[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]