Hi. I do really skip the top. >> Oh, no. >> I just want to make sure we get done with so we don't >> Okay. Scooter to the second meeting. >> Okay. Okay. We'll have you in between then. >> Okay. Nope. The second one, right? >> Yeah. We'll have Lingo first and then we'll do Chrissy. Okay, sounds good. There's so much dad clinging in my life. I can't take it. Stuck like this. >> Shirts are stuck with this one. One bad sweep of this arm and like I could like >> [laughter] [gasps] >> Oh, probably. >> Sorry. >> Two. >> Nope. >> Is anyone else coming? Otherwise, should be someone. [snorts] Sh. No talking. I know. [laughter] >> Brennon, you got my order right at the last minute. >> We have everybody's orders. They've been placed and I'm going to guess first week in March is what they're anticipating until they order and get them in. So, >> very efficient this year. She's [laughter] quite tardy on getting mine in. So, thank you. >> All right, it's 5:30. I will call the work session to order. Up first, we're going to be talking about water meter technology. Shy and Mr. Simmons. All right. Thank you, Mayor and Council, um, for letting us talk about the advanced metering infrastructure. Uh, we were scheduled at the end of 2025 and I needed to get some more information in front of you. So, uh, thank you for letting me reschedule. Um, so tonight we're going to be talking about advanced metering infrastructure. Um, and it will be on the 2026 CIP. So, the the goals for tonight are to leave with a better understanding of what is AMI to learn the difference between the current meter reading technology that we have right now and AMI. uh to revisit the capital plan and then what would be the timeline if we were to implement and then to receive some council direction. So what is AMI? Advanced metering infrastructure is an integrated fix fixed network system that enables two-way communication between a utility and its customers. So think of how Excel Energy or Centerpoint Energy is currently reading um your utilities and getting your readings. So that's how this would be used. Um water usage information is collected in real time eliminating the need for manual reads. Um and then the network communicates from something called a flexet base station. Um we could call it like a smart point that runs on a primary licensed FCC frequency that would only be assigned to us. Um and these flexet base stations are usually placed in a high point in the city. Um, so usually it's a water tower. So benefits of AMI, I'll go over some and then I'll pass it over to Andrew. Um, so billing accuracy, billing accuracy reduce, it's we're going to be reducing the need for estimated reason readings because of feeling meters. You can set up alerts. Um, if there's a meter that's not reading, uh, the city can do that. Um, so if there's a a meter that's not reading at any point during the month, uh, we can set up a alert and let us know, hey, there's an issue with this meter. Um, rather than waiting until the readings come in, come back, um, we download them into the computer and then we get a no um, a report that's called a no read report. Um, leak detection. The system will detect unusual consumption patterns and send an alert to city staff. Um so if somebody you know is watering their lawn or they have a a leak in their irrigation system and so you can set um parameters for these types of unusual consumption patterns and then u moving forward once we hand this software over to the users they can do the same. U right now if somebody has a leak we don't find out about it until after we read the meters they get their bill and sometimes you know it could be a month and a half before we find out about it and now that leak could still be going on somewhere. Um, a really leaky toilet could leak somewhere around 10,000 to 30,000 gallons a month. Believe it or not, that's a really leaky toilet. And sometimes you think about company that comes over, they go downstairs and they use the downstairs bathroom. You haven't used that downstairs bathroom in a year. That toilet sticks open and you don't go down there, you don't hear it. And now you've gone through 30,000 gallons of water. And it happens. I've triaged some of these calls. So, >> one of those calls. >> Do we set the like the the alarm alert limit so if you get to a certain amount then it'll like we can decide that >> we certainly could. Okay. >> Yeah. And I don't know a ton about the software so I'm going to probably try and steer you away from that part of it tonight. But um I think there are a lot Andrew probably. But you could say you could say like if >> cuz we don't want we don't want any more alerts than we we need, right? Cuz you don't want to respond to everything. But uh some of them what other people do is they say, "Okay, if someone uses like let's just say 300 gallons for a number of consecutive hours, then we get alerted." >> Okay? >> So, you know, like during your normal day, you using stuff in your house, it wouldn't alert. But if it continues for an extended period of time then we would get an alert. >> Okay. I was just curious about the threshold of that. So when you know when it starts to alert but it is real time then. So whatever that gets set to comes to you then you can contact the owner before you leave the building. So I guess >> absolutely before the end of the day. >> Okay. And when you're saying we're setting these parameters is it we the city or we the resident? >> Yeah. So we the city. >> Okay. Yeah. Yeah. So we're going to we're going to be we don't like to get those calls anyway. So um I think in the beginning before we would roll out any sort of like software for the um residents we want to make sure that we know how the software works and so we would be setting those thresholds as well. >> And on the cons consumer side there would also be able to set those limits. So if you say at your house that you want to use 10,000 gallons for the month and you want to alert when you get to eight. Okay. >> Then you will be alerted and you can say, "Okay, I need to change my habits the last 27 days of the month or >> you know, so you got >> so people are able to, I guess, take control of their own usage rather than being surprised." >> I mean, at my house, I don't use a lot of water, >> so I don't really care what the water bill is when it comes. I just pay it and move on. But some people if they have I don't have teenagers yet or whatever. So you know as that goes up and down people are >> well lawn watering too in the summer that' be helpful to know like oh I've hit my limit I guess >> I can dial it back or whatever. I just want to be clear because that's a more advanced function of these systems to extend it to the end user. >> So capable of doing that capable of end user entering in their parameters. We're not going to launch it with that, but when we decide to flip the switch, is there any additional software or module or anything we have to buy to enable the end user interface? >> Yep. Yep. And I can, you know, go over that um in detail later if you want. And I do have a invoice the quote here in detail if you want me to go over that cost. Um so reduced operating costs. So, it would eliminate the manual meter readings. When I talk about manual meter readings, it's um staff going around in their trucks and driving around every street in Carver. And some of the streets they have to go down uh twice because they have to get really close to certain houses depending on where their meter is placed um just because they can't get a read the first time. And then office staff also spends quite a bit of time. They have to load this handheld, then they have to download the readings. And so there's quite a bit of a process that goes into these um monthly meter uh bill preparations. Um and then we estimated about 150 calls per year inquiring about water usage um or high bills. So Ashley, our utility billing and finance technician, has been out, she was out all last week and so I've been triaging a lot of the calls and which has been nice because I don't get to do that a lot. Um and I've had some tough ones. Uh, one in particular, the gentleman the usage went from about 8,000 gallons a month to 31,000 gallons. And so immediately there's something wrong with his meter. Of course, the water didn't go through his meter. So, it's it's really hard to triage that kind of a situation because you want to help the customer, you want to help the resident, but you also need to figure out what happened. But when we don't have any sort of technology to tell us at what point in the last month and a half that happened, we're just we're throwing darts. So, it's sending the utility guys out there. You know, I spent time triaging um going through options of checking toilets, going and re reading his meter for me to see how much he's used now in the last two weeks since we read meters. Um so, I'd say we probably spent I