couple

[10:30] minutes of your thoughts. >> Hi Kate. Hi. and KPS 234 street. Um I've

[10:37] got comments but also questions on two areas in the agenda. The first one

[10:41] really is on um

[10:47] the sidewalk administration and I and I kind of want something to also the new

[10:53] um ordinance um and I don't really know um we ask you to be complaint driven or

[11:00] should take a sign your survey and broadly speaking to residents when they

[11:04] charge additional fees. Okay, no one wants to charge an additional fee for

[11:07] anything. you know that that's a given. But if we all walk on our streets and we

[11:12] all use our streets, we're going to eat the steak. We should in charge of the

[11:15] state. Second thing is with this new news

[11:20] ordinance, once we get that put together, please help us support

[11:24] Caroline. So when she says I need to have an ordinance so that I can enforce

[11:28] them and cross, I feel so strongly about that. We have to help her. We have to

[11:32] have courage. We just woke up at one of the coolest

[11:36] hidden gems along the river and I wanted to wait. I don't know if you saw it saw

[11:42] it um come through. It actually came through uh Instagram feed. The second

[11:49] thing that I don't know and Tonyy's not here but it's on the port authority and

[11:53] I don't know this so this is help me understand. Um he's asking for

[11:59] additional monies owed from the port authority to the general fund up to

[12:03] 400,000. Okay. There's it listed right here. It's um what I don't understand is

[12:10] greater. >> Okay. Tyler is here. Yeah.

[12:13] » Tyler can help. Okay. What I don't understand, Tyler, is typically I know I

[12:18] don't want to get myself or my company into big debt because it's hard to get

[12:21] out of, but where are the revenue streams that will come through to help

[12:25] him or is this are we doing this because it'll help us as a community obtain more

[12:30] funding or grants? >> Yeah, it helps us get funding for the

[12:33] bar terminal projects or does generate revenue.

[12:36] » Do you feel really confident we would be able to pay that off within a reasonable

[12:40] period of time? >> Yeah.

[12:41] » So, this is like a no this is like a no-brainer.

[12:44] Y you can stay for that part agenda if you want to have hear it discussed

[12:48] further but yeah okay >> part of it just to get very nuanced we

[12:52] have grants that that cover a lot of it but the grants are requiring that they

[12:57] see the funds on hand so yeah

[13:01] » they're basically requiring us to show that we're in a good financial position

[13:03] to accept the grant that make you happy >> you know I'm all about them

[13:10] » thank you K um was there oh the sidewalk d that'll be a discussion because Dean

[13:16] uh brought that up as a desire to kind of revisit the policy on that. I think

[13:19] we've got a pony's lived experience of surveying people and checking to see

[13:24] whether their sidewalk is intact generating a lot of frustrated residents

[13:28] um sort of like what are you messing with me for or or allowing it to

[13:31] continue to be complaint driven which I don't think is a broken system. So we'll

[13:35] talk about that later if you want to stay for that discussion on that. It'll

[13:37] be in the YouTube. >> Thank you. Yeah.

[13:40] » And was that it? Yeah.

[13:44] I'm Jack Burns 34 on Drive. Uh I'm curious as to how many short-term rental

[13:51] her new ones have been licensed since the August meeting.

[13:54] » We did it more. >> Yeah, but it wasn't effective until

[13:59] Yeah. We're still in process. >> I question um

[14:04] » three or four I could pull it up. Anybody Anybody that was

[14:08] » I just I put in a building information request and it didn't get back to me

[14:12] today. So that's what I was wor. >> Yeah.

[14:15] » When did you put it in? >> Like 1:30.

[14:18] » Yeah. She wouldn't have had time to get it back to you right away.

[14:21] » Okay, that's fine. I just figured I'd mess it here then since I didn't get it

[14:24] there.

[14:31] » In their licensing portion on the city. He's asking how many registered. Oh, I

[14:36] can pull up the spreadsheet, but anyways, it wasn't crazy, but people

[14:41] definitely registered. >> All right.

[14:43] » Um, >> so when would that compiled information

[14:47] be able to be publicly available? >> Did we agree to do that yet?

[14:53] I think the main thing is we have no issue, I personally have no issue like

[14:59] publishing addresses, but we didn't want to do like names, emails, and contact

[15:03] information because of we don't want them to get

[15:08] solicited online. So then you have to go through a information.

[15:12] » Yeah, I just was wondering like just >> it was right after holiday weekend and

[15:17] she got scammed with people registering today. So I'm sure she'll get back to

[15:19] you. She's really good at it. It's just they're just not saying

[15:22] » needs a little bit of time. Yeah. >> Okay.

[15:24] » Yeah. >> It's just hard to be an informed citizen

[15:26] without information being available. So, >> I'll mention it to her right away

[15:30] tomorrow. >> Okay. No, I I mean I talked to her

[15:32] today. I just think it would be worthwhile for you guys to see what the

[15:36] delay, you know, came up as cuz you had it as a resolution that was supposed to

[15:42] take effect last month and you delayed a month. And I know that was partly

[15:46] because the realtors asked for it, but I don't think that was actually some of

[15:50] the outcome. Uh, so I'd be curious to see what happens there. And then I guess

[15:54] to follow up on that, what are the next steps in creating more robust short-term

[16:00] rental ordinance? What are the next steps?

[16:02] » We'll conduct the study and that'll involve primarily our planning staff,

[16:06] planning and zoning staff. Christy Trrisco will head that up. So that was

[16:10] what we adopted as our resolution is to to to accept a moratorum or create a

[16:15] moratorum and further study the issue. So I don't know when Christy plans to

[16:19] begin that. >> Yeah. Um we'd encourage everyone to

[16:23] you know attend the next planning commission meeting. She's going to

[16:28] summarize her research and she's targeting November to approve a change.

[16:34] So she's just going to present kind of research what other communities are

[16:37] doing on this issue and get some general feedback on any commission. So Tim is

[16:43] that on the 16th >> I'm guessing we're going to have it

[16:47] would be on the >> right. Oh the 9th. Okay. So today

[16:50] » I haven't seen the agenda will get published Friday.

[16:55] » Okay. Um, and then

[16:59] » so it's not going to be anything analysis of our actual community

[17:02] demographics of it. It's going to be looking at what everybody else is doing

[17:06] » both. I think >> I would think it would be both, but I

[17:08] would assume over the next two or three months we'll get it all. It's not going

[17:12] to be all instantly done tomorrow, next week. So,

[17:14] » no, I'm not I'm not saying it'll be instant. I'm guessing next for

[17:19] » steps that are happening because it's been a month since the moratorum was you

[17:23] know initiated >> but there's not been a moratorum until

[17:26] now. So those caught up properties were just today was the deadline right

[17:30] » yesterday. >> Okay. Yeah. First and then the next

[17:33] planning meeting will be this 9th. That'll be the first time planning as a

[17:37] body which is how big that works. Plan as a body hear from Christie. I'm

[17:41] guessing she'll be looking for some response from planning based on what

[17:44] she's presents. How do you kind of how do you want us to go further and then

[17:47] that planning body will share with council their recommendations and then

[17:50] council will see if we agree with what >> yeah if it's like any other moratorum

[17:54] usually I would say we would spend two or three months on it at the planning

[17:57] commission and then present something to council

[18:02] » solar would most recent solar been the most recent market

[18:05] » yeah yeah and then we did basically that we just kind of studied what other

[18:11] communities did studied what we have what's our you

[18:15] capacity. What do we really want to do? Do we not even want to touch it? Um all

[18:19] in steps. So that will be over the next couple months and then

[18:24] » I would say by see so September, October, by November we should probably

[18:28] have some recommendations. Probably bring it back to council for input, take

[18:33] it back to planning for final recommendations and stuff.

[18:36] » And those planning meetings are just like this. They're public meetings.

[18:39] » Yeah. Okay. Does the input only come from?

[18:43] » You can send anything right now. >> So if you want to send Wendy or Krispy

[18:47] or even I send an email if you have thoughts, whatever.

[18:51] » Um >> I'm assuming with there's changes

[18:54] there'll be a public hearing too. So you have the ability. So not every meeting

[18:58] will open up the public, but >> you'll still have it, you know, we'll

[19:02] still have public comment like this. So >> you can send in your thoughts any

[19:07] » writing, you know, in writing or in person. Doing a quick by hand count of

[19:12] the latest spreadsheet updated today. I'm counting five new registrations

[19:16] » August. >> Yes.

[19:18] » Okay. >> I think about what we what we expected.

[19:20] » Yeah, we expected three or four. So, >> okay.

[19:24] » All right. Well, that's fair. She want to understand. Thank you so much.

[19:29] » Thank you. Any other public comment bill here? Anybody on?

[19:36] » No. Okay. Hearing no further public comment. Uh, I'm not going to uh Well,

[19:41] first of all, any changes or additions to the agenda? Do we need to move

[19:43] anything around? >> We just added something at the last

[19:47] minute 107. And just to avoid confusion on the order, I've just asked staff

[19:52] that's added last minute. We're not putting it any

[19:56] see it. All right, sounds good. >> Hearing nothing further. We'll keep our

[20:01] agenda the way it is on the current website.

[20:04] » Um, and I'm not going to make presentation. We have plenty to discuss

[20:06] tonight, but um you know, I think we all feel a lot of sympathy for the school.

[20:11] Um really desiring to get up and running today and and show off the the work that

[20:15] was completed this this summer. And unfortunately, if you haven't heard,

[20:17] they are delayed due to a mole problem that apparently um multiple multiple

[20:23] schools in the southern region have faced this really hot one.

