fun. >> Yeah, it's great at steamboat days cuz she works the beer tent and there's bees everywhere and she's just like, "hm, I wonder if this one's going to be the one I have to use my EP." >> I haven't had to do it like once this year. I didn't do it three or four times last year and this year I have not had to do it once. Are you allergic to all behavior? [Music] >> She's allergic to only species. >> This box is bigger than I thought it would be. And there's like a lot. >> I hate an Apple product. >> Makes me happy. >> I know all your bunch of Apple people, but >> I have an Android. I can't do anything. >> Apple bricked my personal iPad last week. So, I'm having a beef with Apple right now. >> Personal personal beef. >> Same old story. Android folks thinking they're better than >> real people. I know what you mean. I don't know. Shoe fits, right? your green text. >> Have you heard that comedian? >> I want to divide between the android and >> I will comment. It is hilarious. >> All right, guys. It is 5:30. I will call the meeting to order. Um up first, we have the draft 10year facilities plan update. Mr. Simmons, >> thank you. >> Got haircut. >> Yep. Got them all cut. Oh my god, the dad jokes. >> Uh yeah, me and Brent, I think, are going to tag team this a little bit, but um >> so here's our 10-year facilities plan. Um in 2025, just kind of looking back. Um city made significant investments in the fire station and the public services building. Um they got the roof, HVAC, and the uh turnout gear project. So that was a good success. has been completed. Um, and the next several years are going to be probably dominated by the public services building. So, you'll probably be sick of hearing from me about that. So, our plan goals is planning of facility upgrades and repairs to minimize those unexpected major expenses. Um, and we want to plan our future facilities to responsibly grow our assets that we're going to be building. Um so we kind of gone over the planning cycle um at the last meeting. Kind of our one to two range is what we're going to be focused on most. You know a 3 to four year critical critical review stage move into the transition stage and then six to 10 is really conceptual because it's it's hard for us to imagine what the world's going to look like in 10 years. Um, so yeah, the 10-year facilities plan will focus on continue planning uh for the public services building. So that's going to be a major investment um and allowing us to store equipment and people responsibly so we can keep those trucks from being outside, move them inside, make them last longer, which we'll touch on next week or two weeks from now with the vehicle plan. Um, public serving is going to hopefully stop us from shuffling equipment around town, which is very inefficient for us and eats up a lot of our precious hours that we have in a day um to get things done. And then uh there's some other projects on this plan. Um exterior repairs, church by the river, um some city hall maintenance as this building, I know you guys just put it up, but you know, it's going to get to that point where we're going to have to plan for repairs and upgrades um and things like that. So, one of the nice things that uh Paul's been doing the last few years is having Schwickerts come out and walk around all the buildings, look at the HVACs and all that type of equipment that we probably don't have the best knowledge on. So, if there are things that are going to be coming up, they give us a report and we're able to insert that into here. >> So, can you repeat? So, that what does that mean? You said Schwickertz. >> Schwickerts. It's a vendor. >> Okay. >> They're like an HVAC company and roofing company. >> So, they can come out and inspect and see how things are going. >> Um kind of give us a lifespan of what is out there and what's left on it so we can plan ahead. >> Um so, the current plan by year uh 2025 would be purchasing of public services property. Um 2027 was the church by the river. Um 12.5 million for the public services building in 2027 and an additional 2 million in infrastructure. And then we kind of get out into that longer range city hall maintenance placeholder. And then the Carver station roof at that point will be I believe 20 years old or on that type of time range >> just to kind of interject. So the on the public services building that 125 should give all of us a little kind of a uh blaster from the past of what we were operating under last year of that world space study and the work that we did or the council did in the community on upgrade or updating that with Orkell. Um and kind of coincidentally looking at what we had budgeted for land for public services uh gives you a real indication of you know when we're trying to plan for 10 years sometimes it's hard to plan for one year um when thinking about all the dynamics that can change. So I'm going to uh jump in and um you can see the overview. I'm going to kind of breeze past this and get into some of the the details and we can go back to the contributions. Um so public services land uh on the council agenda tonight for 900,000. Um as you can as we just noted the previous or current plan had 3 million. Um I'm lumping in that public services infrastructure at 2 million. We would have had costs on any site. uh but it fits nicely within that framework of 2.9. So on the whole uh we're on the plus side. Um both the infrastructure, so that's water and sewer or sanitary sewer utility connections along with the turn lanes we're proposing to incorporate into the southwest uh project. So that's Lebanon for bringing utilities. Uh there's some economy of scale there where we can feel like we can get good bid pricing. um and get uh those infrastructure key infrastructure projects uh built ahead of whatever project and whatever you're you eventually decide to do public services even if that's in a couple years or a handful of years or whenever that happens uh you'd be fully connected. One of the the bigger pieces, and I'm not going to kind of uh run through all of it, but is following uh what we believe is directed from the council on trying to cash flow as many projects as we can. And so, kind of as we're starting to assemble costs for professional services to develop a 60% plan for public services, um we have an idea of conceptually what those costs are going to be. the 7098 number uh gets into architecture, structural engineering, etc. Uh we're probably in that 300 some,000 range for civil engineering. So, you're probably a million dollars into uh pre-esign costs. Uh so that you can get to a point without taking a huge step to the community and saying, "Okay, this is the size of building. This is what we think it's going to cost. You know, what's your value assessment or judgment of the situation? How do you want to move forward? How does the council want to move forward? Um we've seen in situations in other communities throughout the metro and the state where um and frankly we've probably been in this position ourselves where we take a number and you can frankly see it in some of our planning documents. We have this $35 million number, but that's a very I'd call it a generic number size based on uh square footage amount. And then they come up with that calculation where when we go through this design development process, there'll be an opportunity for Andrew and Paul and Jordan, a lot of that team to go through and say, "Well, we probably don't need this space to function like that and we could probably combine these two spaces." None of that exercise has really occurred. Um, and frankly, Andrew and Jordan weren't on the team when we went through it. It was Paul and and kind of a bunch of us trying to kind of make that effort happen. So there's a there's a really big space for our operational staff to meet with the archite architect group and start defining what that space looks like with some uh hopefully refined guiding principles from the council tonight. But getting back to kind of funding that work. Uh there are I would offer there are two approaches to that. One is the traditional approach would be that you do an interfund loan from water or sanitary sewer um and then you say you're going to pay yourself back when you do a loan or a bond for the project and pay back those professional service fees which you can still do in part and maybe we have to do a little bit in part. Uh we're in a situation though um that's a little bit unique uh just based on some things that we've been going through where we think that we can prepay or have some cash available to to do that. So one relates to the fire station public services building project. Uh we have a project surplus of around $160,000. the