don't know 5 hours on that. Um, >> I mean it takes time for you to take the call, talk to people. Um, and then you got to talk to Jordan or utility staff. They got to go out, read the meter, try to get the data from that, analyze the data, and then you got to, you know, talk back to them or, you know, call them back. >> Um, with this system, Ashley would be able to pull up their account online. Um and then they can with the meter upgrades you'll be actually see down to the gallon rather than to the thousands of gallons which we are right now. So every time there's a little check mark on the meter it's a thousand gallons not a gallon right? So it kind of gets tough to interpret some of that data when you're looking at such a coarse view. But when you get into a finer view, you're able to see things um and say your water softener is regening six times at 3:00 a.m. or whatever. And they're able to figure that out. >> Yeah. on our end. You know, selfishly, what it would be super nice for our utility to have is better control of or better knowledge of our water usage. You know, as we continue to grow, we're going to be adding a lot of water related assets, wells, treatment plants, and the better information we have on our actual usage, the better the engineers can design our system to fit our needs and you know what the future is going to bring. So right now when we are looking at what we pumped for the year, we can we know what we pumped, but what we sold goes from the middle of December of the previous year to the middle of January. So there's kind of this weird uh we don't have it exact. Can't marry it up perfectly. But with this, we could set up our own reads and just click a button just for us um and know exactly how much people are using. >> And then finally, increased customer engagement. We talked a lot about that. Um AMI would empower customers to monitor [clears throat] their consumption and educate water conservation with the addition of the customer portal. Um, as council member Conrad was talking about irrigation, I mean, that's a great example of people just being aware of how much water they're using while they're irrigating their lawns in the summertime. Um, or how much it how much water they're using when they're filling up their pool or different things like that. So, I think it, you know, educating residents when they can actually see it, um, when it's physically happening rather than a month and a half later and then they're upset about a high water bill. self. Um, so Drivey Reads is our current system. So that handheld device you see on the left with the green, that is our exact device that, um, Ashley will load all of the addresses at the city of Carver into. And then she hands it back to the public service utilities technicians and they drive around the entire city. Um, and it communicates with something called an MXU, a meter transceiver unit. and that sends the information back to that device. Um, we're currently using census water meters. So, they're installed all across the city. Um, census water meters are sold to us by a company called Corin Mane and we've been using them I I don't even know forever. Um, so they're installed in all of the Carver homes and buildings and the water when it moves through the meter that's what gets charged on the utility bill. So, a lot of times when customers do call and they say, "There's got to be something wrong with my meter." I'm happy to investigate it for them, but we always say whatever moves through the meter is what you actually used, unfortunately. Um, so we have to charge you for what you used unless we can prove otherwise. So, um, and technically we hear when a meter starts to die, the reading slows down and it doesn't speed up unless it's a faulty meter of some sort. So what's the difference between the driveby and then the AMI um flexet smart utility? So as I spoke about before a base station would be mounted on a high point in the city which would be a water tower and then with a push of a button the city office staff would would transmit that signal which is special to us using the FCC frequency and it would come from those same devices that are already installed the MXUS. Um and then it would send that signal back to the to the technology um the software that we have installed here at the city. Um there are about 500 I pearl meters that would need to be upgraded um in order to read to the gallon and a water meter swap takes about 30 minutes. Um so our staff have volunteered to um if if this is approved well actually these meters need to be upgraded anyway. So, we're going to slowly start upgrading these meters because they more than likely aren't reading accurately. They're still alive and they're still reading, but more than likely they they aren't reading as accurately as we would like them to. Um, so the goal would be to replace these eventually. They're old. Um, and so once these are these 500 are upgraded, then they can reach to the gallon. Um, we also have about 800 MXUS. That's that wire you see coming out of that beigish box um that need to be upgraded um in order to transmit the signal to the flexet station. Is it correct to assume that these are probably in the older homes in our community? >> That would be correct. So painting in broad brush strokes. Is it the bluffs? Is it Midtown Carver and downtown? >> Downtown is a lot of them. >> The Bluffs. Andrew has them all mapped out. >> Okay. Just for clarification, when these things age and they start not reading accurately, that's usually an under reporting. >> Correct. >> Is my experience. Correct. >> Yes. >> Just wanted to clarify that for people that might think they're >> getting negatively impacted. It's usually the opposite. It's usually under reporting. Okay. >> Correct. I was kind of wondering the same too and just if we need to be care you know be sensitive to the messaging that or maybe if we have an idea of like typically it's you know maybe not more than 5% or not more than 10 like you know do we have any data points to say we know it's not as precise but it's typically under or if it's over we're not seeing you know whatever that is fill in the blank just so people don't start making up scenarios. Yeah, I can check the main. I don't know the exact amount. >> I don't want the perception that >> Oh, they're running inaccurate. >> They're dying >> when they're like running out of life expectancy. >> Yeah, cuz they do have batteries in them. Um, >> so I thought of a question for Andrew, too. How do you know that like you slowly see it over like a 6 months or within like 6 weeks? >> The older the older meters have moving parts like these new meters it like does it make? >> No. [laughter] >> So like like the new meters that have been being installed like these aren't like these aren't like brand new meters, right? The meters that we've been putting on houses for the last 5 years are this I pro meter. Um but they don't have any moving parts like the old meters actually something spins in them to actually count the water and as time goes by that part does not work as well. So you lose your efficiency just like anything else that moves. This is eventually not going to work as well. >> Thank you. And then we would if it would were to completely stop then we would we would get an alert on our no read report monthly if it were to actually completely stop. >> What is the life expectancy of one of these old meters and or MXUS? >> They're about 20 years. >> Okay. And are so these are reaching these 500. These are >> that's what that's what would be interesting to look at the actual date of the install of those meters to see how many um match up with that. But the cool thing with the new technologies that a lot of utilities are doing rather than replacing meters just based on the date you know like that's a a lot of times we just say okay it's going to last 20 years and when we get to year 19 or year 20 we just say we replace it if if it's working or not. With the new meters, you're able to actually get a little bit of reporting out of it every time you ping it. So, you can actually see how well they're doing. So, if the batteries are maybe lasting longer than we would expect. So, >> I'm just wondering for city planning and cost purposes. Are we [snorts] were we going to have to be replacing these meters in the next 3 years anyway, or do they have 10 years left on them? you would probably space it out a little bit more rather than doing the 500 at once. You know, we probably wouldn't have done 500 next year. Um, but we would have been replacing meters as we go. So, >> I will say too that with the technology um continually being upgraded uh as far as like the meter reading software, there would be a time where these meters may not communicate with the software anymore. I don't know what that is, but I know that our sales rep has mentioned that to me. Is that a sales tactic? I don't