[20:26] » I heard 21. >> Wow. So, it's never doesn't really make

[20:31] it easier, but to know that you're not the only one. I guess maybe they'll

[20:34] collaborate and understand some of the the factors that were at play, but our

[20:37] kids really want to well most of our kids want to get back to school. Some of

[20:40] them want to continue to fish all summer long. So, um that's my presentation. I

[20:44] want them to get get back to school. Uh committee reports for utilities. Did you

[20:47] guys meet today? >> Yeah. Nothing important.

[20:50] » Do you want to talk about you and Tyler want to talk about

[20:52] » ports there?

[20:55] Um so at the port authority um we approved the next um round of drilling

[21:02] at the old athletic field for the new highway. Um so now they do need to do

[21:07] kind of additional drilling to site the new road. Um we received we were on a

[21:14] board for approval for a $275,000 grant to that we applied for the port

[21:20] did to assist people building new housing in Wabasha.

[21:24] And so, um, we're going to create kind of like the HVAC grant program, our own

[21:30] local program, locally administered, but following their guidelines, um, to help

[21:34] people get homes built in WA. Um, sewer jetting is done. And then, um, anything

[21:41] else from Port? I think it was just like, you know, we're still proceeding

[21:46] with permits and pushing things forward. We expect another fall hall for the Army

[21:53] Corps. Sewer jetting is underway and we received a grant to address um more

[21:58] research on um potentially citing wells if PASS turn out to be an issue, but

[22:05] we're still testing if we actually have PAS concern. Um and then some additional

[22:10] testing was completed by the state of Minnesota health department to see where

[22:14] the PAFS in Wabasha may be coming from, which is going to be good data to have.

[22:19] Um, and then just wanted to say that we posted some pictures from the skate park

[22:24] grand opening on our website and Facebook and we had a great attendance

[22:30] and it was kind of a fun event that the mayor and I

[22:33] » participated in. >> There's a lot of city staff.

[22:35] » Here we go. Yeah. And there were way more kids even there in the background.

[22:40] Oh, >> yeah. I got a knack. But um

[22:43] » yeah, the Diane was there with the paper and she was trying to get

[22:53] looked at her like we've been we've been here for four hours today. So it was

[22:57] good event. And do you want to share the little bit of good news with the DNR

[23:02] grant or the DNR that you got from we're expecting good news on the permit?

[23:07] » Yeah, just for the port project. Yeah, we we are expecting hopefully approval

[23:12] this on the port the DNR permit. So that's kind of the last uh

[23:26] gonna celebrate. So get that in hand.

[23:34] » Um we finished August uh with some Um we had calls on Sunday. Um we had two two

[23:44] backup calls which were we had two trucks at the same time and we had one

[23:47] third call um that we're able to handle as well. Um we had two hung up flights

[23:55] um frogs total we had 101 calls 683 for the year. We're up 86 calls over this

[24:03] point last year. Um, we took 22 transfers. Um, and we're 55% for August,

[24:08] which is our best month that we've had. Um, we had 19 backup calls in August, 81

[24:15] total for the year. Um, we only had 68 all of last year. So, we're getting more

[24:20] and more calls that we have two rigs out at the same time.

[24:24] Um, we took uh we're at 127 transfers for the year. We took 119 all of last

[24:30] year. Um over the last four months we're at 400 calls even. So we're averaging

[24:36] 100 calls a month. Um I just did some numbers today because I thought it was

[24:42] interesting. Um so far this year we've performed 20 different procedures um a

[24:48] total of 573 individual tangs and we've given 36 different medications

[24:55] um 361 individual fangs. Um, we're already calls for September.

[25:02] And then the best news yet, I'm picking up our new truck on Friday at 10 a.m.

[25:08] It's finally coming after like 30 months of waiting.

[25:13] » That's great. >> Thank you, Ryan. Thank you, on the crew.

[25:19] Tony, any streets are park news?

[25:27] » Uh, even good evening everyone. Park board did not meet but it's closed.

[25:32] Simple onward an upward to that. We got some work to do and uh plumbing in there

[25:37] that's in the consent agenda. Uh streets commission met today. We

[25:42] talked about the anchor point possible project out there.

[25:47] Discuss city code and then they're going to kind of go back and see how that

[25:51] works in their project. Um and then we we discussed the lower boatard boatard

[25:57] lower arena um expansion on some of their seasonal units, what you call them

[26:02] down there. So we talked about traffic and different things in the process and

[26:08] they went to meet with utilities today, too. And so they're going to go through

[26:12] that process and see where they end up. Post street storm sewer needs to be

[26:16] cleaned out. So I got some bids on that. Um and that was actually a lot lower

[26:21] than I don't know if both of the quotes are in here, but the one was around 7500

[26:26] or 7. Another one come in at 33550. So, we'll go with that one. So, that

[26:32] won't have to, you know, you can Caroline can approve that one.

[26:35] » Um, and I give them an update on the street project. Basically, I think we

[26:40] need a decision on the golf course. Um, whatever the amount's going to be for

[26:44] the assessment and just let them know what the schedule is later this year and

[26:48] then, uh, market street will be next spring. So other than that,

[26:53] » okay, >> I have to say that once you guys go over

[26:56] the animal and stuff like that, that that tar

[27:00] it's been very very good. >> Really nice.

[27:02] » I've not seen any chipping or anything right now. So I think that's a quality

[27:08] product that you guys put out. >> People like it a lot better than those

[27:11] rock and chip steel, but it's a little more expensive. So I got to try and see

[27:16] how the budget plays out this winter. We'll see how it stands out this winter

[27:19] with and stuff like that. >> Thanks, Tony. Planning.

[27:24] » How would it be? >> All right. And

[27:29] Caroline, you gave us every report. Do you have anything? Okay. Okay. So on our

[27:32] consent agenda, the full mechanical and plumbing and a requirement Tony talked

[27:35] about this that the budget workshop to our August 5th regular council minutes,

[27:40] the September warrants, the National Eagle Cent's event permit and temporary

[27:43] liquor license for their one-day event and the August 26th schedule council

[27:47] minutes. We have a motion to approve the consent agenda.

[27:49] » I move second motion from Tim, second from Jean. Any further discussion? All

[27:54] those in favor say I. I. >> Oppose say no.

[27:58] » All right. and North public hearing tonight under general business one we

[28:00] have our general obligation improvement and tax payment bond discussion we have

[28:05] Mike here in person welcome Mike >> I do

[28:08] » thanks for being here >> tell me what I'm supposed to be opening

[28:13] » um you know what how about bomb cash with all the language and the

[28:21] letter and so forth so the exhibit >> yes Okay.

[28:28] And this will summarize. Yeah. Let me zoom in.

[28:32] » All right. We can go back. >> Okay. So, um the council probably

[28:39] remembers uh that periodically through time we've done updates to the city's

[28:45] capital financial plan and one of the projects that was included in that was

[28:49] this year's um street utility improvements. Um we had anticipated, you

[28:55] know, a little over $2 million project. That's where we're at. Um the one

[28:59] difference that we're kind of deviating from is that instead of doing the

[29:03] entirety of all of the work in 2025, the portion of it that will be bid out in

[29:09] 2026. So it's important to note that when I'm doing recommendations for the

[29:13] sizing of the debt, it's based on bids and actual known cost for the 25

[29:17] portion, but on the engineer estimates for 26. But in discussing that with

[29:22] staff and the engineer, um that felt like a better strategy than doing two

[29:28] separate bond issues because it'll save you tens of thousands of dollars in

[29:31] issuance costs for the for the next um for next year. Um okay, so a number of

[29:38] recommendations have to occur. So first of all has to do with bond sizing. So in

[29:42] the top left, it's hard to read, but between the

[29:47] bid for this year's construction, an estimate for next year's construction,

[29:50] the engineering, and then there's a total of $78,000 of contingency uh as

[29:55] recommended by the engineer that totals $1,942

[30:01] uh in capital costs. We have a variety of issuance expenses. Um the first one,

[30:07] the underwriters compensation. You know, typically the purchaser of the bond is

[30:12] not going to be holding the bond themselves. They're purchasing it so

[30:16] they can piece it up and sell it to their customers. And they discount how

[30:21] much they pay you, but turn around and sell it for at least the par amount of

[30:24] the bonds. And that's how they make their money. And by rule, we can offer

[30:28] discount allowance up to 2%. And so we want to offer enough discount allowance

[30:33] that um it'll garner the interest. So one4% is pretty typical uh for a bond of

[30:39] this size and term. However, um just rest assured if you're concerned that it

[30:44] isn't enough and that we might get biders to shy away, there's other ways

[30:48] for investment banks to make money. And that is instead of reselling the bonds

[30:53] at par to their underlying customers, they could sell them at a premium. Um,

[30:59] and so that

[31:03] premium would generate the cash necessary to fund their additional

[31:06] compensation if needed. Um, having said that, um, recognize that

[31:13] there's probably a likelihood that there will be a premium sale even if they

[31:18] don't need extra compensation. And the reason being is for the last two three

[31:24] years now it seems like people are concerned about where interest rates are

[31:27] going to be in the future. And so what they want to do is pay a premium pay

[31:31] cash to not have these interest rates that are shown on the bottom of this

[31:35] page but to slap a higher interest rate on the bonds. And so what we do is we

[31:40] take that cash that premium comes back to us and we downsize the bond if we if

[31:45] it's significant. And so at the end of the day, your payment should be the

[31:49] same. Either you borrow the full amount at a lower rate or you borrow less at a

[31:54] higher rate, the payment should work out pretty much the same. And so we watch,

[31:59] we keep an eye on that stuff. There's no way for us to control those shenanigans

[32:05] on the on the back side. The only way we kind of indirectly control it is through

[32:10] a competitive sale. um because every time they play that game, they're

[32:15] messing around with the net effective rate of the bonds and and we're going to

[32:18] award based on the lowest net effective rate of the bond. So um just recognizing

[32:23] we'll be keeping an eye on that. So the issuance cost there, the municipal

[32:29] advisor that us uh bond council uh historically has been the Taff Law. Yep.