there's some onesie twoosy types of things that the fire station is going to, you know, have uh done related to punch list items and just kind of uh items that we want to save off of the capital. They wanted an extra dryer, for example. So, uh they can get that gear dry more efficiently. So, $1,000 here there, etc. Um we can't just transfer that money kind of anywhere. It has to go back to the debt service fund. So, if you think of you have a if you have your own account where you're going to pay off like a car loan, um it has to go to that account that pays off that loan. Um the other part when we borrow this money, we're required to levy 105% of the cost of that individual debt service. So, we borrow a million dollar. We get a chart that says, "Okay, uh your payment is going to be $100, but we're required to levy 105%. So, we have to levy $105." So, that is how it starts out, but through uh whether assessments come in or interest is gained through the course of that uh debt service account, it can accumulate more funds than you need. obviously because you're collecting 105%. Um so although you start off levying for that by a review of ABDO which is our auditor and Northland our financial advisor, you can go through a process where you review those accounts and often times you you know you're often set up to have a surplus in those debt service accounts. And so adding that $160,000 will put us in a position where we'll have eventually have a surplus in that account. So, what we're proposing on on this account is to rather than make our regular debt service payment because we know we have a $160,000 cash infusion into the account that we reduce our our levy by that same amount which which is actually probably less than that 160. But also, I'm doing that similar review on some other accounts 2015 A and the 2019 uh it should be B. I have at AB, but um we have basically one-time money that you could use to uh accumulate money to pay for those professional services. Um if you remember about 6 months ago, we had a similar uh case that we ended up transferring some money to the street maintenance fund because there was excess in that that account. Um so you could do that. Um, the kind of cautionary tale with that is if you divert that money to somewhere else on a one-time basis, I think I gave the example here. Um, so we have about $382,000. If you said, you know what, we don't have to pay that. Let's just do a $382,000 general levy like decrease when we come back into 2027 and it's not available. you automatically then have to add a 382,000 next year. So, um I would offer that there are two considerations you can make. One, you use it for onetime funds. Or two, you could spread it out over a number of years and say, you know, we're going to reduce the debt levy by, you know, spread out that 185 over the next 10 years, 18,000. Is that right? Close. >> But you could >> about 33%. I mean, you you could kind of evenly lad it throughout the remainder of the debt service. Um, we're offering as a way to kind of generate cash uh for these professional services to frankly put less pressure on our finance system to uh actually do a bond issue for a bigger project that this is something that you uh could consider. So, I know that's a lot um to share. So, I just want to pause here and see if there are any questions or anything I can be more clear on >> questions. Um, can I back up just >> Oh, I'm sorry. I wasn't even looking back to something else. >> No, I I'm looking at Eric, but it looks like you're still formulating your question. >> I'm still formulating what >> Sorry, I like Sorry. Um, if we go back to the current plans everybody here, when we're looking at the cover station where the roof it I know this is a little bit out there, but what are we? >> This is current. >> Um, if we're not going to Is that the current one? Cuz that only has 12 million in for the public services building. >> This is the current. Okay. >> The next one is the proposed. >> Got it. >> This is just about the conversation ref. I mean, are we looking ahead to even keeping that? I mean, what are we've got a big chunk of land up there that's sitting? I know we haven't made any choices about whether we want to go and you know, look at the transit taxing district or not, but when we're looking out, I think this is a small amount of number compared to everything else that we're looking at. But when we're looking at cost, I mean, are we going to even have carver station? >> To be honest, I don't think that's the portion of this that we're looking at. I think we're looking at years one to two and potentially three and four, but I think like that's so far in the future that >> Okay, we'll just >> I mean concerns on the rad. >> Maybe the short answer is we plan for it until we have a reason not to plan for it. So if >> the city sells it or we do something different with it, then we take it off. But if we know within the framework of this 10 years that at 20 years a roof needs to be replaced, then we put it on the calendar. My other kind of out there thought about that is if that let's say that we decide we don't is there can we sell that property up there if we or is it tied up in any state legal wise because we used a grant for it. That's just a big chunk sitting there. >> Yeah, there are strings attached. I'm we're not prepared to like tell you all what those are. >> Um but it was originally acquired with federal funds. Those were defederalized, but uh Mandot is still involved. So um there'd be the last time we checked there there needs to be a relationship between the use and transit um >> forever like >> that I don't know. Um but if there is a at one point there was a mechanism for like clawback of like grant proceeds being paid back. Um but as you can imagine I mean this is a project that's 10 years old. Um it's and then working with MINDOT to try to understand that. So we can certainly dig into that but it'll it'll probably take 3 to six months to have a clear picture of what that means. She can add that to >> Yeah, I think again this doesn't all pertain to this, but if we look at the price of per acre property up there, >> um, and it's something where we decide we don't want to go to the transit taxing district, and now what are we going to do? We have a big parking lot that we maintain that we have a building. Is it worth it? Is it something we can sell and use that as an as an income for the city as we have all this money going out of the city? So, just something to >> model around. Yep. I would be curious about what those covenants and things are as well. >> We'll get at after that. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Um let's direct the discussion a little bit more towards kind of that question that Brent ended up with as far as like what we want to do with this proposed debt levy and the two options that he just outlined. >> Have you formulated your question yet? Do you need another descriptor? Because it took me a couple of times when I talked to Brett about the first So I mean it seems logical. What if we didn't do that? What are we are we risking anything by following that plan? >> Uh in >> where does the money go if we don't do that? >> Right. So if you if you don't do it, if you just levy based on the schedule, like when when the debt service closes, when you've paid in full, uh for example, you could you'll have like on the 2019 bees, you'll have somewhere in the 185 to $200,000 of excess funds that will need to be transferred out of that fund to anywhere you desire, but it's going to happen at the conclusion of that project. Um this is an opportunity to instead of waiting for those savings or that excess funds to occur at some end future end date >> uh you can use them now and so it's more of a I would say it's more of a strategy question than a risk question >> is and those dollar amounts we're sure that that's the surplus. Uh there's some additional like work you know that we'll you know do I mean the on the 2019B and 2015 A uh Northland Tammy Homd Doll did the financial analysis and gave some scenarios and so these are actual numbers. Could they will they be tweaked over the course of time? Yes, but not significantly. Uh the 149 250 is what we know today. So that number is going to fluctuate on the fire station uh project, but um because I I would say like this isn't something that we normally do. We Lyn and I met with Steve McDonald about a month ago and I just kind of reviewed kind of the general strategy. Um and he was fine with that. I mean, frankly, we've done this a little bit before. We've done debt service studies where we look at all of our funds and say, "Okay, are we going to be ahead or behind on this?" Um, we're