know. But you know what they say. Um, you know, this technology is running out, but I don't know a lot about technology. >> If we upgrade, what's the lifespan on the technology? >> I've asked that and he said that this technology will be around for a long time. It's communicating with the FCC wavelength frequency. So, cuz I asked the same thing >> because if if we updo all this money to upgrade now, what's to say in 5 years they don't all on us again? >> I 100% agree with you and I will double triple. >> Yes. So on this map, um, we had him do a a propagation analysis. And what this is is it shows if we were to install two of the Flex Net stations, one on each of the towers, what does our coverage look like? And so we have a 90 a 99.56% coverage on if we were to do two towers, uh, both towers. There's nine homes that may not get the coverage and they're right in that little purple area down there by Bluff Park. Um, that's may not. And so what we would do with those is we would either do a driveby or we have a little repeater option where we could mount something on just like kind of like a higher stake and then it would bounce off of the flex net station, read those 9 m and then report back to us. So, >> and those are the only spots in town is >> Yep. >> Street. Okay. >> And so, this does cover the whole entire southwest area, the north area, the expansion of Carver. >> Did we talk about having two of these initially or was it just one? >> So, I think we talked about having two, but we talked about the potential that one may cover >> the entire city. Um, if we were to go from two down to one, it would it would decrease the cost by about $75,000. >> Okay. And do we have a map of that to show what one would cover? >> I do not have a map of that. >> I can get a >> Do you or Andrew have the radio spectrum this is operating on? Do they give you that >> radio spectrum? >> Where it's operating? 2.4 gig. >> I don't know that. Okay. [laughter] Well, it it goes to the question of longevity. Uh things that are cellular have the lifespan of that type of cellular network. If it is an FCC controlled frequency that is ours, you know, then it's indefinite. I'm just curious what the provider is telling you. [snorts] >> I believe Lynn said it's an FCC. Yeah. >> What should I ask? >> You should ask what band it's operating in. what frequency band it's operating in. >> Okay. >> Well, no, those do change. So, >> um you know, your old TV with rabbit ear antennas, the reason those went away is not because the so much of the technology, it's the FCC repurposed it for cellular. So, there are uh parts of the spectrum that have, you know, 50 years out where they'll be repurposed. So those things >> like they just sell it >> or >> the FCC can repurpose it. Yeah. >> Okay. >> So, >> thank you, Eric. [laughter] >> Not that she's worried about it. Okay. So, >> full disclosure, I don't want to keep pressing my thumb down on this, but this is the stuff that's been in my scope for 20 years. My team sold this kind of stuff for 20 years, so I'm intimately familiar with it. maybe four years ago. So, I'm I haven't been dealing with this in the last four years, but when I was a a Greenhorn uh city councilman 3 years ago, I was a proponent that we move to this. >> Okay. >> So, I'm happy to see it got traction, >> but there are, you know, if I maybe I'll come in and just take a look at the technical specs of what we're doing. >> Absolutely. I appreciate >> and then give us the summary. Oh, I [laughter] >> will um get that information. >> Thank you. >> So, I asked for some cities that are using the AMI technology for meter reading. Um, a couple that have just switched over from the walk by driveby uh to the full AMI are Buffalo and Lorettto. I know. Um, and so those are the two that just recently did what we're proposing to do. >> So Chan and Chesca don't use this. They still do driveby. >> They could use it, but it could be um they could be have been using it from a long time. These are just recent um >> recent ones. Yep. And they could use a different vendor. >> Yeah, they could be using badger meters something else. These are all corn I think of Ferguson, >> right? I'm just curious cuz they weren't listed on here so I would hardly believe the chance >> probably a different meter type >> driving around. >> So when we look at what we had planned, we've been talking about this uh shortly after I started. I was asking just about like how can we be more efficient with the meter feeding? You know, I just noticed we didn't have a very large staff at that time. Um and then you know, we'd lose a couple staff members and then we'd gain a couple staff members. And I just thought, how can we make this more efficient? I started talking to the corn vein people and then asked if we could start putting some money into the CIP. Um, so staff has been aware of the project goals since 2024 and the need to upgrade the MX use the water meters. Um, so in 2024 we budgeted 190,000 for the meter reading system and then in well that was in 25. So, we knew about it in 24, we put it away in 25, and then for 2026, we have 309,500. So, we didn't use any of those funds as of yet. Um, so the total CIP funds available for the project are $500 shy of 500,000. So, what does this system upgrade cost? Um, so these are the estimated one-time costs. So for the 800, this is an estimate of the number of MXUs that we'll need. I will say that we have replaced quite a few MXUs. As the, you know, we get the no reads, we'll go out and replace an MXU. Um, you know, one gets broken, they go out and replace it. Um, >> and we're replacing them with the new ones. >> Yes. >> Yep. >> Yeah. So 850 MXUS quoted out as $168,300. 560 I curl water meters with the staff installing them. $126,650. If we did the two smart point water tower flexet installations with training um and s first year of software that is just about $178,000. And then the customer portal setup um that would be for the installation um and then the training of how to use that portal setup is $15,395. So that would be the total cost for the system. And then there were um I believe Eric asked about the annual cost for any kind of software after that. So there is a network interface software that you would have to pay for annually and then the customer portal software and so any sort of annual cost would be about $27,740 and those costs would be split between water and sewer and I just want to remind you that we're talking about water sewer um storm water funds and those are the enterprise funds um and so we budgeted for this in the CIP And these are our money-making funds. Um, not that, you know, we're we're out to make a lot of money, but we are also out to create an efficiency um where we see fit, I think. Um, and to increase operations. Um, so looking to the future, I think that's where, you know, we were going when we thought out this project. Um, and so I'm happy to answer questions on that, but I do have a few more slides left, but does anybody have questions on the costs? >> I do. >> On that first one, would we be paying that 850 MXUS regardless? >> Yes. >> So that's >> and the meters eventually >> just Okay. >> But maybe, you know, stretched out over a little more time, but we would Okay, >> good question. Correct. >> But my other question might get answered. >> Okay. So yeah, so the reason that I delayed this presentation is because there was some question you might ask. Why is this not going to bid, right? Like why aren't we doing a closed bid on this is a big purchase? It's over $175,000 if you take everything and add it together. So technically, shouldn't this go to a closed bidding pro process? Um so we did consult with the city attorney due to the nature of the meter upgrade project and we've determined the following. Um many of the portions of the city are currently equipped to begin using the AMI while others require some sort of an upgrade to their meter or the MXU. Um we need to purchase equipment and software in order to have the capability to read these meters. Um but for the above needs, census products are required to avoid upgrading all 2358 meters that we have currently in the city corn in the state of Minnesota, which means this is the only dealer that is able to provide the products that we need for this upgrade and to help support us beyond the upgrade. And so based on the above statements, we would have the ability to forego the bidding requirement by adopting a specific resolution detailing the purchase, the limitations on the dealers and pro proving legal authority for proceeding in a non-competitive [clears throat] manner. So this has been done by other cities um Farbo most recently working with Kennedy and Graven. So um I I am confident that if if council does want to move forward that we would be in a a legal spot to do so. So, um, a timeline if if we if council did direct us to move on this project, um, we would