[32:36] Uh they were formerly known as Briggs of Morgan and Mary is still with them.

[32:39] She's worked for you for years. Uh a paid agent is simply a third party um

[32:45] who tracks all the underlying investors. So when this thing gets pieced up by

[32:51] parties, they will be the agents that invoice you for the payment and then

[32:55] they'll disperse it to all those underlying people. They will also charge

[33:00] uh an annual servicing fee not shown on here. It's like $495 a year.

[33:07] uh printing in miscellaneous has to do with the uh preparation of the official

[33:12] statement which is the disclosure document we work on and in fact um Tyler

[33:16] I think you're working on city certificate thank you for that um as

[33:20] well as mileage and all those kinds of things and then the rating I'm going to

[33:25] encourage the city to pursue a standard course credit rating because for that

[33:30] $15,000 we're going to get an interest rate

[33:33] that's half a point 3/4 of a point lower than what we would ordinarily that and

[33:37] that could be seven, eight, nine times more in interest savings as a result of

[33:42] that really. So, um knowing your financial position and u past history

[33:49] with rating, I I think that's a good idea.

[33:53] All right. So, anyways, you put all that together, we've got a bond amount of

[33:56] 2,15,000. We expect when you get these bond

[34:00] proceeds, you're going to have them in an interest bearing account. Um, so we

[34:05] use $4,000 of construction fund earnings just as a um

[34:10] figure really. Uh, and with the one portion of the project being delayed to

[34:15] 2026, it's quite possible that you're going to

[34:18] earn more than the $4,000 shown. But what I would like to do is have that be

[34:24] to use the term, but gravy because then you could do the offset income. If that

[34:28] $78,000 contingency isn't enough, it'll be added. um dollars for you there.

[34:37] Okay. Um now, as far as statutory authority, you can't just issue that

[34:42] Minnesota, right? We got to we got a state which authority we're going to use

[34:45] and whatever that authority is, we have to follow by those rules. And

[34:49] originally, I thought this was going to be purely what we call an improvement

[34:53] bond issued under chapter 429, which is one that says you will special assess

[34:59] all of the benefiting properties, at least 20% of the costs. And Caroline, if

[35:03] I could get you to flip to the next page,

[35:07] » the letter. >> Oh, yeah.

[35:09] That exhibit. >> Oh, okay. Sorry.

[35:12] » And just scroll down. >> Where' it go?

[35:17] » There it is. >> Okay. The next page.

[35:21] » Yeah. Yep. This one. So, what you'll see, well, it's hard to see,

[35:28] but I'm going to just come over here for a second.

[35:31] Right here, you're going to have a summary of the anticipated special

[35:34] assessment roles for each of the 25 and the 26 projects. If you add those

[35:38] together and compare it, uh it would not be 20% of the overall project, right?

[35:46] And so what I had to do under this authority is limit this portion of the

[35:50] bonds so that those assessments represented the required 20%.

[35:55] And then what I did is I took all the remaining costs and moved it into

[35:58] supplemental authority. And in this case, I'm advising tax evate authority.

[36:03] This, you may not remember this, staff will remember this. This is the

[36:08] identical strategy we used for our big project that included the athletic field

[36:14] and the other public infrastructure project at that time. Um,

[36:19] now using tax evading authority, but that

[36:23] requires I saw that >> sorry

[36:27] loves talking about tax authority. uh

[36:32] we have to have a public hearing and we have to identify parcel that benefit. It

[36:37] doesn't have to necessarily even be a direct benefit. It just have to have

[36:40] some sort of nexus to the project and then the city taxes on those parcels

[36:46] have to add up to the principal amount of that portion of the bonds.

[36:50] Thank you. That's that's great. So the parcels I've identified are down there

[36:55] in the lower in the red area. the the map has colors where there's

[37:00] work being done around the city, but I just started down at the bottom. And

[37:04] there was sufficient city tax support there that I didn't need to go any

[37:08] further. Now, when we do that public hearing,

[37:12] we'll publish a notice in the paper saying, "Hey, we're having the tax

[37:16] hearing. Here's the parcel numbers." And somebody that knows our parcel number is

[37:19] going to see that and say, "What the heck is the city doing to me?" And the

[37:22] answer is absolutely nothing. This is a paper exercise only. And so go back to

[37:27] the exhibit >> and go to the tax abatement piece

[37:32] which would be like the third page. Yeah.

[37:36] » You're going to see two columns here. You're going to see tax levies and and

[37:40] tax abatement levies. And what I want you to think of is those are tax

[37:44] abatement levies. I just want you to think of them as regular levies. In

[37:46] fact, I want you in your mind you combine those two columns into into one.

[37:51] Because what happens is when you certify these levies to the county, they don't

[37:55] know which parcels. They just spread it across the entire city. So I'm going to

[38:00] say tonight and then I'm going to say it again at the public hearing in October.

[38:05] If your parcel is identified, your taxes don't change. They're not calculated in

[38:09] differently. We're not doing anything to you that we're not doing to anybody else

[38:13] in the city. Okay? It's simply a legal mumbo jumbo. And if it wasn't for rules

[38:18] like this, I wouldn't have a job. Okay? So pretty there's that bonus. All right.

[38:23] Um so of the two uh authorities a thou a

[38:28] million70,000 would be under the improvement authority in chapter 429.

[38:31] That's the one with the special assessments and then the remaining

[38:34] $945,000 would be done as tax evaporate authority

[38:39] um for the remainder of the borrowing. In terms of how many years do we go out?

[38:47] Um I'm showing final maturity February 1st 2042, meaning you'll impact your

[38:53] budgets through taxes payable 2041.

[38:58] It's pretty close to what we had done in my capital planning worksheets. It's

[39:02] lost by one year simply because of that movement of the 26 project pushed out.

[39:07] So that final maturity did get pushed back one more year. Um, but all in all,

[39:13] uh, based on current market conditions, we expect

[39:17] payments to be pretty close to what we had in our planning. So, we're on track

[39:20] is an important. >> Um, Caroline, you're doing a bad job.

[39:24] Can we go back to the first page? >> Yeah.

[39:29] » Is this part of your page or not? Let's go over to the right hand side.

[39:38] Um, couple things to point out. Yeah. up there and goes, "Right, that's perfect."

[39:43] If somebody says, "Well, what's the interest rate?" Let's say someone from

[39:45] the public says, "What's the interest rate on the bonds?" And then you show

[39:48] them these payment schedules and you see all these different interest rate and so

[39:50] forth. That'll be very confusing. What we do is we mush all that up together

[39:54] along with the underwriters discount allowance, which is considered an

[39:57] interest expense and come up with a net effective rate and that's that 4.13%.

[40:02] So, if somebody was to ask, that's what we're projecting. Um, now a month from

[40:07] now, who knows? Um, rates could go down, rates could go up.

[40:12] I don't know, but that's where we are right now. And then you're going to see

[40:17] something here. You don't have to move it, but it says the call option.

[40:22] And then February 1st of 33. This is something that the council can

[40:27] set, but basically it's a promise not to prepay or refinance these bonds until a

[40:33] certain date in time. And that's because when the these investment banks and

[40:38] underwriters bid on the purchase of these bonds, they don't want you to pay

[40:41] them off next Tuesday. They want to make sure the investments are going to be

[40:45] good for at least a period of time. Um, and so what we would like is we could

[40:50] prepay it at any time, no penalties, so forth, but we'll get dinged huge on

[40:56] interest rate if we don't offer some sort of protection. So the trick is how

[41:00] far out should we go with that call option to keep flexibility on the city

[41:04] side but not get tamed on the interest rate and I would say that this is a

[41:09] decent enough protection.

[41:14] Okay. Um, and then just in terms of interest rate,

[41:19] uh, one of the nice things about doing a competitive sale, um, I did consider,

[41:24] you know, maybe we do a direct bank placement issuance costs are much

[41:29] lower, interest rate be a little higher. Um, would that be a better option

[41:34] because, you know, staff is going to Well, they'll remember from the last

[41:37] one, you know, this is a lot of work on their part. Um, would it be easier to do

[41:42] a bank placement? I just I don't see us getting a deal that would compete and so

[41:47] it's in the best interest to to go this route. Um but having said that instead

[41:52] of coming to you tonight with a ready to go proposal bank offer um what this is

[41:58] going to allow us to do is going to take a period of time. We wouldn't come back

[42:01] until October 7th. That morning I would take bids. So we bid it out just like a

[42:05] road project. instead of bidding um you know so many feet of black top or so so

[42:11] forth we bid the principal amounts and then they plug in their interest rates

[42:14] and their compensation and then take the best bid based on that. Um but by

[42:19] delaying till that day we potentially have a federal reserve

[42:24] action coming up September September 17th I think is we're going to find out

[42:29] if there's a rate cut or not. Um, I think this Friday there's a jobs report

[42:33] coming out and so the betting was that there's absolutely going to be a fourth

[42:38] point cut in the middle of September. Now there's a bunch of people feeling

[42:43] wishy-washy on that. So I had no idea and uh if somebody tells you they know

[42:49] they're lying. Okay. So, um, but the benefit is is we'll have that cuz one

[42:55] thing if we had done a bank place, unless I had an offer for you today and

[42:59] you accepted it and then there was a rate cut, you'd be like, hey, you know,

[43:02] so, um, I think this is probably the best way to make sure you below the

[43:07] overall cost of borrowing. Why don't I stop there? Oh. Um, in terms

[43:13] of the revenues, you're going to not only see the tax levies and tax

[43:16] abatement levies, which you combine for the purposes of your

[43:20] budgeting. Um, but we do have water as revenues that are pledged to portion of

[43:25] the bonds. That's right. Consistent with our planning. Was that water going to

[43:30] make a contribution? So, um, like I said, I think we're pretty much pretty

[43:34] close on track with our plan. >> Thank you.