never behind because we're out, you know, we always levy for that 105%. Um, there are situations where if uh it could occur where you have a street reconstruction project and a bunch of property owners prepay their assessments, so you don't get that interest coming in. um then you could have a shortfall, but that uh is infrequent and doesn't align with what we're seeing uh here. >> And this is all for the professional services, correct? >> It I mean it's a strategy to pay for that in partly in cash. Correct. >> Got it. >> I'm in favor of the option that doesn't leave us a shortfall in next year's budget. >> I agree. Yeah, I think what looks will look really great uh then the next one will look really shocking Pennywise and pound foolish. >> Yeah. for you. >> Um, if we had the option, I would really I'd feel more comfortable seeing the um if there's going to be a surplus in the 2024 um fire department public services using that for professional services for that project because I think the more like advice or input we can get on like you know decisions we make with um building out a new public services building. So, you're agreeing with the strategy >> in in that like I I would rather I would like to separate it like for that line item of the three for I would if I could ear mark it for that >> and then for um the other two if we could just put it back right into our um street management, you know, street maintenance. >> Do you understand that professional services is going to be almost $800,000? Is is it for can you just go up to >> all the type of professional services or is it professional services just for fire department public services? >> No public service >> just for a new public services to take it to that >> design development. We're probably at a million dollars worth of that. So >> which I like it's I probably sound like contradicting because at first I said like we need their help. Um but will we need help with um street maintenance? Like are we >> I mean that's coming up on the next I mean we are cash flowing all those projects. If you'd add those two you could do more um more is typically better but it's it's a matter of strategy. If you choose to move that to street maintenance, um what you'd be that's a strategy then we'd have to figure out some financing to fund the professional services or just offering the scenario where on street maintenance. We don't have to create financing for that because the plan is already set up to be funded. this um as a culture like I need less advice or like input on the street maintenance because it's like oh we could just like drive around or like we kind of have you know feed on the street eyes you kind of see what's needed but if there's a possibility that that's not the right way to go or like there's a professional services that can say you know we actually have a better prediction for you or like here's where we see a cost going up I would rather keep that >> I hear you funds there but >> I think I'm under like so when I say professional services it's not uh they're not giving advice but they'll do think of like Aaron Schmidt's role when you want to do a street project they have to do u survey work and uh geotechnical where they do soil borings and they prepare like the official plans and so that takes hundreds of hours to do. So you're what you'd be doing with this million dollars is you're going to be paying a group of engineers and architects to prepare plans for a future estimates and you have enough of a plan set that you could take to the council in the community to say you'd get this for this amount. Um, so it's it's less advice even though they're advice elements and it's more so building a plan enough that we can communicate it back out to the council and the public for them to weigh in on. Okay, that that's helpful because I don't want to walk away from we should like have money set aside to like get input for the street maintenance things other than that. >> Yeah, there I mean if you would move it to street maintenance, it wouldn't necessarily be input. It would just be um you would just add kind of a cash infusion to do uh more streets earlier in the process than you had originally planned for. >> We don't see that ex um line item going up like if they're like we need to like give you. >> We're planning a $100,000 increase to street maintenance a year which we've been doing for the last four or five years probably. >> Okay. Like the biggest thing that you you'll see if you want to move forward with the strategy, you don't have to decide tonight, frankly, but let's say the debt service levy was like 900,000 last year. If you follow the strategy, the debt service levy will drop to like 550 and we'll take that 380,000 or whatever it is and move it over to the facilities capital levy. So you're just you're you're getting the same amount that you would except for instead of taking it for the debt, you're moving it to capital for for one year. So you'll notice a big change in the categories, but the bottom number will be the same. >> Okay. >> No, I don't have any concerns. >> Seems like a smart strategy to me to use those three sources of money to put towards that 798. So I'm all for it. Can I ask a question about the plan the plan year that things you have listed right at the top for 2026? So we know the land cost and then I think you talked about this. Sorry, there's a lot of information. I want to make sure right. I got it correct. Um so we're doing the turn lane in conjunction with the rest of our utilities extension to get a cheaper price on it. >> That's the goal. Yes. >> Okay. Um >> if the council supports that. >> Sure. Um, so the public services infra infrastructure for 2 million, that's not the same as that we're talking about the utilities extension, right? Or is this >> is that in addition to the utilities extension we're already doing for the >> $2 million would be in addition to the already budgeted >> utilities extension. >> The utilities extension to the southwest is like $5 million. >> This $2 million would be added to that to make it 7 million. >> Okay. to get us all the way to the >> site >> site. So, and what year are we? >> It's okay. >> So, is the two is the structure then? Because of because of the utilities extension also. >> If you would do it as a separate project, it would be higher. We No. And we were going to So, we bond for that. If you make it round it to 500,000, say 2.5 added to that 5 million, you'll bond for that. that the 5 million of that is paid through through trunk >> uh utilities and then the 25 will be through future debt service levy. >> Okay. Okay. >> I just wanted to make sure because we're not planning to build on there right away to then put out $2.5 million to put in infrastructure. But if we're getting a better price cuz obviously they're mobilized to be out there, right? Well, and if you see so like when I say plan year 26, you know, we're going to probably scratch around in the dirt a little bit, but the like the heavy lifting on that's going to be 27. And like the project, you know, if we were to get a share a completion like substantial completion, probably fall of 27. Is that accurate, Aaron? >> Yeah. So like really the soonest that you could potentially like use that is probably the spring of 28 or winter of 2728. So although you know the council hasn't kind of and there's plenty of ground to cover no pun intended to kind of get to when public services would be built. If you think about some of these pieces, um, having them in place for even 2028, which is three years from now, you have to kind of start now. And so, um, some bigger bigger steps. And I, you know, one of the things that we've talked about too is when you have a project this big, uh, sometimes it's nicer to kind of chunk it up into more bite-siz pieces, uh, because we know what the cost of the turn lanes are and and utilities for water and sewer to some reasonleness. We know how like it's going to be an 8 in water pipe or water man, etc. Uh, we don't know what the size of the building is or a lot of kind of the specifics. And so if we can take our time and kind of go through that process while getting the stuff done that's known like buying the land because we know it's only going to get more expensive and getting the utilities in under that same rationale in a larger project then you know that's a strategy for I would offer of saving money in the long run although it does create a situation where like you're committing to something it's just when that occurs is in delta at this point. >> So, what year are we going to have to start payback on this if we move forward with this? >> So, we're right now we're planning um a bond issuance