be looking at the spring to do any sort of determination of what sort of equipment needs to be ordered and then later spring, uh, the installation of all of the equipment and then with the goal being that 80% of having this city on 80% of AMI by December. [snorts] It's an aggressive goal. Um, but I think, you know, we can do big things. And I think I know that the utility staff is very determined. Um, our utility superintendent has worked with this AMI. Um, Jordan's worked with AMI. >> He made her change out in Richfield, too. >> Oh gosh, I didn't know that. >> Familiar with the process. >> Yeah. So, help me understand one thing. So it says that sole source does that mean an only source vendor? >> Yes. >> Okay. It's corn mine. But then above it when we're looking at the different cities, we've got a few of them that have Ferguson. So what is the difference if we're saying that this is the only source vendor is corn mine. I don't understand. because we currently use corn mane for our we switched to Ferguson for whatever um we're I don't know that they does Ferguson sell badger though >> was that just a slide that showed what cities are using AFI >> not necessarily system they're using >> yes I don't know if they're using Badger meters >> they have the yeah the AMI vendor >> is Ferguson or or main depending >> yeah I don't know what kind of meters they use >> okay those are too >> and ask for clarification so you said that the enterprise accounts are our money making accounts just want to be careful about that they're moneym in that we have money for investments in the water and sewer system like this for our long-term financial plan >> yes >> okay we're not princ let me say they're businesslike accounts >> okay let me phrase that >> proprietary you know snippets get water like [laughter] >> Thank you. Um, are we safe from cyber attacks? I mean, can somebody mess with that system and jump in and now all the water we everybody used a million gallons or everybody use zero? >> So, that's a good question. Um, so I here at the city of Carver, we use Laughler. who use a managed IT service and we pay them, you know, you probably see what we pay them on the claims, but um for something called manage detection response and so that that detects you're an >> so the to answer that question, this system doesn't control any valves. It is just reporting. So it doesn't put us at risk of infrastructure damage. Um but the firewalls you know that would protect the metering system that is going to be this the the company. So the firewalls are only to prevent interference in we have no reporting information because somebody hacked the system and we lost all the data. Any kind of system is subject to that. They're going to have their own firewalls for that. >> Yeah. But it wouldn't impact infrastructure. >> No, I realize stop the water flow. >> No, I'm saying if we you got your bill for 10 million gallons or you got your bill for [clears throat] >> But we do monitor our >> but not because you used it because somebody decided >> we wouldn't generate billing for that but it would disrupt >> the reporting we were getting and that same threat exists with our current technology. >> Yeah. >> I don't know of any that's kind of >> that's damage for damage sake, >> right? you know, it's it isn't going to do physical damage to the city. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> But it is something I worry about all the time. Um, you know, and >> please leave it. >> We do have our we do have our staff go through um all kinds of like you know, cyber security training and um as these threats increase um you know hacking into smart TVs and different things like that, we're constantly looking at how can we become better at that. So that's great that you're concerned about it as well. And then for the timeline here, cuz you have February 17th, I still think there's a couple of things that the council wants to see before that is fully approved. So I don't know if we view that at the next work session and then we do the beginning of March. Does that would that affect your timelines at all? >> I'm not in any hurry. I just wanted to get the information out. This is a proposed timeline. Okay. I have the budget coming up. So, I mean, yeah, whatever. [laughter] >> When do we not have the budget coming up? >> I mean, I could probably get you this information tomorrow if you wanted it. Right. I didn't know if the council as a whole wanted to talk about it because if we were talking about, let's say the one meter is going to cover everything. I mean, do we want to talk about it again or are they going to be like, well, it'll last to this long, but now if we're in the Southwest, we're not going to hit these last 100 homes, but that could be 20 years. I don't know. I just didn't know if the council itself wanted to discuss any of the things we've asked to come back or I'd like to see the questions that we have answered before we make a decision. >> I would too. I think we can talk about our next work session and it could be a consent item on the agenda potentially that could be removed if we need to. I one thing I would like to see is um so in 2027 when we need to pay the maintenance for the software subscription will there be a new line item on the water bills? >> No, that would be in our operating budget. >> Okay, >> that's a good question though. >> Yeah, so I have get a map of what just tower one would cover. percentage of homes >> and then for that I'm sorry does it if it will matter which tower it's on too you know what I mean because we've got >> I swear he had that m I swear he showed us just tower one >> cuz we got it shows now two towers but okay so let's say we said the one by lions right that or m hope that we that one but did we check it to see if it's on a different tower if it covers >> yeah I think what I remember him telling and was tower one was pretty much sufficient with a repeater because of those homes along Main Street, they get blocked out by that hill. >> Um, but check on that and then find out too if we're adding that second, what is the besides sales, what is the like push to have a second one if if we don't need it from [snorts] sales. >> How hard is it? How hard is it to put up another one when we need it? That's probably the >> Yeah. And I don't know if you sorry I have another question, but did we talk about like how much further to the west when we're going and to the south this will cover so that >> if we go with just one in two and a half years >> or 20 whatever that looks like you know. >> Yeah. >> Like I'm sure that there are maps that have like radiuses right of how far this will go and is or is this the map and it will cover everything >> everything in green. Okay. >> Okay. The question that >> I think is that all of our annexation area and everything? I feel like it might be. >> Um, >> looks sketchy. >> Yeah, >> I'll have them go north. >> They're probably facing it >> towards the city as it exists. >> South, >> which if you if you ever have a tower in the south and you put one up there and you got old >> and then I'm going to ask what frequency band is it operating in? >> But Andrew, yeah, you're right. If you have one up on the top >> would think that would >> Yeah, eventually. Yeah. >> Great. Well, thanks for letting us present this tonight and I will get those answers. >> Thank you. Thank you. All right. Um, if you're okay, we're going to mix this up a little bit and talk about Christiey's request for the future improvements at Broadway and Main Street West. Okay, does everybody have this view or is this what you have on the computer? >> It's going to be on the computer. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Can you go? >> It's a picture. >> Yeah. Oh. Oh, you snapshotted it. Okay. [laughter] >> Um Okay. So, >> which one do you want me to be on? >> Let's start. Let's not start with that one. That beautiful, beautiful picture. Okay, there we go. Um, so it was really nice that engineer Aaron and Brett met me out on a really, really freezing cold day in Chesca. I'll preface with I think I've made it pretty clear to the rest of the council that when we're talking about this intersection down here on Broadway and Main Street that I'm not a fan of the configuration on the right hand side. Um you know we looked at this as a whole and when we were talking about the one over by Casey's I like that one. I think it makes great sense. I and I just wanted to bring up a few reasons why. And then I also um was in Chesca and down by the Gosbo Park they have um some bumpouts that are you can it's kind of hard to see here but that are um that make it so you can have that angle parking you can have stop signs on the end of those bumpout so that people can cross safely. So let's go back. Um yep there we go. So, when I'm looking at this, when we turn this to a oneway, I've stated, you know, numerous times, I live where I live and I see Third Street a lot, and these are only the times that I'm looking at Third Street. And I bet 300 and 365 days I have watched I watch a car go the wrong direction because it's a short oneway. Um, I'm not opposed to one ways ever. I just these little short ones tend to be kind of uh optional at times, right? So I see people going the wrong direction. Now having this kind of squished down would eliminate some of that. Um but when I look at how that is configured and I think about the delivery trucks that come to our bars of egg, the doghouse has to have it come into the main street because they don't have there is no like real good side area and they're not allowed to go down that alley with their weight or whatever it is. Um, and then Harvey's, they'll be on Third Street. Lisa's, they tend to park, um, basically where that bumpout is right there now, um, just south of her building. So, they park there so they're off the main drag and people can get through, you know, get through and they're not blocking traffic. So, when I look at this and these trucks having to make that turning radius and then coming in and then having to now park, you're going to have to park farther down if you're going to park at all. Um, and then with the cars backing out to come in and out. These aren't, you know, passenger vehicles. These are small like semi trucks that are coming through here. So, I worry a lot about what that flow of traffic is going to look like. Not just not only for that, but that's a big one is to that, you know, they get there's deliveries coming to businesses and we don't know what could, you know, pop up, you know, by the getaway. Who knows? but coming through here a couple times a week and now blocking traffic, blocking cars, blocking parking lots. Um, and then we go into this one way and we do have the, you know, Riverside Park will eventually open back up, right? So, now we're going to have boats and boats, trailers coming out that now have to take a right to then take a left somewhere to get them back down here to then get out of town or to get that direction. So, while this looks really pretty on paper, and that's great cuz engineers are supposed to make things look great. I don't think for me that this in reality is going to be as functional as we would like. Um, again, I worry about some of these radiuses. I also like the fact that we have added some of these bumpouts, these more decorative areas to shorten traffic, to add stop signs. Being that I used to live behind the Getaway Cafe, if I walked my dog, I would never walk my dog across the street in front of where Greg's Whip's Historic Garage is because there's no stop sign and it was for sure, you know, it was run for your life before a car comes around cuz they don't see you. Um, so it will be nice that you'll have easier pedestrian access at all corners. But I was in Chesca and I've seen this for a long time and I've kind of been mulling this around and bringing it to council is that down by where Gazebo is, where Wells Fargo is, they have those little pieces. Now again, Brent, move the um you have these little pieces that stick out where Oh, go back, Brent. Sorry. Uh yeah. And then you have a stop sign where it's you can see it. So it's on the back side of where the angle parking is. So the other one on the right hand side is by the yellow chassis truck. It's actually out farther. So you can see when you're coming down that there's a stop sign there. I I I want council to consider having this be also one of our options at that corner rather than having so that would be on all four and rather than having um this oneway constricted drive and then leaving parking as it is there and not having that piece be a oneway. Um, in talking to Aaron, um, there would be some cost savings obviously because you don't have quite as much of the decorative things going on here and he didn't know what that would be, but there would be a cost savings to that. Um, and I also did wanted to mention because I do know that we had a a focus group or whatever the term was we used for that group that that looked at it. Um, and of course their information and their thoughts and and work on it is is valuable. Um and but I also want to say the building that we're sitting in right now when we had the focus group looking at where to build city hall this wasn't even on it. So council asked a request to have another option viewed for a would be in another location. So by asking us I don't want to say that oh this focus group thanks you you did the work and we're as a council we we'll just move forward with any of those because we've in the past we've asked to go back to the drawing board. um for a different style, place, location, whatever that looks like. >> So, I just want to be clear. You're saying to keep the existing parking arrangement, but maintain two-way traffic. >> Existing, not what's on here, existing today. So, >> existing today, not what's on there. >> Don't have the pull in, don't have the angle parking. It's going to be end to end parking. And then we would just bump out on all corners. um to have stop signs there rather than having this constricted drive in. Um we I think the stamped concrete look is great. I think everything that's here is traffic caling measures outside of even just having the uh stop signs and it's more pedestrian safe because they're in the road for a lot shorter time. I just I think we're overdoing that corner when we don't need to be. And I think there's some savings in CERS with the stop signs to control the movement of traffic. >> Just to refresh my memory though, the this exercise and this plan was primarily to increase parking, right? Add spots and that why we did that. >> I don't think that was the main focus of this. We were It's kind of I thought it was the reconstruction to make something besides a block building and a tugboat sitting at the end so that it doesn't look so I mean we get a little blind to it cuz we see it every day but if you're first driving into town I thought I thought it was more of aesthetics of adding the park and the gathering space and things like that. It is adding a total of eight parking spots. Okay. >> But I want to make sure because I had asked Aaron because if you look here where those that the major bumpout is, there's actually parking spots there. So I didn't I don't recall if when we see this net change of plus 8 if that in if that for sure includes what we are losing right there. >> So if you shrink those bumpouts, you might gain a spock or two. Is that what you're saying? >> Yeah, you would have I would say you would you'll have two for sure below Lisa's. Okay. >> You may have three in that spot. >> Did we ever have a picture of what that looked like >> to keep it two-way and what the parking would look like? >> I don't think so. And that's what I So, I that's what I would like to see council look at and the cost of it. And I don't believe that we ever saw one that just had that. If I'm wrong, tell me. But I don't >> I'm asking looking at Brent if he or Cornney if you remember. I don't recall having one that looks like that. So, I don't want to I don't have an answer to that question, but I'm ready to comment if you're I So, you mentioned this was something that we asked community members to participate in. You talked about city hall. That wasn't even that wasn't our council. We weren't council yet. That was a different group. So, I I've talked to folks who have participated in this. I've talked to business owners in this area. I'm sorry. I have so many thoughts on this and I I I'm having a hard time stringing them together. First of all, like I don't think we have anything to worry about with the turning radius. Aaron wouldn't show us even in a concept sketch something that won't work for a beer delivery truck or the Cisco truck or whatever it is that needs to get back in there. I get it that you don't like this, but I'm a little disappointed that we're talking about it again because this was something that community members who are still part of our community have participated in and opined thinking that they were sharing their voices to help guide us and help give us direction. The business owners that I have talked to were like, "Yeah, we don't really care as long as we get increased parking down here. We're a little bit landlocked. We're a little bit landlocked downtown and we were talking years ago on a council that we were on about putting these bumpouts in before the turnback of the county road and we were going to lose parking spaces in there and ultimately we decided not to do it. So I think based on the feedback from our community, the folks who spent time to opine to share their thoughts with us to come up that informed this sketch, based on the fact that it's going to give us more parking, based on the fact that the business owners are clamoring for more parking in a