[43:38] » That's 10 15 minutes you're never going to get back. Um

[43:41] » it's clear every time and your memo is also very helpful. Any questions for my

[43:46] the memo's in the packet for members of the public who want to read it?

[43:49] » Two actions tonight. Uh one is a resolution calling for the public

[43:53] hearing for that tax evadement I described. That's all it is. Just

[43:56] calling for public hearing. We'll request publication on your behalf. Uh

[44:00] and then the other action is a resolution setting sale date of the

[44:03] bonds. So what that means is on October 7th for your agenda packet, the first

[44:09] thing we need to do is hold the then we'll approve the abatement.

[44:14] Then we'll talk the bids on the bond and award the bonds if you're happy with the

[44:20] results. So and then as well we would close on the

[44:24] funds October 21st. >> Feels like yesterday.

[44:29] Any other questions? Otherwise we could entertain a motion to let's do those

[44:32] separately. the resolution call for the public hearing on the approval of tax

[44:35] statement. >> Move. Both are first by Brian, second by

[44:39] Tim. Any further discussion? All those in favor say I.

[44:42] » I. Those say no. And then again, the resolution providing for the competitive

[44:47] negotiated sale of the $2 million 15,000 $2 million $15,000 obligation

[44:52] improvement and taxment bond. >> Thank you, Tim. First by Jean, second by

[44:57] Tim. I look away. First by Jean, second by Tim. Any further discussion? All

[45:03] those in favor say I. I. Oppos say no. Thank you, Mike. Your time is very

[45:07] valuable to us. We do appreciate the very

[45:10] make it very clear and we look forward to the hearing and what we learn about.

[45:15] » I'll be in touch with staff. >> Thank you, too.

[45:20] » All right. Now, we have the uh request to approve anou. This is related to the

[45:26] presentation to pay $6,000 per year as a service fee essentially for five years

[45:31] to provide matching funds for the pre-ervice bus. What they didn't explain

[45:34] and I actually should press them on it is they're leveraging they kind of said

[45:37] it they're leveraging MDOT funding which and MDOT funding is now requiring 15%

[45:41] but 20% of lease is leading to sort of an overall service fee of what they're

[45:45] estimating 6,000 every five. Anything further or discussion on that

[45:51] item? >> What are your guys thoughts? Well,

[45:55] » can we assess this every year and not wait five years or what?

[46:00] » What happens all of a sudden? >> It is per year.

[46:03] » Well, but there Oh, I see what you mean. And take a look

[46:06] at it again. >> I think my So, I feel very naive about

[46:10] this. I'm on the transit advisory committee and I was always under the

[46:13] assumption that the countyy's paid because and that this for solely one

[46:16] reason that I did not ask the question of which is that Mike Wabby invited me.

[46:19] He said I think it'd be great for there to be some Wabasha representation. And I

[46:22] thought, "Sure, I'll learn about transit." And there's never been a

[46:25] discussion in the times that I've been on those calls about the source of

[46:28] funds. There's been a real angst, a very serious hand ringing about wrership

[46:32] because of co just changed everything. And then about these buses, which they

[46:36] have been waiting for for so long. So I think their leadership has been so

[46:39] caught up in the unavailability of these vehicles. There has been no no real

[46:44] thought about kind of how the fees to be managed. And I believe Tracy and um

[46:48] Diane, while both having a lot of transit experience, are new in their

[46:51] leadership. So I think this is kind of their proposal. That's the impression I

[46:56] got when they visited with us initially. Is that your thoughts that they this is

[46:59] kind of a new way that they think it's more stable and I don't know if there

[47:04] it's just it's similar enough to what they did before, which is, you know,

[47:06] every 5 years you get dinged for a vehicle,

[47:09] » but they don't want it to be that they don't want it to be that for the

[47:12] organization because that put them in trouble. Yeah. Yeah. Basic.

[47:16] » Yeah. Right. They don't want us to have to pay a lump sum and they don't want to

[47:19] be vehicle specific and how, you know, they don't want us think of thinking of

[47:22] ourselves as paying for buses. >> They want us to be paying for service.

[47:26] » When it was a 20% match, it said they just came and had to get 16 grand.

[47:32] Right. >> Right off the bat.

[47:33] » Right. >> But now the buses are double the cost if

[47:36] not more. >> Right.

[47:39] » They're looking at options for >> Yes. Yeah,

[47:45] » can terminate >> at any time,

[47:48] » but um at any time whereas Three Rivers can only terminate

[47:53] if there's a breach in agreement with the city. Um

[48:01] I I mean part of me is it's important that I think we need to look at it but

[48:06] all of a sudden it's like you look at some of these numbers you know 22 23 is

[48:10] 9,000 and then all of a sudden 2024 is 6 6200.

[48:16] Well I mean we're projected to go to about 5,000 for 2025. I mean if it keeps

[48:21] dropping I guess what's the point of the 30 grand, right?

[48:27] Um, that's why I asked if we could re-evaluate,

[48:31] do it once this year, reevaluate next year. Can we do it on a year-to-year

[48:34] basis instead of a fiveyear thing?

[48:40] » When do they >> I mean, obviously, we could terminate

[48:42] per this agreement any time and for any reason,

[48:47] » but you're saying put it on the agenda for a year.

[48:49] » No, I think we need to discuss it for a year if that's the case.

[48:54] It's one of you know it's one of those things it's sort of like you know

[48:56] there's a there's a there's a cost of sort of public health services and then

[48:59] usership is going to change all the time but I I like you have noted that that's

[49:04] a really dramatic those are really dramatic shifts you know 2020 one and

[49:08] two was really robust what that isn't co acting that is so what what's the dip

[49:15] now in I think it is it because of they didn't talk about is it fleet in

[49:18] availability and I can ask this you on future tappings but there's a real kind

[49:22] of community by community. Um the thoughts about ridership are very

[49:28] community by community because of course if you live in a community where there's

[49:31] you know a planned route and they're going to these you know plan locations

[49:35] like a shopping center, a hospital, we don't have that. So it's a very personal

[49:41] service here. It's on demand and

[49:46] yeah I think you have it sold for 24 hours. You have to request within 24

[49:51] hours. is not a particularly flexible um solution, but it's what it's the

[49:58] model that works for our community because a planned route really doesn't

[50:01] make sense for our community. I know they try to make the bus more visible or

[50:04] that's they say that they try to make the bus more visible. They don't just

[50:07] drive around because of the fuel cost, but they'll try to park where the semis

[50:12] park or they'll try to park near the grocery store or near the Dollar General

[50:14] or someplace where they can be visible. DAC I feel um is the high utilizer

[50:22] just because our disabled numbers although many elderly people are

[50:26] disabled as well. So it's it's hard to tease out. I've never been able to get a

[50:28] clear answer. Wabasha's disabled utilization is higher than other

[50:32] communities. And I always say why is that? and they say probably the DAC, but

[50:36] I don't I don't know if they really know if it's that or we have a high number of

[50:40] disabled individuals in, you know, independent disabled individuals that

[50:44] are riding in addition to DAC because then I start thinking about it really as

[50:47] it's public transit infrastructure that we need to stabilize.

[50:53] I do know that the Head Start thing that comes up over and over again that other

[50:56] communities have really built ridership above because of their preschool

[51:02] prek ridership and that was just something that either our prior

[51:06] administration chose not to advocate for or didn't see the need for or they just

[51:11] never explored it. But I really urge them to look into it with our school

[51:14] with the new administration in place.

[51:19] » I don't know Jeff's comments. >> Sure. Oh, sure.

[51:23] » Regarding three rivers requested for 30,6k a year for five years, he asked,

[51:28] "Do the counties and cities in their service area make the same

[51:31] contribution?" Um, it sounds like all the cities are,

[51:36] but not the county. Based on six months of ridership this year, January through

[51:42] June, they average 14 riders per day. This is a 6% of Wabasha's population. If

[51:49] transportation is needed so badly, has anyone contacted Sunset Mobility to see

[51:54] if they can meet this minimal need? And he just attaches a picture of a van.

[52:00] I've attached a picture of one of their vehicles, a van, which is more suitable

[52:03] for this amount of ridership. I'm opposed to this cost to the property

[52:07] taxpayers. All I see is an empty bus sitting around.

[52:11] So I know from the age friendly initiative the two domains that were

[52:15] identified as most important were housing and healthcare

[52:20] community healthcare services but transportation came up a million times

[52:24] in those themes. And one thing that's come from the the uh surveys and the

[52:28] listening sessions is that those fantastic services if they're covered by

[52:32] insurance it's one thing but if they're not the private payer has to pay that

[52:36] they're it's it's a $100 trip. So that sometimes makes sense for major

[52:40] procedures and certainly for going a distance, but that would never make

[52:43] sense to go from your, you know, house on 12th Street to your hospital.

[52:48] » Yeah. Extremely that's >> very flexible.

[52:52] » Yeah, they're flexible, but they're very um it's um

[52:55] » it's a one to one. >> Yeah.

[52:58] » Yeah. It's more to say this. I can't think of the ones.

[53:02] Yeah. >> Specializ. That's what I was thinking.