about this time next year. >> So, that would fund uh three projects. Uh so, your first debt service payment would be uh levy for you budget 26, levy and 27. Uh the three projects would be that Southwest utilities extension, uh the land purchase for public services, and then uh the school district and uh the Wicked Houser family are going to be petitioning uh for a special assessment project to extend Commerce Drive. They'll pay the assessments, but we still need to borrow the upfront money. So, those three projects uh we would bring to you in July, August of 2026 for financing. >> Okay. And I know that we talked about this before, but remind me when we talked about out on will be the new public services works area not having a well septic since we're so far away from city services. Why is that not ideal? >> I think um we could probably look at the numbers again, but with the private well, if we had our own well out there, we would have to have a tank and everything big enough to have fire suppression. >> Oh, that's right. >> That's the kind of the sticky wicket. >> Okay. >> Yeah, that we can kind of flush that out. Well, we have to be enjoying all >> I'm enjoying them. >> But I think that'll be a question a lot of folks will ask and we can make sure that we spend some time kind of digging into that. [Laughter] >> I really am enjoying >> and she's expressionist plus hear it all day. >> Her and Erica look the same. But uh it'll be a question that folks will ask. But you know, Andrew hit the nail on the head. The the biggest issue is having having a tank and big enough to do fire suppression and the maintenance and kind of everything that goes into that. And that has been described to us as a budget buster, but we can uh get into those details when we have them in front of us. >> All right. I don't think it's a bad idea to have that information because that's my first, right? So, I'm I'm sure I'm not the only one who's going to come up with that question. >> Um, when we look at how we budget year toyear and um, you know, we don't want to be over 3%. Is this are all these projects and all of these payments are going to have to start coming out in the year 2027 or whatever. Is that going to are we going to not be able to meet our goal in that? >> Right. So, that's uh kind of going back to that last meeting. Think of these as all the ingredients. So, if you say, "Okay, we're fine with these ingredients going into the long-term plan," we'll we're going to and have been sending all this to Northland to update that 10-year draft. And they'll come up and say, "Okay, here's how you're doing here. This is that 3% you're meeting it here, but not here." And that will create an opportunity for the council to discuss priorities, um, objectives related to costs, um, scheduling, etc. But uh right now we're just asking for your support on whatever however you want that to be adjusted or left the same to put it into the mixing bowl and then they'll come back. But uh without them doing the analysis I could I couldn't tell you. >> Okay. >> Anybody else? So, just kind of moving forward, I'm going to throw it back over to Andrew on the Church by the River. Church by the River 2027. Um, I think there's probably still some work on our side that needs to happen. What? Um, so it says paint and I think there'll be some woodwork repairs that need to be done to the siding before we can paint it. So, I'll be working through that process, but uh so we'll be working hopefully find a good contractor that can help us out with that and narrow down that scope and budget for that. But >> Aaron, what year are we thinking park construction at that end is going to start? >> 209. >> 29. Okay. Cuz I think obviously the church by the river will be a little bit more of a focal point down there. Um, so maybe as we look through this, maybe those years should match up a little closer. Um, unless it's dire, you know, we don't want >> the repairs to >> maybe if we're doing the work down there for the park, then maybe that happens at that time instead of in 2027. enough. >> I think the goal for next year at this time when we talk about this is we've already had a contractor there >> saying this is what you should be doing >> cuz it's still in that two-year >> okay >> window. You know what I mean? >> Yep. Yeah. I don't want the building to fall apart obviously. I'm just if we're all doing big construction down there and it's something that can wait and we can do it all at once and maybe that's the right time. >> But you mean that's an example. We could certainly cuz the way that we have this sculpted is 30,000 and 26 and 45 and 27. If you said no, we'd rather see that in 29, then we would, you know, maybe split it up into different quantities and do less. So that that's valuable feedback for us as a team if you if you want to change that approach. For me, I think it's really clear that you're creating some room for the big project in 208. My only concern is it's with that being an allwood building, it can go from uh to oh my goodness, really really quickly. Um so I'd like to get a better idea of can we like can we afford to wait two years? >> True. cuz otherwise we have to add it back in later too and then it just gets bumped onto the >> you know on top of after the big the big year right >> I just have the strongest preference of not seeing it in 28 but I think that goes unsaid we're all working around that presumption >> uh what else is there >> so we I'll kind of jump back in on the facility so um this is kind of educated guesses based on the space study. So, um it's impactful to us. I'm no doubt that it's impactful to you. You know, I think if we if you really wanted to put your nose to the grindstoneone, you could um theoretically be in a position to try to construct in 27. Um but I wanted to I put it at 28 cuz I didn't want to be indelicate about it. So I put that number in. Andrew and I have shared to the architects and to the construction managers that we're talking to that, you know, we see a lot of space for that number to to move down. Just just based on Andrew and Paul and Jordan having an opportunity to kind of talk about that building at some more length. But um understanding that this is, you know, city hall was 5 million. I just wanted to get some feedback from the council. Again, you're not you're just talking about ingredients. There's an argument to be made that you should show it at 27 because then you're seeing the worst kind of good quotes, you know, the most aggressive scenario and then you can plan backwards from there. Um, but I just I wanted to get some feedback before we made any other kind of changes to this >> feedback on the number size of 35 million. We don't like it. >> I would say like uh >> so we have one that's made of straw and one's made of. >> It's >> Yeah, I mean that's that that'll be the biggest construction project we've ever had. Um but I mean we know that we're planning for something well beyond our tenure. uh for the life of the city. So, it's hard for me to put a number on your number because I do expect like all the work you just did, you know, showing how we pay for professional services, um that's probably the top end. >> You're asking more for feedback on the year and the sequencing. >> Yeah, I think the I would say like the public's like the cost is is kind of arbitrary right now because we just don't know what that is. But I would offer that if design development starts in October, I would say by like spring summer, you'll we'll have a good enough set of plans and cost estimates that we can do robust community engagement all throughout the summer and fall. And if if the council had the prerogative to say, "Okay, we've got all this. We feel like we have support for whatever this project is. You could fundamentally request plans and specs that winter and bid a project in 27. Now, do you is that like, well, we're not ready. That's way too fast. We want we want to see it for 28 or um no, we want to start we want to see what 27 what that tax impact would be. But that said, we don't we're going to use this 35 million number knowing that that could be off by millions at this point. So it's kind of >> okay. So let's talk about the year then. It's not going to cost us less in 28. So if we're ready to go in 27, don't we want to be ready to go in 27? >> That's what I'm asking you. Well, I would if we're doing the project and we can save money by getting a quote of 27 at those materials costs or whatever it is. I mean, we made some great progress on the land acquisition. We're going to talk about that in the council meeting, but I think that went really well and we're moving along. I would support being ready to go when