really busy downtown, based on the fact that it's traffic calming and it is going to have just naturally with those bumpouts slow traffic down, I'm still in favor of this. I was talking to a business owner today and they said that they've had some really scary near misses with folks down in this area with kids and it being a business busier area. When that's a park, it's going to be even more popular. When the bridge opens, it's going to become even more popular and the need for parking is going to be greater than ever. Okay. So, I'm going to respond to a couple things then. So, we were when we were on the council, a very Cindy Monroe was the one who said when we were looking at the council um or excuse me, the city hall. I just want to be clear. Cindy Monroe said where in downtown. So, I don't want to I don't I don't want to go tick for tat, but to say that had nothing to do with us is I >> Okay, this before we were on council. Um, >> so I agree with you that there's definitely traffic issues. I mentioned those and we've been talking about this before is that um obviously with adding all of the stop signs there that helps. Um I think [clears throat] I I mean we always have we have always had parking issues downtown. And we also added a parking lot behind Harvey. It's on Third Street here that we were told we were going to have a certain number of parking spots and we ended up it was I mean it's a limited anyways. Let's say it's seven or nine that's in there. We ended up with two less than the engineers started with and so when we say we're gaining a net eight is that ended up being a net six. Okay. I think it's being overdone. I think there's money to be saved there. I think that um [clears throat] I'm not in favor of the block one way. Um I just I I understand that the focus group downtown has had a lot to say about it. Um it looks really great on paper, but I think it would look really good if that all of those four corners just matched as as as bumpouts and we took away that constricted area. I I get it that you don't like the one way. I hear you. I know that I think that's known amongst all of us here and that's that's fine to have a different opinion on this but I I don't feel that same way. I have a response. Um, and it's definitely made like your your perception or or like things you brought up made me rethink some things, but I still favor this the one way. And when I think of like the objectives for the project is having our trail connectivity and just to really showcase that Miriam Junction Trail. Um, of course safety is a concern, but I feel like we have a good relationship with the engineers, [clears throat] the safety, the aesthetics. for good there. The parking I have I put lower like so for me it's more about the trail connections. Um and it's a tough balance. I don't know that you can have you know great ideal trail connection and the um you know a good setup for delivery trucks. I just don't know that you get those two together like [snorts] I don't know how you would make both happy. Um I so for me I realize it's not convenient easy for delivery trucks but that's not the objective of the project. Thoughts go I am not a fan of a oneway there. Um I understand what's trying to be done by narrowing this down and by you know trying to increase some parking. Um, but I think that a lot of the safety and traffic issues will be solved simply by putting in clear stop signs in that area. Um, and and cleaning up the the fact that it is an in fact an intersection. Um, I think that putting a oneway there makes traffic in an already kind of confusing I mean I know it's a grid, but when you're trying to get from point to point in downtown, especially down by the river, um, there can be some confusion about, you know, where what goes where, what connects where, what roads connect where, because there's a lot of dead ends. And I think that this is just going to increase some of those problems as well as, you know, like you said, especially with people coming out of Riverside Park, um, trying to go west. Um, we're we're creating additional traffic problems for that. So, I don't like the one way there. That being said, I wasn't part of the original planning process for all of this. I was not here when these focus groups I was not on the council when these focus groups happened. So, um, obviously my opinion should be taken with a grain of salt, but um, that's my opinion on that stretch there. >> Eric, thoughts on that one? >> Yeah. So, you know, we have to forward think uh what this landing is going to be when it's done. So, we've got a park there, we've got a trail access there, [clears throat] we're going to have utility there that just doesn't exist today. And as I recall, this whole process was not just parking, but uh a bit of a beautifification project. It expands the area around the uh that that park and entrance to the trail. So, it serves more function than just adding parking. I think the idea was to really slow it down. You're only looking one way for cars coming. you're not looking both ways. I agree. I don't like short oneways either. That's confusing. But um because it is such an important part of the the the landing asset, the the trail entry asset. Um, with those in mind, I would still support the way it looks, uh, this concept plan because it it was more than the parking. That's my opinion. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. Well, >> but you're I don't want to discount the concern because I'm uh Christie, you you know, you have a close pulse on what things look like downtown. you see it all the time. I understand the concern. I think it'll be confusing for the people that have been there for a while, but that will, you know, those things change with time. Um, and this is going to be a central gathering place for the city. So, that's the reason for my decision. >> Sure. Okay. Well, I mean, I think I've made it clear that I don't prefer the angled parking there and the one way. um and the other parts of the project. I think there was money to be saved by um going down to just having the four stop signs and the bumpouts there and um but the rest of the council has spoken. So I will say thank you for listening. Thank you. All right. Um and I I appreciate you bringing it up. I understand your concerns but um direction. All right. milestone program amendments and an employee performance pay. Mr. Merrick, [clears throat] >> good evening, Mayor Council. Thank you. So, if you remember in 2025, the council adopted a pay for performance program that we dubbed the milestone program. Uh, it was in conjunction with a uh classman and compensation study that the uh city funded through the 2025 budget. And so it set up uh eight milestones uh based on uh the ability to um have advanced skills training uh performance measures through quarterly or through uh quarterly check-ins and an annual performance review and then years of service. And so uh we built this from scratch as you know and so as a part of kind of understanding what worked and what didn't uh all the supervisors that participated in the program uh provided feedback not only based on their observations but the feedback that they got from the folks that uh also participated in it. And so we're offering for a discussion and review some adjustments. uh you'll see there's a a red light in the packet, but there's just some adjustments of I would call like administrative program tasks that were a little bit too specific uh related to timelines etc. So we've scaled those back. Uh we also wanted to expand uh there was some questions related to we have some folks on our staff that have required lure through the state. So, uh, building inspecting staff, utility staff and, uh, uh, would be specific examples. And so, um, we wanted to provide some type of credit towards that. Uh but we also as a team and I would offer as our kind of workplace culture, our team culture is the importance of having uh people with strong interpersonal skills, being able to uh have tough conversations, manage conflict, uh establish a trusting environment. So we wanted to to lean into that. And so you'll notice we have at least 20% of that training requirement or 4 hours out of 20 would need to be uh done for that. And actually one of the things that uh I think somebody in the room had an idea related to that was to see if we could do a group training for that. And so um just a little bit ahead of that uh I reached out some folks that have done that I participated in that training with and we're getting a proposal so that like the whole staff could do a conflict uh resolution type of training as an entire team. So, um, and when thinking about that idea, some, you know, a lot of excitement about not just doing that, but doing it with the people that you would maybe have an opportunity to do that with. Uh, we also found that there's some gap years between milestone 7 and 