[53:04] » Right. So, I use sunset and ability a lot with my dad when he was going to and

[53:09] from the nursing home city dur. It's not cheap. Um, it's not for everyday use for

[53:16] people. Um, we were paying $175 each way just to take them to appointments in

[53:22] Rochester. Um, they're not hardly ever on time. Um, and they had missed two

[53:28] appointments one day because they were an hour and a half late picking them up.

[53:31] Um, so it's a good service, but it's not something that you can count on for

[53:37] everyday use. And it's financially for everyday use. It's not

[53:42] » Yeah. It doesn't scale.

[53:47] » And we could see a rate increase in the next couple years, too.

[53:52] » Yeah. >> But I mean, the trends are down, but

[53:56] » they're kind of all over the place. They're all over the place in all the

[53:59] cities. It's they don't I wish they would actually that would be maybe

[54:02] something they could provide to us is our was our trend prior to co you know

[54:06] for a 10-year period because it's really >> it's like this it tanked in CO so that

[54:10] kind of wasn't really a good beginning of the slide there because of course

[54:13] everything closed in CO but what happened before CO I think was also sort

[54:17] of variable so >> so I I do like their thought that you're

[54:21] paying for a service you're paying for that service to be there you're not

[54:23] paying for a bus that may or may not have people on it you're paying for the

[54:27] entire apparatus of three rivers you know like she said they're working on

[54:29] safety. They're working on um better better rider experience and they really

[54:34] do have a stigma fact. It's even in our agenda packet. This is for disabled

[54:38] people and elderly people. It's they don't they have a marketing issue. So,

[54:41] you know, one of the things that they've done is added a person who goes into

[54:43] communities and essentially markets markets the service and I urge them to

[54:47] come to our library to come to our new apartment building when they have their

[54:50] community space open to really get the word out about their new bus. you know,

[54:55] these are nice to vehicles and if we chose not to contribute, it wouldn't

[55:00] necessarily mean that they're going to leave town.

[55:02] » Well, I think so. Yeah, I think that's what it means. Then they would no longer

[55:06] provide services to us. >> I asked that question. I didn't get an

[55:11] answer. >> I should have asked here.

[55:15] » You think we would get a direct answer wrong?

[55:19] » I hope so. So they're trying to put, you know,

[55:23] they're trying to create a stable operational model, which is good. That's

[55:27] a good plan. I'm glad it's I would never want this to surprise another future

[55:31] administration like, oh, you need even a $6,000 annual contribution, but

[55:35] certainly not a bus, you know, 20% of a bus right now.

[55:39] » I I mean, I'm fine with it, but I think we need to address it every year. I mean

[55:44] because if you look at the numbers so 2020 co I assume the numbers so 4200

[55:50] roughly but 2025 do co we're on pace for 5,000 I mean

[55:56] » yeah they just it's like they've lost >> sounds like it's

[55:59] » like they've lost track people's people's lives it's people found other

[56:04] solutions >> have you gotten any anecdotal

[56:07] information through the front desk about it's the same people have every

[56:15] But they get to hear from you. >> I'm super torn on this one. Um because I

[56:20] think it's a a valuable service. Um I mean I think I'd be willing to do a

[56:28] year and see where we're at next year. That's what I would move for. So when

[56:33] we're doing budgeting, we should bring it up and say, "Hey, present like we do

[56:37] all of our other >> people that are in our budget." Right.

[56:41] » Yeah. So, >> and I get the statistics quarterly if

[56:46] anybody ever wants to see how other communities are doing, you know, because

[56:48] they all, like I said, they all boil them down to it. It's it's not a, you

[56:52] know, like any transit, any public transit, it's not something that you can

[56:56] control demand for. You have to build demand for it. And that writership

[57:00] experience has to be good. It can't be late. it can't be you know

[57:03] » I think the other thing I was completely unaware of if we were a participant in

[57:08] this service because so we certainly get a lot out of good out on our website

[57:13] Facebook Washa helping Wawasha I mean if they come up with a marketing piece I

[57:18] was completely unaware we were a supporter of theirs

[57:21] » I mean so were you we had no idea we paid for part of the vehicle so I think

[57:28] they need to do a better job of like you said being treated like everyone house,

[57:32] which is come give us an annual report and tell us how you're doing.

[57:35] » Well, I mean, we asked each street to give us a report. We asked everybody

[57:39] else why if we're giving them money yearly,

[57:42] » I want to know what they're doing to approve it.

[57:45] » We just budget discuss it at our next workshop.

[57:49] » If we're going to approve this item? >> Yeah.

[57:53] » If we're going to budget it for the year.

[57:54] » Oh, next year. You mean? >> Yeah. 2026. Yeah. are proposing

[57:58] approving it this year but continuing to bring it back annually.

[58:02] » So yes, that's what I would do. So in August of next year, 2026, it gets

[58:08] brought up and they present on why they need another three or 6,000.

[58:15] » I I I'm just not comfortable approving it for five years

[58:19] » because >> I think it should then get moved into

[58:21] our operating budget where it's a fee for service. It's not like we're

[58:25] literally buying a bus anymore. So >> we will make that change.

[58:29] » Yeah. >> Okay. So is that something we can are we

[58:33] allowed to modify thisou in that with that regard?

[58:36] » Well approving it this I would say we can approve the U but we're going to

[58:42] address it every year because according to this we can actually terminate for

[58:46] any reason. So

[58:49] » as long as I think we have that out I'm fine with it. Can we send back that

[58:54] though and and and request that they they do a report yearly?

[59:00] » We can edit the to say that. I'm sure. Yeah. Statistics every every

[59:07] quarter. >> Yeah. I mean, if we can if we can modify

[59:10] it to say we'll do 6,000 every year, I would assume they would want third, but

[59:15] tough. I'd like to see it change before we approve it

[59:20] » or approve with that with that change. Yeah.

[59:23] » Okay. And then also say you'll make annual reports to the city of Washa with

[59:29] ridership information etc. Right. Because right now it says Three River

[59:33] just makes necessary reports to them. >> Well, I think it should be treated just

[59:36] like tape. What are you doing to approve actually just printing things doesn't

[59:41] make any sense nowadays? So what are they doing increase in the money? I

[59:46] Yeah, I'm fine with delayed. So we want to print and make that report available

[59:52] in August because we don't have a time frame on it.

[59:59] » That's probably a good idea.

[1:00:03] » Are you willing to make that motion to >> to get those changes?

[1:00:08] » Yeah, I mean if they're going to change it, but are we sending it back with

[1:00:13] those? >> I think the proposal is we'll amend

[1:00:15] theou and and and bring it back. So, it's directing ST next. Okay, that's

[1:00:22] fine. >> That's fine by me.

[1:00:23] » I'm good. Okay. >> Yeah. And I'll try to learn now that I

[1:00:26] realize our sort of role in their in their funding, which of course is a

[1:00:30] small amount of where their funding comes from, but I'll try to be more

[1:00:33] critical of what I what I'm seeing. It's just it's a lot because you're looking

[1:00:36] at really hard to compare cities like Farbo and Northfield or Redwing versus

[1:00:40] us. But then I I'll look at a city that seems similar and their statistics to

[1:00:44] this. The usership is very different. Um the disabled piece really stands out for

[1:00:48] me for Wabasha and I' I just never have gotten them to say like well you have a

[1:00:51] ton of disabled senior users and you've got the DAC so

[1:00:56] » I'll just continue and Diane and Tracy have really improved the communications

[1:01:00] as in writing and every every part of their involvement has improved kind of

[1:01:05] my awareness of where they're at. >> Are they fairly new in their roles?

[1:01:08] » Yeah, but I don't think they're new to a lot of them.

[1:01:12] » Oh >> yeah. or maybe one of them is, but I I

[1:01:15] remember Tracy's name from some time back, but she's been she's

[1:01:19] been leading the the um TAS the transit advisory committee

[1:01:26] and I think they're in sort of co- director role. Sounds like Diana serve

[1:01:31] on the financing side and and uh and Tracy more the operational the bus the

[1:01:36] you know their infrastructure. All right, that's good. And now um the

[1:01:42] preliminary budget levy our

[1:01:49] you want to talk about this at all? Y

[1:01:53] our budget work for the public we take a look at the

[1:01:59] budget for the first time budgeting workshop in July August when it was it

[1:02:05] was August. Yeah. um where almost half of the year is already completed so we

[1:02:09] understand costs halfway through 2025 staff there's a very detailed budget

[1:02:13] packet and we basically look at this now every month and sometimes with another

[1:02:17] special meeting until we have to approve our budget by the end

[1:02:24] » so um right now for the prelim we're looking at um a 12% increase from 2025

[1:02:33] to 2026 Um and just to again highlight kind of

[1:02:39] the major changes, the debt service levy um for the new road project is about 4%

[1:02:45] of that 12% and then the rest of it is um due to

[1:02:52] general wage increases. Um currently we have the same CIP

[1:02:57] contribution as last year. um fire department is requesting an increase um

[1:03:04] for um on call pay rate as well as they had an increase in call volume. Um,

[1:03:13] uh, ambulance has a request, um, for a little bit additional payroll wages that

[1:03:20] we're going to look at in an ad hoc and it also soon a, um, 15% in increase in

[1:03:26] health care, health insurance, and we'll know that amount um, in December um, and

[1:03:33] November. December is when we'll finally approve the budget.