we can get the best value. So I would support 27. >> Do you think that allows enough time as things take time when it comes to finalizing the the purchase of the land, getting the infrastructure done out to it, you know, all of those things like I mean we're half overhead over halfway through 25, you know, and then we have to go into 26 and our budgeting season, you know, starts ahead of time. So, I'm just Do we feel like it's rushing to go at 27? >> Well, we don't have to go, right? We just have to be prepared to go, >> right? >> I think all >> I think all you'd be deciding tonight is like, do you want to see what the tax impact would be at starting at 27, whether or not we can hit that target? Um, I would like unsolicited like advice. I would plan for like 27s cuz it's easier to push back than it is to push up. >> Yeah. >> And so if our plan shows 28 and for whatever reason you want to move it to 27, it creates a I think you're a little bit disjointed then from the community if someone says, "Hey, your long-term plan says 28 >> and but now you're doing 27 as opposed to if you had it in 27 and we just weren't ready." Then you pushed it back to 28, 29 or whatever that year is. >> I would like to see the tax impact for 27. I'd like to be ready if we're ready and if we're not, it pushes. But let's be prepared to go if we can and let's know the tax impact. That's my view. I have the same sentiment as uh council member pers where if it's possible in 2027 I want to move forward with it and get the t find out what the tax impact is but also knowing that and within 5 months the land acquisition will probably be finalized >> and what we can do I'm sure it'll be something we can ask Tammy but we can just to kind of give you some perspectives You know, you know, we can show some scenarios like at 20 because this is such a big piece to the overall plan. We can segregate it and say, "Okay, run 27, run 28, and run them at different values." So 35, 30, 25, give you some like three scenarios for each year. So you can kind of play around in the sandbox a little bit, kind of going through those. Then again, like what we've talked about here, the 10-year plan is just that it's not as is a plan. You're not as a council obligated to follow through with the plan. You're going to kind of see that plan in different parts and pieces in the room across the hallway and vote on those individually taking those steps. So, um you're not bound to follow the plan because as you know, we update this every year >> and so those conditions will will change. I don't see any problem in having knowing what the numbers look like. I mean, >> if we look at it, we're not voting, >> right? I mean, we look at it like, oh my goodness, absolutely. You know, there's no way. Um, then we know that at least. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> I would prefer to see the more aggressive 2027 numbers just because like you said, it's easier to push it back than it is to pull it forward. And um it's always when it comes to tax implications, worst case scenario is kind of always the best place to start from. So, I'd rather see it in 2027. >> Yeah. And I feel very similar to everybody else hearing that we can push it back, but it's harder to pull it forward, especially on a moment's notice, which like the difference between 28 and 27 would be the further on we get. Um, I think that's great. I also just want to reiterate, you kind of laid out a timeline where it could work in 27. I just want to make sure that that doesn't feel too rushed because I want to make sure that this gets ample time for public feedback. >> Right. And it right now that's it's kind of a fictitious scenario cuz um we know that generally if the council supports it, we can start design development in October. I don't know how long that process is going to be, so we're not going to rush that. Um, and based on what that is, we want to tailor community engagement based on that. I mean, uh, a couple of you have already mentioned like there'd be a great opportunity at the fire department, the city open house in the fall of 26 to kind of represent that. So, you're already like into October with community engagement. Um, and so that like that's the part we want to spend the most time with. And maybe that's just something that you'll know when you know when you feel like, okay, this has resonated. It's a conversation piece with the community. Um, you know, I it kind of makes me think a little bit about city hall. At one point, it just kind of felt like people were just kind of tired of talking about it already and just kind of build it. And it it's hard to kind of describe that in a plan like this, but point well taken. We don't want to feel rushed. We don't want to feel like someone's going to show up to like a meeting when the project has already kind of been moved forward and like asked, "I didn't know anything about this." We want to kind of get into every nook and cranny and make sure people know about this. >> We figure out the way that we can avoid that. >> All right. So I'm going to the feedback that I have is I'm going to move that up to plan year 2027 for the purposes of uh Northland's analysis. >> And then do we want to keep the source by the river then in that same year or we want to push it back then to the 20 >> flip pl. >> My only worry there is if there's some structural integrity we put at risk. >> Yeah. Uh because I agree if we're going to have everything kind of open, have this grand uh new facility downtown, we'd want everything to look its best. But I don't know enough about that structure to make a judgment if we can wait. So >> yeah, I think I mean the rest of this year and early next year we have a better picture. So, I think my suggestion would be leave it the way it is right now. And if someone tells us that there's not as much work that needs to be done on it than we think, then that's great. But if not, then we reassess. And >> you could wrap it in blue tight. I could. >> So, that's another example of easier to push back than pull forward. So, I'm comfortable keeping it in 27. >> Okay. >> Uh, I can do this one. the city hall maintenance is just a placeholder. Um we'd be at 10 years uh undefined. And so this is again the strategy of kind of building cash and you can kind of see it in the the earlier contributions kind of layout. you know, rather than saying, "Okay, we need 50,000 next year, you know, we're going to fill 10,000 a year for five years and kind of build a maintenance account, if you will, or as the mayor likes to call it, the water heater fund for uh city hall." And then I think we talked about uh the reed roof. So, I'm going to go back up to the the contributions page. Um, so that 412958, that's that onetime money plus the $30,000 for in essence the first half or 40% of the church by the river. And then 2027 is that second half. Uh 28 and 29 uh fund that 50,000 and uh undefined city hall maintenance. And then you see like kind of that lading of 10 10 and then 15's building that uh maintenance account for the regruff, but then as other things pop up with this building or other facilities that we have um we'll be able to get a better handle on it. And frankly, just like with a lot of these plans that you're probably experiencing and I know we're experiencing as we're putting together, um it's energizing and overwhelming all at the same time because we haven't done 10ear plans on parks, on facilities. Uh we have done that heavy lifting on infrastructure and we've been there for a little bit on streets. Uh but the rest of it is like we're building it and I think we're just we're going to get better and more narrowed in on what the needs are. Uh but corresponding to that is kind of building that uh seed money kind of the same following that same pattern that we use for street maintenance. You know, we were mentioning to Andrew that, you know, it wasn't that long ago, probably half a dozen years ago, we were at $40,000 a year for just every street maintenance that we did in the city. 45,000, you know, and it's fortunate that the city council supported that approach because uh there's some really um cool graphs in the street presentation that show the age of our streets and how if you don't all of a sudden you land in this like little window of time where you have all these streets to like upkeep and if you don't have that seed money, you're putting yourself in a position to do additional debt service, add additional interest on those projects. So, if there aren't any more questions, I'm going to use that as a segue into the streets uh presentation. >> No questions. If you can address it, my son wants to know why we used gray gravel instead of red gravel. Oh, the county switched from the limestone to the granite chip. Well, it's not really granite, but it's kind of granite from Morton, which is a nice technically. I used to be a geologist, so I like rocks. But >> he was really concerned because he left the road. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. He thought it was unique to the city. Oh, I thought it was hard to see the lines. >> I was going to say when any word on when striping's going to happen. >> I don't know. >> It's like you guys. >> They were sweeping. >> I know. But they might tell us something. We might have an inkling. >> We can find out. They were sweeping a lot. So, >> they were. >> Yeah. >> So, >> I'm just I'm sure everyone is as frustrated as I am not being able to see where the lines are. >> Much more room. >> Just make your own lanes. I haven't seen the problem. It was nice on the motorcycle. >> Yeah. >> I saw somebody bite it in the roundabout on a motorcycle. >> Yeah. Awesome. Awesome. >> Speaking of streets, we'll talk about our streets a little bit. Um so, >> we're going to talk a little bit about our 10-year plan. Um, one of the things that we did this year, um, the last couple weeks is we had three public services employees rate every street in town. Um, the last time that was done was what, 2020? >> And there was only one employee that did it. So now we had three scores. So every person scored the streets individually and we smashed those all together to give the every street a rating and that's kind of what we're basing our plan off of. >> So you did average it then from whatever it was. >> So the good news is um overarching story is the plan that was presented last year is very similar to this year's plan. So there wasn't a lot of change um which was great. So, our pavement management plan, you know, not only focuses on the streets that need to be reconstructed, but also guides us on maintenance activities, um, seal coats, the fog seals, crack seal, um, and then also the trails and parking lots that we have. So, our goal is to extend the pavement life. We're going to update this on an annual basis, you know, for construction costs and inflation. Um, using the numbers that Bolden Bank has seen in the industry plus what we saw on our last year's projects. Um, we're going to try to group the projects by area to every extent possible so we can tackle neighborhoods to avoid coming in there three, four, five times um, over the course of a few years. Um, and we want to complete milling overlays before we need to reclaim the entire road. >> Can I ask a question about that? Can you mill an overlay indefinitely or does the roaded eventually need a reclamation? >> So, a lot of times when you see those milling overlays, you will notice that the cracks show up faster. >> Yeah. >> Usually within the first or second year. And those are those underlying cracks that you didn't get with the reclamation. >> So the answer is you ultimately reclamation. >> I mean you could do it indefinitely, >> but you're going to be they're going to be deteriorating faster. You'll be spending more on maintenance. >> Yeah. The milling overlay the gap between them. Like right now we're targeting like year 20 for our first mill and overlay. you'll see that gap start to close, you know, and pretty soon it's non-cost effective where you're just going to want to do the reclaim and just get off brand new pavement section. >> Can I ask a question just kind of because I'm curious. You said you had three employees do it. Were anybody's ratings wildly different? >> They were actually pretty close for the street they lived on, >> but no one lived in town. I did it. Uh Paul did it. And then Wayne did it. >> Okay. >> So >> I was just curious. >> Those were the three >> the outliers, >> but they were mostly they were very similar in scores. Maybe one had one higher, a little bit lower, but >> you know, with the average it basically was right on. >> Okay. >> So we put it in the glossery just in case. >> Um hopefully we can get everyone up to we can speak the same language. Um, >> I just have to know I'm right off Malberry Lane off Green Ash says that it's poor. Isn't that a new street? I don't think we're there yet. >> No, I know. I'm just sorry. Oh, yeah. You're right. Sorry. I'm on the map. >> I'm already in that as they say. >> I will defer to Aaron to a lot of the street names because I'm not >> I gota up to speed. Yeah, >> I'm ahead of the game here. >> All right. So, here's our funding. Um, so 2026 will be 620. Then it bumps up to 720, 770. It kind of plateaus there for the street maintenance fund. Street aid fund staying steady at 350. I think that gets adjusted annually. >> Yeah. So, that's I wanted to do that conservatively. Hopefully, the state funding will continue to appreciate over time, but for now, we just left left it as a constant because it is a guarantee. So, Okay. Um, let's get into the fun stuff. So, our top five lowest ranking roads was Ramsey Court, Bluff Road, Carver Creek Place, Mount Hope, and the South portion of Lylewood Parkway. And those are kind of the corresponding years right now as the plan uh when they're going to be addressed. So, our rating system, you can kind of look at this that really show up great. Um, but you know, nines and tens, new construction, recent overlay, they look like new. All the way down to one severe stress that's barely a paved road, now it's like a gravel road. Um, I don't think we had any ones or twos. It was mostly like threes and fours. So, here is when Aaron threw in all our numbers. So, I guess the biggest thing I would say is, you know, the green streets are good. The yellows are okay, the oranges and the reds are the ones that we want to go after. Um, kind of see the newer neighborhoods are a little bit more green. the streets, the streets that got done last year and the years previous, they're still holding up. Um, so really we're focusing our attention to the Carver Bluff neighborhood. Um, we should have turned those ones that we're going to do this year green, but >> next year it's going to look real nice down there. >> Um, >> any questions, Christie? >> I think I do. >> So, geologist, >> I know what you're >> former GIS person. Um, yes. So, so that one is rated poor, but I don't >> we should have left it off. >> Okay. >> Because it only had one lift. >> Okay. >> So, if they had one lift, uh, like some of the new streets out west, we didn't rate because they're either not our streets yet or we're not they don't have a second lift on. >> So, that one probably should have just been left off. >> Andrew, can you clarify what you mean by lift? >> So, there's multiple layers of pavement. >> Okay. So there's a first lift. So you'll see that lip on the curb when you're driving around those new neighborhoods. >> They'll eventually put that second lift on when they're mostly done with construction >> to get that in there. >> Uh >> mostly um uh Mount Hope, I'm glad to see that was on 2026. I have had a lot of complaints from residents about that. Um, and so I'm I really of of all the thing the ones that are on here, that's the one that I get contacted about the most is in Hope and it's such a major collector for us, too. So, um, >> so that one >> and is that going to be >> when we get to funding? That one's not funded through our >> local street maintenance state. >> That's state. So, that is a goal for sure. For sure with the state aid, >> we get state aid contributions every year, right? So, >> okay. So we I mean we have to wait to make sure that that comes in or >> we build the fund over time. So it's not a matter of cash. >> Okay. The hope is good to go for sure. Like we're going to do it. >> The council has to vote on it. >> Moneywise though everything is there if the council says yes. >> Correct. >> Excellent. Um okay. that Malbury was the one hope my comment and >> so my question is about Ramsay and Ramsay Court and Road so down in the bluffs. Um yeah, those residents are getting very vocal. Um, when I was talking to them, they've I I don't know the history of the maintenance in that area, but they seem to think that they have been told every year that next year it's going to happen and it never happens. Is that an accurate statement? Has that been has that project been pushed in the past? >> Um, we pushed I think we pushed one of the roads last year. Um, one program year. It's it was already a reclaim. I can't remember which one it was specifically. Um Ramsey, it was a piece of Ramsey Avenue. >> Okay. >> Last year, but the plan in general has been consistent year-over-year. >> Yeah. I I would only add to Erin's comments that uh the council and I forgot the origin, but there was some I think it was some