8. Um, and thought that there could be some unintended consequences to folks waiting two years to get through a milestone even if they had the years of service. Uh, so we named that. And then finally, uh, you know, we we're going to have some people that will make it through, um, the milestone program, be at that top pay, and they could be on staff for another, you know, 10 to 15 years. Do you want to provide, and again, these are all suggestions for the council. You might have some tweaks or like some and not like some. Um but under that uh situation, you'd have an employee who could be at max pay for that, let's say 10 years. Um and they would be eligible for only cost of living adjustments or whatever the council approved for the pay skill increase. And so this provides a milestone graduate status that takes that cost of living adjustment and adds 1%. So, I would say that's probably the biggest uh I would offer as like the uh stretch as far as like a new policy initiative within the confines. I would offer that uh items one through three are more administrative and program cleanups um and recognize that uh the fourth provision is more of a policy shift that involves a bunch of other things. But again, that's just my editorial. So happy to answer any questions or uh sit back and listen to the council discuss. Uh so we're offering this as a discussion and then would based on your feedback either bring back to staff for additional discussion or place on a future regular meeting agenda. >> So do we have so I see specifically called out under the advanced skills development if you want to go to the red line. >> Sure. >> Spot. Um so it says that those spec and you've mentioned it. I just want to make sure that I'm understanding it completely. So if you are required specific safety to have your job that second account like if I work in public works. So do we have anyone who was doing the steps right now that was using some of that because we didn't have it called out? >> No, we So a part of it's kind of spelled out in here but maybe a little vaguely is uh your training plan has to be approved by uh your supervisor. So like uh training for like OSHA training like report or uh right to know uh bloodborne pathogens chainsaw safety or if uh for instance we got to do software program like that [snorts] doesn't count towards treating but uh for example if we have someone with a C lure and they're going to a class that uh even though it maintains their lure it's like it's new developing material uh we felt like we should recognize that. But the other types of training that you mentioned would not and would still not be >> uh credited toward their hours. >> Okay. And whether public services or office staff, nobody >> did that already. Correct. Okay. Cuz I would want to take it away because we didn't spell it out right. So it was I leave it the way it is. >> Um Okay. Okay. >> Brett, just out of curiosity, what percentage of folks participated in this last year? >> All of them. It's not a This isn't a voluntary program. >> Oh, so >> who accomplished all of the >> 100%. >> Okay, that I guess my question is who accomplished the goals? >> Yes. >> Great. Okay. Um, you know, when I talked to Brent like about what questions I have. I asked him about the milestone graduate because that wasn't just I just wasn't understanding it at first initially. Um, but I think it's a a great idea. I think 1% is a good starting point and I certainly don't want to punish folks for longevity. So if we can do something to keep them here beyond 8 years, especially like for that kind of institutional knowledge that folks will get after that amount of time, I think that that's great. And if anything, that's something that we can look to increase over the years and kind of see how that goes and what percentage of our folks get to that point. >> So I agree with that. I think individuals that have the initiative to get through this program and reach all of those milestones, those are typically the folks that are that are doing the highest level of work for the city, the most expensive to replace. Uh, and a 1% um increase in pay is a is a great retention tool. And we've talked about that in the past, how important it is to retain that level of employee. So I I support that, too. >> I do too. I mean, if we getting to the, you know, ninth year of this, um, you're not just sticking around because you want that 1%, right? You're you're you're working here because you plan on being here. Um, I don't think anyone's going to be like, "Oh, I made it to my milestone eight. I'm bye. I'm out of here. FOR ME THE NUMBER SIX. >> YEAH. SO, I think it's a I think it's a good idea to have that milestone graduate. >> I don't like the milestone graduate. Um, we already do a cost of living adjustment that we have control over. That was part of when you established this program, you increased the control that we have over what we increase the overall pay. And if we are just saying that, you know, milestone graduates now, everyone regardless of where they are in the program is eligible for this pay increase, then the it just seems unnecessary above and beyond what we already have with our cost of living increases given the flexibility that we have within those numbers there. So, >> do you understand that they get the cost of living and then this is separate from that >> and that they wouldn't get this once they reach that top tier? >> Yes. >> Okay. >> I think Kayla when I look at this um I think yes, everyone get I mean we do a collab but we can't we can't pick and choose like an exemplary employee and be like you're going to get six. You know what I But no, this I'm just saying this is the way I look at it with this is that um you know we can't be like well >> Kim did a great job she get 6% you know sorry Lori you get 1% and you can have three. So for me this extra incentive to invest into the job um and then to be hitting 8 years I know I'm trying to think I can't remember the latest stats on how long people are staying at their positions before job switching like the average but it's short and so when you can get for me when you can get people who are are going to put in this many years I'm going to stay and we we have that knowledge and that historical you know work that they've done and and you know I just think of like Paul Schulz right now. Paul's been here so long. If we're like, "Paul, why did this happen?" Or, "Where was this 1983? Why did this happen? >> Where was this pipe?" Oh, yeah. We put it over here 20 years ago. So, look right there. It's in the ground or something. You know, whatever that might be. So, I think that I like I said, I totally get what you're saying. Like, we already do a raise. This is this is just an you know, that addition when we could formally adjust that during our during our session. If the 100% of our employees are meeting these milestones, are we really rewarding exemplary employees by adding another level? So maybe I need some more clarification from Brent then on this. So if they when you said everybody is in it, but they don't have to complete it, that's up to them. >> Correct. Okay. >> So they >> you start a plan, but if you work the plan, you you get it. if you would finish short on your training or you don't uh meet your performance goals that you would uh you wouldn't be eligible. So we um I you know I would offer that the 100% completion is not a sign of lack of rigor. It's a a sign of the people that you have here. Um could it be more rigorous? Obviously, it could be um but we we've also set it up where it's like we're trying the you could have more training requirements. You could establish some I would say data sets for like performance measures. But when we put this together, one of our key things was like this is like the don't be a jerk performance measurement system that like we're that we're really leaning into what we feel we hear from the council on what makes Carver Carver of like those soft skills and the ability to manage through that. So um I take no position on what the val what that value is. That's the council's uh choice. But um >> just present just presenting kind of that data from a perspective that I have. >> Any thoughts? >> Um >> I'm having a hard time like thinking of the scenarios. So, but >> true. >> Um I really liked how um Council Member Pchman um referenced retention. I mean >> to me this is great for that purpose. I I can maybe this anecdote will help as it relates to the milestone graduate because like and uh Lynn and Brenda and Andrew were in the in the room as supervisors when this idea brought up to be like very unvarnished. I was opposed to it and uh a senior employee well I won't share the name but said so based on the current program incentive aside there's no there's no reason for me to try to get top contributor leader or maintain training because I'm going to get cost of living regardless. Now