[1:03:37] Um, and the budget also includes um some additional funding um for the port

[1:03:44] authority to pay a portion of my salary and Tyler's salary because we staff

[1:03:49] that. Um, and so I think to summarize um some of the discussion was let's set it

[1:03:59] pretty high. We're hoping for some favorable numbers coming out for the

[1:04:02] ambulance service um to to imp prove some revenues. We're hoping for

[1:04:08] favorable numbers with health insurance coming out. Um and then the other thing

[1:04:14] we had a lot of discussion is that since so much of the budget is truly wages,

[1:04:19] that leaves relatively little that we can play with. Um, a couple things that

[1:04:24] we're still working on since we met is that, um, last year there was a proposal

[1:04:30] that the port authority take over payment of Main Street in the Chamber of

[1:04:35] Commerce. That's a relatively small amount, but that alone on the next port

[1:04:40] meeting. And so we you would see that in October if we're able to um take that

[1:04:46] out. Um the other thing we talked a little bit about the CIP and just some

[1:04:52] of the challenges of wanting potentially that's an area to cut but then we have

[1:04:58] you know equipment that is excuse me Tony pointed out today his ball truck is

[1:05:03] 20 years old Tony

[1:05:08] » so I think that was older than I mine um so um so so anyways Um, we're going to

[1:05:18] be researching some of that and and bringing that back uh to you if there's

[1:05:23] ways to raise fees which get paid for by nonprofit organizations rather than just

[1:05:29] put everything on the property tax levy which is only paid by taxpayers in

[1:05:34] Wabasha. Um,

[1:05:37] and so, uh, Jeff did send me some comments that I can share.

[1:05:43] Um, so just for everyone in the audience, um, council did a turn page on

[1:05:51] the entire budget um, a couple weeks ago at our packet and we went through

[1:05:56] everything in detail. So, I'm just giving you the highlights and we won't

[1:05:59] make you page through the budget. I don't think they want to do that. Um,

[1:06:04] but it's all online. Um, we will also publish it on our website as well.

[1:06:11] um if people want to take a look at the budget packet which just includes what

[1:06:15] I'm summarizing the changes and then tons and tons of charts and graphics. Um

[1:06:21] our biggest change is as our expenses go up. Um it's just really hard to move the

[1:06:27] needle on revenues because things like you know park fees etc um account for a

[1:06:33] relatively small portion. The one thing that's been growing rather well has been

[1:06:38] the the ambulance service line which we are watching but they are a few months

[1:06:42] delayed in their revenues. Um Jeff's comments that I received is um

[1:06:52] you know would we consider that asking all departments to he'd like to be at an

[1:07:00] 8% cut a 5% reduction to all line items other than the things they don't control

[1:07:07] which is salaries and benefits. So come back with a 5% reduction and you know

[1:07:13] present what that looks like. Um he suggests um a three-year replacement

[1:07:20] schedule for police squad cars. Um and then

[1:07:28] that or his main I think suggestions that maybe this 5% everybody goes back

[1:07:34] and tries to cut five other than uh salaries would that um help lower the

[1:07:40] levy. So those were some comments he um

[1:07:48] he provided. So 12 makes me a little nervous. I'm

[1:07:53] just being honest because I'm not sure what you're going to learn about

[1:07:56] healthcare and we learn that so late. And for the public's understanding, this

[1:08:00] is a ceiling. We are we are publishing our ceiling levy. The state requires it.

[1:08:05] We will work all the way through the year to move it down. I think moving it

[1:08:09] to a single digit would be nearly impossible. I mean, I was looking

[1:08:14] at the CIP. I couldn't add up anything substantial that isn't like really

[1:08:19] needed. it's either going to be needed this year or next year. So, what

[1:08:21] difference does it make? We either get on it or we, you know, have an

[1:08:23] artificially high 14% increase in a future year, which it's that variability

[1:08:28] that makes people crazy. Everybody that understands the cost of goods and

[1:08:31] services goes up. And that's true for government as well. But when people see

[1:08:34] it 3 7 9 12 that's the part that I think really people have a hard time

[1:08:39] understanding because people also have a hard time understanding that a lot of

[1:08:43] the increase in their taxes is a dep is dependent on the increase in the value

[1:08:47] of their property which of course we don't have control over and they don't

[1:08:50] have control over for the most part. So I think that that you know that desire

[1:08:54] to get to sort of this thing that we think is going to make people happy

[1:08:57] nobody wants their taxes to increase for any any in any percentage. So, I just

[1:09:02] feel like our body has to be putting staff in a position to responsibly, you

[1:09:06] know, keep people employed, which is the biggest cost driver. Um, if we're going

[1:09:12] to cut 5% of any department budget, I don't know how that isn't a service cut,

[1:09:16] then we'd have to be really seriously talking about service cuts. We can't ask

[1:09:20] our staff to make those kind of decisions as we round off the year. I

[1:09:24] think those are that issue. Then, we don't want Tony's budget to be this in

[1:09:28] future years. So, we're going to talk all next year about we decreased it by

[1:09:31] 5%. Because we have to be responsible for what those cuts look like. That's

[1:09:35] our job. That's not Tony's job at this point. He's telling us what the budget

[1:09:39] is to perform the services and and work that needs to be done. True department.

[1:09:43] I know I've talked to Joe about this. You basically don't change your budget.

[1:09:46] It's not like you're looking for new things to add on, right? So, every year

[1:09:48] is basically the same budget with just cost inflation factored in, you know,

[1:09:52] which is how budgets usually are made. So, I don't know how we get a 5% cut out

[1:09:57] of any budget, let alone all budgets. I think that's kind of a fool's errand to

[1:10:00] ask staff to do that. Maybe we talk seriously about the CIP. That's where I

[1:10:05] kind of was left hanging because I don't know as well as as our department heads

[1:10:08] do. How critical is it that something is this year, not next year? I know that we

[1:10:12] bumped things beyond what was probably good planning already on some of those

[1:10:17] items, but just having a a and if it's not significant, if it doesn't make a

[1:10:22] ding, then we don't do it. then we don't cut it. But, you know, I was adding up

[1:10:26] things. I was like, that doesn't add up much. That doesn't add up to much.

[1:10:28] There's a lot of little things on that CIP that are you can you can cross them

[1:10:32] off and it doesn't help us. It's just something that's deferred.

[1:10:38] Um,

[1:10:41] yeah, I'm just worried about insurance. So, I would be okay if staff was

[1:10:44] comfortable with the 12. I'm okay with 12. I might be a little more comfortable

[1:10:46] saying 13 just because of that uncertainty, knowing that whatever

[1:10:49] savings we identify, we're just going to drop it by that exact amount. So, you

[1:10:54] know, if you're estimating 15, it comes in 14. Well, then that's real. That's a

[1:10:57] real savings or real reduced, you know, reduced expected

[1:11:02] cost. You know, Tim and I were on the um we

[1:11:06] didn't report you guys. I kind of apologize for that. We we talked to the

[1:11:09] staff about benefits and the plan adoption and that and there's there is a

[1:11:15] portion of that that does hit employees pockets and and depending on their plans

[1:11:19] function, but also depending on how the plans are structured. And so I like to

[1:11:23] think of that benefit allocation as more of a policy oriented are we going to

[1:11:28] wiggle our are we going to move benefits, you know,

[1:11:34] are we going to tease the employees at the end of the year that benefits are

[1:11:36] always on the table or is that kind of against our policy? Do we really want to

[1:11:40] do that? If we really want to do that, then I guess that's on the table every

[1:11:42] year and have that difficult discussion. But um maybe Caroline can share um one

[1:11:48] slide that I thought was particularly interesting. Not now but in in email.

[1:11:52] » Yeah. In future going to share. It was comp you know sort of our competitors.

[1:11:56] » The competitors were broader than I see as our competition. I see our

[1:12:00] competition from a budget standpoint as like cities and every city is so

[1:12:03] different. It's I think it's fascinating. I mean like what is plain

[1:12:06] view all union? >> Yeah.

[1:12:08] » So it's hard to even find a like city really. I don't see us as a competitor

[1:12:12] with the county. I think of them as somebody we should worry about our

[1:12:15] employees going to work for for sure. So like Rob was saying, well, they are a

[1:12:18] competitor. They are from a standpoint that like we could lose employees just

[1:12:22] like Wish Dentistry could lose employees to the Mayo Clinic, but we're not like

[1:12:26] enough to have similar access to plan coverage that a county has access to. We

[1:12:30] know that. So just look, it's interesting to see how different we are.

[1:12:34] And we're not out of line. We're not over compensating our employees in wages

[1:12:39] or benefits. We are right on target, but we're not over. If we were over, which I

[1:12:45] didn't know, I might have wanted to have a conversation with staff about that.

[1:12:47] Like, you know, just so we can make sure we're keeping wages on track. We got to

[1:12:50] be realistic about benefits, but we're not an outlier at all.

[1:12:54] » This was the I'm going to update it for this was a couple years ago. You've got

[1:12:59] more information, >> but I've got to update it. But this is

[1:13:02] where we were for I just used the Mayo plan. That's our most expensive plan.

[1:13:08] and the Mayo access we were at 610 and then you can see their range. So you can

[1:13:13] see that you know some communities are higher.

[1:13:18] Um >> and then who's the one that's low is

[1:13:20] that? >> And then then plane view is union so

[1:13:23] they don't pay a premium. Um Washaw County is much lower.

[1:13:28] » They're much bigger organization. They're competing very differently for

[1:13:31] plants. >> Um Lake City was like

[1:13:35] you know 667 610 but you know it could be a lesser benefit. We were very close

[1:13:41] to Pine Island, Chatfield, and maybe a little less than St.

[1:13:47] Charles, Cannon Falls. So, I have to update these numbers.

[1:13:53] » Yeah, I don't see that. I don't think that's something we

[1:13:57] manipulate to try to address the levy. I think that's that's right where it

[1:14:00] should appear to be right where we should be. We can't do anything about

[1:14:04] paid leave. That's required. We can't I mean our our step you know people are

[1:14:09] on a step increase. We're not gonna I'm not interested in in holding salaries

[1:14:13] and doing a salary freeze. Um we've got union contract negotiation with police.