bid savings, but the council authorized some additional mill and overlay work that wasn't scheduled. So, I would offer that the neighborhood is further along than what it was originally planned because the council's moved out. But it all that said, the under normal circumstances, we wouldn't want streets to get this far gone. I mean, we've lost a couple uh I think they'll get into it up to um reclamation. Uh but this is the product of not having a plan in place for many years. And now that we do, it'll be nice to have this neighborhood done. >> Yeah. Yeah. Because there the I hear a lot about Mount Hope. That's one residents both that live on it and that don't have vocal concerns about that one. But the other one that I hear about a lot is the Ramsy. Um and and my the concern I keep hearing from that I kept hearing from them was that they feel like when they talk to the city, the city says it's next year and then it never gets done. Yeah, though I've talked to one resident uh a couple times related to Bluff Road and we've had a pretty consistent date, >> but there's sometimes there is kind of a communication gap on what they might remember. You know, we have some emails related to like, hey, this is what we're planning to do. >> Uh what what are the streets that we have for 25 >> because the Ramsay is not pushed. Ramsey is scheduled for 27, which is why I was asking >> the reclamation is 27. in the plan. >> So 2025 we're doing Carver Bluffs Parkway and then the roads on the south side of Carver Bluffs Parkway right through there. >> Yep. >> So that'll be green after this year. >> Mhm. >> Okay. So it's Ramsey Avenue will be 2027 and >> and those roads to the >> We wanted to start with >> Yeah, we can. Those that might just be the best. Yeah, this is the current plan >> and then this is the proposed plan. So, let's >> by year >> 26 Ridgerest Wood View Ramsey Lane Carver Creek Place >> north and south along with Mount Hope. >> So, Carver Creek moved to a reclaim. That was based on the result of our findings this summer. >> Yep. >> And then the only actual shift in plan year was overlook. >> Mhm. >> Which is kind of that standalone piece. >> Yeah. >> And we thought that would align nicely with the southwest. >> Finishing up that. >> Yep. That'll kind of come together at the same time. >> Makes sense. >> So that's 26. 27 is basically finishing up that Carver Bluff neighborhood. Um, and the overlooks and then Lylewood Parkway, the south section of that on that steep hill. Um, that could be a >> Can you go back up? >> Alternate next year hopefully. >> Um, oh no, curve. Never mind. I thought maybe one of the overlooks was supposed to be a reclaim, but it was the Carver Creek that got changed to a reclaim. >> Yeah. Okay. So, Erin, that changed then, right? Because those were milling overlays. >> Yeah. >> Before when they were 26, they were going to be guided. That makes sense. I get it. >> And can you share for the council like the cost differential between will and overlay and reclamation because that's significant. Yeah, it's I I know I've said it in the past, but it is about twice as much money as a million to make that switch in a >> Well, it's good to know. I you know, I get complaints in my neighborhood about this. The messaging will be yes, it's delayed a year, but it's a complete reclamation and it'll improve the road quality significantly. We won't see cracks develop >> like you said as quickly. >> So, like we've said, it's always we we want to do the mill and overlays. We want to get there as soon as we can. It's not that we're deferring it just because it's literally it's a cash flow decision. >> It's hard. Like I understand where residents are coming from though because they feel like their road is worse so it should be seen first >> and it is worse. They're going to get a it's an entirely new road. So I thought that story. >> It's already gone. >> Your road is always the worst, right? >> Well, if I had done this earlier >> No, but but I I get it from a resident standpoint. and your road is in worse shape than your neighbor's road and your neighbor's getting a million overlay this year and you're not getting looked at for another year or two. >> That's a really tough cell without the explanation behind it. >> And I think too when what Brent was saying it's >> it's hard for the resident to understand possibly because they see what's in their neighborhood, right? The Bluffs has been here 20 25 years and not a lot has been done up there for the streets, but now we have all the other streets. So, we can't just say, "Okay, Bluffs, you get everything brand new." Well, >> all of all of the rest of the streets, you know, get no attention. We have to kind of sprinkle it around. So, but I get it. Like, those roads are old up there. They are for sure. Okay, let's get back to >> So, this is getting to the age portion. This is the age of every square yard payment that's in town. So, um, just kind of an interesting graph to see these are probably the Carver Bluff neighborhood out here. Um, you know, you see what new construction does to you. You start adding these bars in the larger developments. Sometimes they get to be very big. Um, this could also be coupled with a payment rehab that got done that year, too. So, this this isn't just that road's never been touched before. is includes the last time it got mil and overlay to reclaim. And then the blue line is just to highlight that in 2025 we're going to pick off about 20,000 square yards of payment rehab. So some of those bars are 70,000 square yards. So that would take three years to break up that chunk. Um so sometimes we get that pig and a python type look at some of these. I think what's really cool with this, >> you're very proud of him right now, are you? [Laughter] [Music] >> But I think our payment management plan is a lot of fun to put together. It's a lot of cool data that we can present. Um, and as we get better at maintenance, crack sealing, staying on top of some of the other maintenance projects, you know, our goal is to make things last longer. And Carver is blessed with good soils, too, in some areas that a lot of towns don't have um are that fortunate. So, we have the opportunities to be successful. So, we just have to stay on top of it and use our maintenance budget when we have it available to us. So that's kind of the >> Okay, have a quick quiz number. So what's the 31 year? Which is which street is that? >> What's our oldest street? >> 31. >> Must be my flower. >> I know. I just So >> that's downtown. >> It's downtown somewhere. >> Yeah, I think it's over there. So >> thank you. >> Call me Rainman. >> We reconstructed all the streets down here. >> Millan overlays. >> Well, this is Milan. >> These count. The Millan overlays count. I'll look up what the 31 Yeah, we don't need it at the very site, but I would love to know cuz >> Oh, I thought you said program year 2031. >> You're asking what's >> Okay. >> Yeah. I just wanted to make one more point on that graph. I think that was a really good thing Andrew put together. >> And just look at the the black lines on the left side of that page. >> And with the development that we see coming up, >> there's going to be a lot more black lines that are going to be scrolling to the right of our screen as time progresses. >> Big black. Yeah. So, I think you're doing a really good thing and I I think just as much as we can think about this in that as time goes on, those lines aren't going to go away. So, we need to make sure we're trying to maximize as much as we can, which I know you're doing, but we we got to be really diligent about that as as time progresses. So, that's all I wanted to say. Thank you. Yeah. So, that's kind of pretty much what the projects were last year. They're very similar to what they are going to be um moving forward. And I think us finding out that it only takes like 3 days to rate all the streets, we should be able to do it on maybe an every other year type basis so we can stay up on it um and give good data to Aaron so he can run the numbers and put their nice maps together and keep us in a good spot. So that's kind of where we're at. If there's any other specific questions, we can try to answer them for you. I have a few. I think I think they'll be really quick specific questions. So, with our uh pavement management plan, including trail and city parking lots, I don't see any or Oh, you're scrolling up and not an answer for today, but in the future, I would like to see, you know, what >> There we go. what you're planning for trails and parking lots. Um, as and then is it just paved or what about the huge gravel? Um, and before you answer that, I have to give like huge credit like there's