##VIDEO ID:e-3d6cC2l9w## e we'll call the meeting of Monday November 25th to order roll call Dar yep Scott here overgard here here please stand for [Music] the states first up on the agenda is the consent agenda is there a motion to approve the consent agenda the motion is there a second motion and support all those in favor iOS motion carried and that brings us to the guest citizens forum is there anyone who has anything that's not on the agenda you'd like to discuss hearing none we go reports from staff the administrator L all right so we did have our initial meeting with the East Range water board uh Jake and Jake were there we will continue to meet with them as I st the second meeting we're working through the holidays so the Aurora has requested engineering to upsize the water M on Highway 100 the St Louis County roadway project I do believe that they're doing both the standard size they need and the upsize and so we get a price difference there which LS may be responsible for if you chose to put that in the ground the East Range water board is also engaged with an engineer to get cost estimates from Mains to Aurora and the and so that's um basically from from Aurora to each Community what exactly that would look like what kind of infrastructure we're going to be putting in the ground and that is all I have is water still interested Jo maybe in 20 years but not C did they get a big revamp on the water plant they did right Public Utilities director not a lot this time around big issue we had last week is Li station three went down um they they have old brck system on the back it's an electrical system that's all we're replacing that with DFS so that should be up and running next week sometime so we're just kind of watching it right now if it does go down we get back out there all right thank you City attorney we report report all right reports from elected officials counc Kramer nothing tonight coun St nothing coun jar nothing tonight and I have nothing to report tonight either so we'll move on to Old business 10.1 ordinance regarding Zing for R4 the planning Trail rep y planning commission did meet uh they put in a few suggestions to me I requested that they submit any other suggestions to me and I will have a draft ordinance in front of them after their January 10 two ordinance regarding dangerous dogs and we been working with Aurora yep and we are still waiting on that right agenda and three ordinance regarding prohibited animals the Planning Commission met and discussed this ordinance they did vote unanimously to recommend to not allow backyard chickens in their Community they did state that it would be administratively heavy for the employees and the current staff they also work in favor of the potential of different types of animals and the slippery SL situation so I know a couple of the things I heard talk about is like the chicken coops are those a permanent structure are those a temporary structure building permit I know some of those kind of questions had come up um so that would be work on the zoning officer and stuff to regulate that I guess on my end I'd like some more I guess recommend ation or suggestions from them to see what they would want to make them more inclined to [Music] agre that you say that there some sort of line sand stops being as far as the additional work mean we're trying to make it so this what anybody can happen if they want them but how are 10 people in is that that much work I don't know but yeah if everybody decides to have one and then you have students instead of justs we already have sometimes and when I did talk to the Animal control officer his initial response was he doesn't care one way or the other but that is ultimately who would be responsible for collecting and doing something with any loose chickens that um that he has um I guess I wouldn't mind yeah as talking to them a little more maybe if we you know a couple of us went to a meeting and asked some questions um you know if there was a size limit on the poops would they not have to have a zoning permit would they not have to apply to have one is there you know just answer some more the questions and like Brandon said just kind of see what what regulations they might allow to make them a little more to the situation with the administrator stop like just prior you need to do obviously and getting your needs done and get need done you get one one yeah um everyone thinks that they're one thing is the one thing and so we get of phone calls say you know it's just this you have to process well we have 2,000 people of just this yeah so it makes it difficult to get everything done and there is an understanding to prioritizing work but understanding also that that means some work won't get done and you'll receive complaints about that and I wouldn't want to make an ordinance to allow them if it's not something we're going to be able to stay on top of and make sure they're following the regulations we don't want to make the time and effort to do all this and then no one is bothering to check on them more enforce it it seems to defeat the the whole purpose of all this work to make it you allowable I don't want to put it on every agenda but maybe we can find out what some of their recommendations would be that they would allow um or they would lean fors and then if we just can't come to any Common Ground I wouldn't want to go against their recommendation and they're the ones who are going to have to enforce it yeah they did talk about it at link um I can definitely bring it up at the next meeting um but they did talk about it at link and what exactly would be en like and that is the conclusion we' end up having old truck toppers out in the backyard you have spell issues you have a lot of issues I mean so are we going to are we willing to take on the expense with having the BL officer the Animal control officer and maybe the police involved a lot of differents that are involved they discuss it all limiting the areas I know we wanted to make it so anybody could but if they were on a backl of woods or likeing drive or whatever those areas