[1:14:18] We've got this fire department payroll which is not even doesn't even get us

[1:14:22] close to what I think Darren said other cities are seeing. So without all those

[1:14:27] big wage and benefit costs, the only thing that we that I feel like we have

[1:14:30] some ability to kind of really try to have an honest conversation about

[1:14:35] the impact on is CIP items. And even there, the little ones to me don't add

[1:14:39] up. Even all of the little ones together don't add up to something significant.

[1:14:43] So I don't know why we would digger too much about those. It's maybe

[1:14:46] understanding the critical need for the big ones.

[1:14:54] That's just kind of my I feel like this is where we kind of end up each year,

[1:15:01] which is good. We don't have some big horrible

[1:15:04] um financial problem or, you know, project that's creating a lot of

[1:15:10] issues. It's just that this is this is the this is what it costs to do the work

[1:15:14] that we're currently doing.

[1:15:19] I've never once had somebody urge a service

[1:15:23] like a service reduction. I I can't think of something. I'm not even sure of

[1:15:27] an off-handed comment where somebody said, you know, the city really doesn't

[1:15:30] need to do that. I just can't think of one.

[1:15:39] Anybody else got any thoughts? Otherwise, we can

[1:15:43] have a motion on that 12% or another number.

[1:15:48] » Yeah, it's just a placeholder. >> Exactly.

[1:15:50] » So, we can cut. So, I'm I'm fine with 12.

[1:15:54] » So, my first question is, is staff okay with the 12%. Do you think that's

[1:15:59] appropriate? Because I think it is, but and then my only other comment is how do

[1:16:06] we compare with our fees? That's a structure. How do we compare to other

[1:16:10] communities, which I know it's hard because on the river, it's hard to find

[1:16:14] a small town on a river, but >> like for our fees are, you know, charge.

[1:16:20] Are they competitive? Are they too much? Are they not?

[1:16:23] » So that's like an analysis that we had to go speed by piece. So Jesse, do you

[1:16:28] want to comment on your research today? Um,

[1:16:31] » some we were higher on, some we were normal.

[1:16:35] I mean, I don't think that we had anything that was super low.

[1:16:39] » We've raced it several times in the last several years.

[1:16:43] » I really throw a review a couple years ago. I mean, it's I know that they're

[1:16:47] talking campground, but I think we were pretty comparable there. Comparable

[1:16:50] there. I know our liquor licenses are lower than Elgen, but pretty much higher

[1:16:55] than other places. I mean, the park rentals seem to be the same. The

[1:17:00] cigarette licenses were high on on one and low on another by drastic amounts,

[1:17:05] but Sunday sales are maxed. Off sale was like the only one that could possibly go

[1:17:11] up and that was like by 100 bucks. >> Yeah.

[1:17:13] » I mean, there's not anything drastic enough that it's going to affect your

[1:17:16] budget a month. >> I don't know if she increased

[1:17:19] everything. No, I'm I'm fine. I mean, it's I just

[1:17:22] bring it up. >> Always good to check.

[1:17:27] » I mean, obviously, you I don't want to go to extreme as Jeff, but I mean,

[1:17:31] obviously, we should look at and I agree with the mayor that the CIP is probably

[1:17:36] the best benefit to look at, but again, you're just shifting it down the road. I

[1:17:41] mean some of these things that are out there like the Lucas device to buy the

[1:17:45] value is just you can't put up money because used it the benefits amazing but

[1:17:52] we still should look at it. So our last devices were there was a fundraiser that

[1:17:57] was done that's all about >> what Ryan did this time is

[1:18:03] them to get some savings. So his original amount was a onetime

[1:18:08] $75,000 price tag and now it's over a threeyear period and as a service,

[1:18:15] right? >> Yeah.

[1:18:16] » 15,000 competitive maintenance which currently we pay for and now it's

[1:18:21] included in the purchase price. >> Yeah. So yeah, we could do a fundraiser,

[1:18:28] but I think I think some of the is like, do we really want to do a fundraiser for

[1:18:33] the thing that we absolutely need? You know,

[1:18:36] » it doesn't make a dent. It it's not that amount is not going to move the numbers.

[1:18:40] So >> I thought his

[1:18:43] his um financing plan looked good and that's the one Tony did for his tools.

[1:18:49] So yeah, good. >> That one ended up being only 13,000 over

[1:18:55] two years. So that's good. >> Okay. I was moved to approve the for

[1:19:03] preliminary budget levy resolution. >> Yeah. And I just wanted to say it says

[1:19:07] approve capital improvement plan, but since we're continuing to talk about

[1:19:12] cutting the budget, we'll finalize that with the budget.

[1:19:14] » Sounds good. Do we have a second? >> I'll second the 12%. We have a first

[1:19:17] from Tim, second from Brian. Thank you guys for letting me have a moment.

[1:19:20] » No, it's fine. >> All those in favor say I.

[1:19:23] » I oppose say no. >> Uh, all right. Now, our um porticotty

[1:19:29] discussion which Tony had some I think it was funny. Tony, you want to share

[1:19:33] with us what your perspective is?

[1:19:44] I I understand the request like everybody else, but you know, if we get

[1:19:48] to budget time, you know, here we go. Are we going to

[1:19:51] we're going to add this in the budget. Um and we're trying to go down and

[1:19:55] couple of these things are, you know, going to take it up. So, um

[1:20:01] Caroline, did you have I gave you that amount for like the total

[1:20:06] yearly? Mhm. >> You remember what that was?

[1:20:10] » Yeah, it's on a prior I you know I think it was like Yeah, let me look that up.

[1:20:17] Um >> does anyone else remember cuz

[1:20:20] » I put it along with this guest talk a couple

[1:20:25] » months ago. >> Um says the line item would range from

[1:20:30] 50 to 70.

[1:20:35] It is. >> Yep. Yep.

[1:20:37] » That's the overall park maintenance budget. So

[1:20:40] » I I to do more street work, I need to take some money out of parks.

[1:20:45] » So So right now we pay $4,865 a year for portaotties. So when 88

[1:20:53] portaotti is 200 a month, about 1,400 a year and a regular porta potty is 165 a

[1:21:00] month about 1,155. And I think we do it April through

[1:21:04] September. >> So that represents the typical time

[1:21:09] frame >> when it comes down to it. You know, do

[1:21:12] we want to spend another roughly $1,000 on another portaotti for the park and I

[1:21:18] mean you look at Eagle's pace. I mean that's that's now a park and there was

[1:21:22] no bathrooms. So that was kind of a no-brainer to put one there. Maybe we

[1:21:26] don't next year. Um but you know there's already two at Heritage Park and we just

[1:21:32] felt that you know why should we have three and not

[1:21:36] one at another park that was part of that discussion but

[1:21:42] » as far correct me if I'm wrong because this was I got this information sort of

[1:21:45] after the event. I think you guys maybe learned of it right around the time that

[1:21:48] it happened. My understanding was not there's a line for the restrooms. It was

[1:21:52] that the that the portaotties were already maxed out at Heritage Park by

[1:21:56] that time they had that big event. Is that was that accurate?

[1:21:58] » Yeah, I think I think it's Well, you know, the chamber they take care of

[1:22:02] days, you know, they have what 20 down there,

[1:22:05] » but like Fridays under the bridge at certain times, you know, that's what I

[1:22:10] heard is there's a line um to use them. So,

[1:22:13] » which is okay. There can be a line during an event that's but I didn't even

[1:22:16] hear that there was a line. I just heard that they were that they were full and

[1:22:18] that that was sort of a proper like a oh we have to solve this quickly.

[1:22:22] » You mean like the tank full? >> Yeah. No, that wasn't okay.

[1:22:25] » It was the usage like >> Okay. Okay.

[1:22:27] » people waiting or there's a lot of people use it on

[1:22:29] » Okay. Okay. >> No, they're empty um

[1:22:32] » weekly >> every Thursday night.

[1:22:34] » Yep. Okay. >> Just to make sure for the Fridays.

[1:22:37] » Yeah. It's just an unusual thing I was thinking about. You know, the chamber

[1:22:40] has their events. are very you know contained to a weekend whereas the our

[1:22:44] jack events are every Friday for June July August and four months so it's a

[1:22:50] it's a park that receives you know certainly the porticotties are are

[1:22:54] appropriate for general use of the park more than more than adequate it's this

[1:22:58] four months where the park is used as a really big convening space every single

[1:23:03] Friday so you know Paul also discussed whether there would ever be a permit you

[1:23:09] know he was advocating for a permit restroom access we have on them planned

[1:23:11] but it's not there you know it's not it wouldn't be suitable for that use

[1:23:15] » so I don't know if we continue to revisit that in a long term that doesn't

[1:23:19] solve the situation short term but we can abide by Tony's um recommendation

[1:23:24] and keep talking about that the the only thing I was going to add is if you

[1:23:28] wanted to treat them like Main Street and Chamber you can ask them to request

[1:23:34] make another request which we're sending theoretically to the port authority

[1:23:38] scene we need assistance to add a port of potty for our event. I think Tony's

[1:23:42] point is >> it's due to the event,

[1:23:45] » not general usage of the park. So, he's kind of questioning roles. We don't do

[1:23:50] it for Riverbo days. So, it seems like if you're a special organization needs

[1:23:55] funding, >> you could theoretically

[1:23:58] get in line with the Port Authority. We can barely every year we want to cut

[1:24:03] chamber and um >> yeah,

[1:24:06] » main street. So, it's hard to think of us. But now we've added the food share

[1:24:10] for 4,000. That's the other thing we need to send over to uh Port Authority

[1:24:14] is the list of nonprofits that we support is expanding.