been a lot of fallen trees lately. >> Yeah. >> And um, your team is doing a great job clearing them off the trails. >> Yeah. It seems like the nights that there's not much wind, we get calls and then those mornings that we're expecting a lot of calls, there's not too many. So, >> there's been a good amount of trees that had to be cleared. So, >> okay. I hate to go backwards. I have one more when you're done. >> Um, what about the uh unpaved trails? >> Just so that we don't get into a situation where we just kind of >> lost track and all there's a huge erosion problem. Just >> that's a good question. Um then I don't think it's really addressed in this plan but >> okay then for a future conversation the pavement management plan the unpavement [Music] >> but I mean we're talking about trails they're kind of the same >> thing. Yeah. >> So >> okay and that the trail part leads into so when we're looking back at the map of um the ratings map. So when we look at Broadway, Broadway ends as a street and turns into a trail. And that looks on this map like it's a full street, >> right? >> So future maps, we want to cut that short then to where the actual road section ends. >> Yep. >> Um >> it's a trail. I I drive on it. >> It's a road all the way up. >> I think on this >> Can you go to this one though? >> The trail one. The trail one is correct. The road one is not. >> It's my favorite. >> Yep. I think there's a discussion on how what that road >> Yeah. >> how that functions in the future, what it looks like, how wide is it. >> Okay. >> But >> okay, moving on. Okay, good. Um, let's see. Do you want to start? Do we want to do city manager report? >> I probably can't get done in seven minutes. >> Okay. uh city manager report. Correct. >> I'm gonna throw it over to Brenda. Good if you want to hand this to her. So the >> I'll take the chapter too. >> We contract with uh Civic Plus for our website. And so they're offering as a part of our contract a website uh refresh. So Brenda is just going to run through some early design options for the council to take a look at. While she's getting that set up, just want to kind of remind you that uh the council is going to be looking at the first draft of the general fund budget at your next meeting. So Lyn and I are working on finishing touches for that. Um but then in addition you'll have your uh parks uh utilities infrastructure and equipment I think all at the meeting on the 18th too. So pretty heavy work session agenda. >> Brenda. >> All right. So Natalie and I have been working with Civic Plus uh since the beginning of the year and as Brent mentioned every four years they do a website refresh with their customers. That's part of the annual contract included in that. So, here's a picture or a a shot of our current website. And then here is what they've come up with um for redesign. Uh so, color scheme um and layout is part of what they they help us with. Um we have the full option to change pictures. Um if you refresh websites, a lot of times the pictures will change on there. Of course, it didn't expected it to, but we have several pictures in there and um you know, those can be changed at any time. We just gave them some to work with. Um they've softened up the buttons a little bit, made them bigger, and changed some coloring on that. Um and then they've generally just added some coloring, a little bit more coloring to the website. These are our news flashes that we have out there. Um, we've made the containers a consistent uh size across all. Um, you can click and view all news there. Get a quick easy one. We were able to choose a design component. And so we chose this one here. It's um called something. It's an extra content feature. Um, so we still need to build this out, but um, as an example, we've got our resident info and then we can just highlight um, things for that. Um, this won't switch, but for utility billing, we might have the start service, stop service, why is my water high, why is my usage high, and some of those resources out there. And then >> or why is my rate low? >> Yes. Yeah, we could that. So, >> a big button. >> Yes. Yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> So, do we have what the mobile view is of this? Because that's really important. >> Yes. So, um I'm just going to show you a quick page interior page. So, it's just got the city of Carver logo here. Um >> you know, we all know social media is where people find some information, too. So, we've moved that to the top. It's got some rounded edges, etc. So, it's a good opportunity for us to also kind of just redesign on our end things that aren't like part of a major update, but um >> they are be used to deage the city council. perhaps limbs threads. And then one of my favorite things, >> one of my favorite things is the mobile app. So Erin was able to pull that up with her. >> Perfect. >> Um, and if you scroll down those buttons, um, we made no changes to those. We sure could. But if you continue scrolling, events and highlights, that's our news flashash. And then that resident info, um, where they can click on any of that. And then if she continues on like then they could click on the utility billing permits or the connect. >> Love it. >> I like it. >> Colors the blue and green like the exact blue and green from our logo. >> Um I'm we're going to check on that because they weren't and then we requested that they are and I'm still like a little unsure if they are or not. Do you prefer that they be the same? Yes, that's what I found. >> Visual identity consistency. Um, Erin, do you mind scrolling down just a little bit? >> Are you okay with like a blue offsetting our green? >> I think it looks just fine. Looks great. >> Yeah. I have one question though. Will this clear up some of our um I guess link to links? Like if I go to meetings and events right now, it links me to a page and then I have to click another page to get to the agenda and agendas and minutes. Will any of that get cleaned up in here at all? >> Um, it depends. I mean, that's good feedback and I could clean that up, but if you go to the bottom of the page and click on the um watch city, go up a little bit more, >> down a little more >> there. If it just is watch city meetings, it takes you right to it. >> To it. Okay. >> But are you going through the calendar? Is that what you're doing? >> No. When I go on like my laptop at home or whatever, then when I go to click on I would have to I'll show you how it does. And there's like an extra page that you have to page. >> I can try. >> Okay. Okay. >> All right. That's what did you get what you need from us? >> Yeah. If you have any feedback specifically, but I think we're we're ready to roll it out. Um probably Well, we have a meeting on Thursday with them to kind of give them the thumbs up. >> Roll it out. It looks good. >> It's funny because I thought it was perfect the way it was, but now that they redid it, I'm like, "Oh, yeah." Is it funny how it changes? You're like, "Oh, this is great. We just did this." And then you're like, "Oh, wait. >> It's been a couple years now." >> Oh, take. >> Awesome. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> Good work. Is that it? Okay. Uh, any council requests? >> I guess my only one is I'll just reiterate that we maybe get those um not maybe that we get those costs on what it is uh up at the the bus station there. Not the cost, sorry. Whether or not we would be able to sell uh land up there because of the grant and things like that. So, because for me, you know, I stated really briefly, but we do have some maintenance that'll have to happen up there, but if we decide not to go any further with any transit, we also have are the owners of a big old parking lot that's not connected to a city building. It's not connected to any other businesses or functions. So, maybe there's something to look at there. >> And I think we've talked about this before in the context of fixed route transit going away, kind of figuring out a deeper d I think they're all a good time for the conversation on all of them together. >> That's awful. >> Probably won't be able like we'll work on it right away, but it might take a just a bit because of Mindot and >> that is just have to dig into their old uh agreements that were filed in 2015 or 14, etc. So, >> we're in budgeting season. It's not like we don't have enough on our agenda >> because we're I mean I don't >> but very good. >> Yeah. Okay. Thank you. All right. Uh if there's nothing else, I'd entertain a motion to adjurnn. >> I'll make a motion to adjurnn. >> Motion by council member pushman. >> Second. Stay here for a second by council member. All those in favor say I. >> I oppose the same sign. Motion passes.