do I love that point of view? No. And so that was my me willing to put this in for council consideration was a nod to that like how can we maintain that is that too much or too little that's a choice for the council how and how it fits within the whole program. >> So if you're given up u we'll just the plan to do I mean so you don't finish it this year you can finish it next year. I mean it's not >> it's not rolling so your clock everything's resets January 1st of each year. Gotcha. And I'm sorry, why did we move it from the six I was thinking it was eight years still. So when I look at milestone 8, it makes me think eight years. So why is it six years now? >> Cuz you may have someone. So previously it was uh eight and if you look at uh milestone 7 at six. And so it's scaled up each of those years because there'll be employees that start with service credit because they've worked for other cities in the program. We give credit if they've had a similar position in another city. So there was an unintended consequence of creating a a gap. Um if you want that to exist, it can stay in there as well. Um >> that's just years of experience. There's still eight steps, >> correct? >> But so you could I know but then you're doing more than one step a year or is that because you said because people are starting at a >> you could have somebody that based on their service credit they could have two they could start at two years of service to the city. But there there's a maximum of one milestone per year because fundamentally based on the program rules you you couldn't complete all the step the same steps in uh one calendar year cuz the because the check-in and performance reviews are based on that year. So you can't double up on that. >> Okay. >> Lori, did you ask all your questions? >> Yeah. >> Okay. All right. Okay, I think I'm hearing support for this. >> Yes, for me. All right. Any other questions on this? >> I I do have a question retention bonus or can we call it retention bonus or >> is that a [clears throat] bonus? That's not what it is. Bonus is like a hey, we made a lot of money. >> Here's your portion of it. That's not how the city works. This is something that folks specifically worked towards Christy. >> I'm just I because I still had milestone 8 is 8 years in my head. I was really comfortable with the 8 years. So when I see that it's six, that isn't quite the longevity I guess I had in my head. So I'm just trying to come to terms with I feel exactly the same as I did about that 2-year difference. So, if you don't mind, we're going to move ahead because I think you're the only one with that concern. >> Yeah, >> this is Oh, we don't have anything else on the agenda. >> Oh, you don't have city manager report. >> I don't have any I don't have any updates. So, >> take up to seven minutes accepted. >> Does anyone else have any like thoughts on those years changes? So I think I see where it was creating a gap. So if you're milestone six, you couldn't in the old program, you couldn't make it up to milestone 7 for 2 years >> because you have to have two years of experience between those two. Whereas between four and five and five and six, it's just a single year. >> So I see where this is cleaning that up a little bit. Yeah, I think if you might be helpful if you look at milestone milestone 4 requires two years of service. So that's where where milestone 1 2 and three don't require any years of service. So that's what created >> the gap. Um, but again, it's this is a total like sub like subjective like you decide how you want this program to be. Um, because I can't offer you that what is being presented is like the best way because this is a policy decision. We rely on the council to to formulate and approve uh policy choices. And as I'm speaking or preaching to the choir here, but you know budget and what you pay employees is a is significant as it relates to budget and and not only internally but externally how you communicate that to residents. So uh take all the time you need if you want [snorts] me to bring this back to the next work session I can do that as well or if you want more discussion to to happen or changes I >> So one question then so milestone graduates. So if there's an [clears throat] extra 1% in perpetuity, if someone starts here at age 20 and works here till they're 50, what does that look like? >> Your position has >> 1% of >> Yeah. [snorts] >> I mean, and you know, Council Member Conrad, you've been here around long enough that cost of living has been as high as like eight, I think, and as low as zero. >> Mhm. And there, you know, there have been years, you know, when LMC or not LMC, LGA was cut, um, where there was a complete just pay freeze. So, there's a lot of variables that go with it. That's just one of the reasons that we liked having in the union agreement and this is that >> the cost of living adjustment is entirely up to the council based on variables that you choose >> where in the past it was based on this one uh CPI calculator from the Federal Reserve and so you were locked into that no matter kind of what it said. So this provides you with that flexibility but there is yes um that 1% and then what that does and you know one of the I would say conversation pieces that I offer that some point there is a if you have a position in Carver but you want to make more money like there is a >> so just reconciling that. Well, what I was just going to say too is I've been city staff in a couple of cities. The reason I end up at the city of Carver was I mean or ended up at the city of, you know, Victoria or whatever was because and I've I mean this is sort of an unwritten thing between city government staff. If you want to make more money, you got to switch to the next city to get it because you're not going to get a bonus. You're not going to get that big raise. You're going to get the cola and you're going to get stock options. >> There's no stock options. There's nothing. So it really is an unwritten kind of what's known is that if you want to you get some experience, you work a few years and then you hop to the next city or the next county and reapply and ask for more money and that's how you get your that's how you make jumps in local government when you work for local government. That's the only way you make jumps. >> You were such a champion for having the employee engagement survey and like how do we make sure that our folks are happy and this is just another outcropping of that and just kind of an expansion of that. I think you're right, like folks could potentially make more money absolutely working in Eden Prairie or Crystal or anywhere inside the 494 loop. Um, but I think, you know, we talked about this a little bit. You guys know how I feel in jinxes, so I don't even want to say it, but like in 2025, we lost zero employees on their own leaving the city of Carver. >> That was the first year of this program. Is it a coincidence? Right now it is because you need probably two or three years until you can see if it's a pattern. And if somebody gets a great opportunity in Phoenix, of course we're going to lose them. But >> this is starting off strong. >> Yeah. You don't go in every year and re renegotiate your salary with your with your city administrator or your city manager. It doesn't work that way. So um thank you. I'm talking through all this, but I'm still then on board with this 1% cuz that does makes it I had to look back a little bit to think of how places people move around here in local government. >> Look at that. >> To your point, you did it. I wait >> to your point of an employee staying for a long time. >> Hooray. It worked. And that's really what this is. This is retention. And if we can keep them longer from going to another city, it worked. The biggest mistake, the most expensive mistake we can make is losing someone. Uh, and if this program helps keep them in 2026, I think losing one good employee in the months it takes to bring somebody up to speed and being as useful in their job uh, exceeds the cost of this program as it did when we initially talked about it. So, I'm I'm completely in favor of it and I I want them to stay 30 years or 40 years and retire. >> I'll shut up. >> Yeah. I think it's important that our staff know that we value the work that they do. We can't give them stock options. Pizza lunches only go so far. At the end of the day, people want to get paid and this helps do that. Especially the milestone program for that longevity component. So, all right. I think you have what you need from us that >> you're okay with next meeting agenda. >> I am I am >> um all right with that I would entertain a motion to adjurnn. >> I'll make a motion to motion. >> I'll second and a second. All those in favor say I. >> I oppose. Same sign passes. Uh Brenda put that email that you got on the phone. >> And there's a second one on there >> from Brian. >> From Brian.