[1:24:19] » Yeah, I'm the whole transit for disabled people is important enough to me. I'm

[1:24:26] entertaining this 6,000 a year, but I'm so close to not wanting to do that as

[1:24:33] well. And so to keep adding stuff I I'm just not in favor of it. Two is plenty

[1:24:40] for normal use. I'm with you. I think >> Yeah.

[1:24:44] » Yeah. >> And I think I think Paul said in his

[1:24:47] comments to council, he just needs to know that if that's going to be the

[1:24:50] case, the earlier the better. They can look at their own financial arrangements

[1:24:54] for that. Whether it's like you said seeking donations or grant funding in

[1:24:57] order to cover that cost. Yeah. >> Yes.

[1:25:00] The other piece of it that I guess is tricky is we don't um it's not like the

[1:25:05] pool where where we are in control of the utilization.

[1:25:08] » Yeah. >> Yeah.

[1:25:11] » Different events cause you know more use and should be looked at like what the

[1:25:18] chamber does for that's what I was

[1:25:24] » do we need to make a motion then? I don't know. Do we have to? It's just

[1:25:29] that you we're we're getting staff recommendation not to add it.

[1:25:34] » Make a motion to let it die. Right. >> Motion to deny.

[1:25:38] » I would move to deny it. >> I'll second.

[1:25:40] » We have a motion and a f first and a second. Any further discussion? All

[1:25:44] those in favor say I. >> I. Say no.

[1:25:47] » Okay. I know those little organizations are powerhouses. They are doing

[1:25:50] everything they can to get the little funding that they have available into

[1:25:53] action. So they want to keep doing good and and yeah and uh they do they do do

[1:26:00] good and we should also remember to thank them for the contributions they

[1:26:04] make back to us now in this fundraising approach they've started. All right

[1:26:09] sidewalks

[1:26:12] I'm going to leave it the way it is. We have an issue we address it.

[1:26:17] » Do you want to talk about it? >> Sorry.

[1:26:23] Um, I mean, I think a lot of the ones, so when I did it the first time, I think

[1:26:28] that was a lot of stuff that had never been touched for 20, 30, 40 years.

[1:26:35] » Um, but like when I deal with stuff on a case by case basis, I right now I got

[1:26:41] two in my head. Um, that's out of the whole town.

[1:26:46] Could I or could somebody go out and rather find some more stuff, you know,

[1:26:50] with the level and tools and to really get picky about it? You probably could,

[1:26:55] but um yeah, I just I'd rather stay with a complaint basis

[1:27:02] um process and and not cause upward the community. and you know family money

[1:27:10] tight right now and uh prescribing. Um so I yeah I I you know if I had somebody

[1:27:21] else to take that over like if we wanted to hire a company that might be an

[1:27:24] option but I don't know how that would turn out. Um

[1:27:27] » I would feel like they'd be incentivized to

[1:27:30] » identify profit. you trust them. You know, they're in, you know, they they

[1:27:33] get a percentage. You know, how does that all work? And I I don't know.

[1:27:37] » Um, >> yeah,

[1:27:39] » I would just add that um Jessica shared that there are definitely communities

[1:27:44] that add this on as a fee so that when your sidewalk needs to get repaired, you

[1:27:49] pay zero um like Plane View. But at this point, we're having discussions to to

[1:27:55] add on fees just to get the CIP covered. >> Yeah. But do you remember how much your

[1:28:02] sidewalk? We can do research on a sidewalk fee. Um Dean was the one

[1:28:07] saying, "Let's cover more. Let's cover 50/50 of someone's sidewalk." Was it

[1:28:12] 5050? I think that's what he said. >> But she's saying it's 100%. I mean, we

[1:28:16] could make it a research project when it becomes a concern.

[1:28:21] » Um >> I find that very appealing because it's

[1:28:23] manageable. You know, those costs are high when they come up all at once.

[1:28:27] Whether it's 5050 or not, no support by the city. It's

[1:28:31] » when I bought my house, I have brand new sidewalk that cost them nothing for a

[1:28:34] buck 75 a month and I pay $2 towards compost.

[1:28:38] » There's cities that do that with utilities, too. So, like if you want to

[1:28:41] pay insurance, you know, there's companies that do that where, you know,

[1:28:45] you don't people usually have to pay the whole service to them. I guess, you

[1:28:49] know, that's going to be five grand, three to five or more. And there's

[1:28:52] communities where you can pay insurance a little bit a month and then it's

[1:28:55] covered. They just city takes care of them. How many fees do you you know you

[1:28:59] want? >> Well, I don't know how I don't think

[1:29:02] people compare how many fees does my city have compared to the neighboring

[1:29:04] city. It's more like is that good is again is that good policym because

[1:29:08] nobody gets surprised with a multi,000, >> you know. I just think ours ours was

[1:29:11] just a low in front of our house. We didn't address it because it wasn't

[1:29:13] really a safety issue except when it was icy and we saw the heck out of it. But

[1:29:17] it was kind of it just I kind of got sick of having to do that. It was a big

[1:29:20] expense just for just for improving what was an intact sidewalk. They were

[1:29:25] surprised. So, >> well, I'm doing fee research regardless.

[1:29:29] So I can research this in their fees and we could just add it to conversations

[1:29:34] but it sounds like we are as staff saying we'll continue to operate on a

[1:29:40] complaint based only and then if we want to have savings to cover and change it

[1:29:47] so it's not 100% on the homeowner and

[1:29:52] fees. I guess >> once that's the case then I think you

[1:29:55] can be a little more strict with compliance because there's a basis for

[1:29:59] it to be you know not fully the residential property owners problem or

[1:30:04] commercial property first person's problem

[1:30:07] » I remember Mayor N's face he's like what you do so the sidewalk policy that's the

[1:30:12] agenda is that current so we should revise that

[1:30:16] » we probably need to revise it to say that it's not like a blending base

[1:30:20] » well I mean the first thing procedures the survey which followed.

[1:30:26] » We kind of wanted to see what the plan was tonight and then if we wanted to

[1:30:29] bring it back next month we could rehear it.

[1:30:32] » And did Dean give any feedback because I wasn't even sure what he really even

[1:30:35] wanted to be reviewed. >> His biggest issue from my understanding

[1:30:39] I don't want to speak for him is the whole fee who pays for it.

[1:30:42] » Okay. >> That's that's what I'm interpreting but

[1:30:46] I could be completely wrong >> in the removal. Right.

[1:30:49] Well, I don't know why people have the authority to remove a sidewalk. That's

[1:30:54] what it is. That's a whole another issue.

[1:30:56] » Conclude was that any sidewalk removals in the future will come to council. It

[1:31:00] won't just be approved by street commission.

[1:31:02] » That's good. >> As long as we're changing them, then we

[1:31:04] have that too. >> It's always good to commission, but it's

[1:31:08] certain places get, you know, kind of like which way you go. So, it's an

[1:31:12] important sidewalk, but it doesn't go anywhere. sales.

[1:31:18] » So, we will amend the sign off policy to leave it as complaintbased.

[1:31:25] We'll leave it as 100% but then maybe when Dean's present he could amend it to

[1:31:30] say 50/50 and we'll look into fees too. >> This is just a policy. It's not an

[1:31:35] ordinance. So, we don't have to like >> do an ordinance change. No, I think

[1:31:46] » but if I had to take care of some of the sidewalk and they couldn't afford it, it

[1:31:50] would be assessed under taxes at some that's

[1:31:55] side or policy side.

[1:32:00] » Thank you, Tony. >> All right. Now, the conversation on the

[1:32:04] inter loan which K asked about

[1:32:10] We got to do it. >> Who wants to take it?

[1:32:14] » Yeah. Um, we're applying for funding for the bar project. Um, we're the

[1:32:19] application. We basically have to show the port authority has at least a 78

[1:32:24] 748,788. Um, so they've already got $150,000 loan

[1:32:29] and then there's another 150 that's been approved but not transferred just

[1:32:33] because the port hasn't needed that fund balance yet. They've been sustaining on

[1:32:36] their own. sleep with trans 150 and then approved an additional 100 and like we

[1:32:42] did earlier it's just to get grant funding um we'll have the money to pay

[1:32:46] back terminals up and running we have another call plan so just kind of it's

[1:32:53] all in the same city bank account it's lally just behind the scenes shifting

[1:32:57] money from one fund to the other so it's not even moving

[1:33:00] » it's worth it's all >> it's all

[1:33:06] funounting Yeah. >> Um, yeah. And I just was reminded this

[1:33:09] was something that Kathy Anderson identified her cedar rep. I mean, this

[1:33:12] she's always she's thrown so many so much spaghetti against the wall. It's

[1:33:15] hard to keep up sometimes, but really great her to realize there was this this

[1:33:20] funding to to develop the infrastructure on a large.

[1:33:24] » Yes. >> Yeah. I mean, if it's going to give us

[1:33:27] grants, I'll move to approve it. Second like I couldn't get. We have a first by

[1:33:33] Tim, a second by Brian. Any further discussion? All those in favor say I.

[1:33:38] » I. Say no. It's great. Okay. >> And now that BDPI grant fund

[1:33:48] » is a simple resolution. >> Yep. And I just wanted to clarify that

[1:33:53] the only the city is eligible to apply for this grant, not the port. So the old

[1:34:00] um resolution kind of had port language and this just makes it clear it's all

[1:34:06] city. So that'll again it's kind of confusing. We're they're different but

[1:34:10] we're one and we kind of operate together. Um so this would have been a

[1:34:15] consent but we just um got it. >> Got it. So care to move.

[1:34:21] » Jean second Brian. Uh any further discussion? All those in favor say I.

[1:34:26] oppos. It's good news. Okay.

[1:34:30] [Music]

September 2 2025 Wabasha City Council Meeting

Transcript