where they have more space the that you needed or something what would their thoughts be on that we from everyone to could we get this maybe like a little brief um recap of what they their issues that they why they're against it and then if we have questions we can take it to them on see the answers are all right now we're on to new business 111 Bolton the M proposal regarding for water supply engineer well good evening everyone it's good to see everybody made it here with the snow so um so Becky gave me a this last week and mentioned that the proposal had come up and there's some questions so if you just going to bear with me I'll walk through what the proposal presents and then we if you have any questions or like to discuss it further I'd be happy to answer some questions and uh another comment that kind of came up was the rates like a rat study and so I do have some information that I can talk through after I walk through the proposal about maybe what that looks like in some of our initial thoughts on the concept that we're raise study uh so the proposal that's presented in front of you takes a three-phase approach to walk through a groundwater assessment in this region targeting the uh basically the six option in the water study which looks at a new groundwater Supply Source uh we do have some items in the proposal that talk about regionalization with the EAS range water board but I wanted to present tonight that u in discussion with the EAS range water board those items those costs for both in make to work on those are being covered under the strange water board and even though the activities are listed in the proposal there's no cost Associated to City of white Lakes to do those so when you see a option to EAS range waterboard work activity again um that's being handled separately so what we recommend for phase one of the work as you turn to the second page of the proposal is is an Alternatives preliminary engineering assessment um so what this takes into for the phase one piece of the groundwater study is basically doing a preliminary investigation uh with your staff and record search to see if there's any other studies that were previously completed in like say the last 20 to 40 years uh Jake has provided a couple studies that we have heard that have been done so we'll be looking at these uh these studies specifically to see what their findings are and then working with the city on identifying available land that has land Access Control to get to because if you can't get to the well location it doesn't prove very fruitful so that would be that first piece and each phase of the proposal as we step through them takes a pause and then offers a basically a new sculping and feing so that way for this first phase we're recommending it to be 8 Grand the next phase would be x x number of dollars and so forth so that you don't have to step through all phases in case you decide early on you would like to no longer proceed with the study so that's I I forgot to mention that's why we kind of designed a phase study to it so so again this first um first piece would be about $8,000 and we read roughly about two to three weeks to complete this study again the submitt would be a map showing land control and we eventually would use this information to take a step into the groundwater aquafer desktop evaluation so the next phase of the project um once it's approved would be to do a desktop hydrologic evaluation in this local area we would be teaming with bar engineering to complete this and the reason for this is bar has done a lot of work in this area between industry and other sort of other cities in the area to where they already have models established and a good understanding of the geology and hydrogeology so there's a cost saving there and using them and working with them to help sist with with the work so this this phase will consist of a desktop analysis of the surrounding area we'll identify potential future Wells sites um by using the information from the first phase a summary report and Technical memorandum with the findings will be presented this will include information on um soil types to groundwater chemistry that's very available that's published along with any other sort of online and available information we have whether that's through meno mdnr or other sources that are get are published uh this piece will also include a technical committee review so we'll sit down with the city uh in the technical meeting and discuss the findings if there's any questions we'll bring them back to the team and address those questions and lastly then this would include attend a regular council meeting to present the findings for the council so like I said so the summary items that we'll have from that will have the reporter technical memorandum along with a map showing potential areas for Wells uh that is estimated to be $30,000 and we're anticipating that to take 2 to three months to complete with with a milestone being January 27th if the council decides to proceed with the next phase this is where we'll get into the groundwater aquafer infield evaluation and testing so this is actual installation of Wells along with done with conducting pump tests and water quality analysis so what this would entail is preparation of a bid package to solicit uh to solicit test Wells we have installation of weth by a certified well installer the number is ultimately of the number of Wells to be installed is going to be dependent on the desktop analysis so we'll need to work through that to kind of identify how many areas we want to Target and then we'll have conversation with the Council on how many they actually of the areas identified how many of those areas you would want to test um so some of the inputs or some of the outputs we looked from the modeling and from the effort of the testing would be groundwater Supply rates and then water quality um we can use this information to refine our cost evaluations that were put together in the water study and then eventually um we would like to sit down with the technical committee for the fourth meeting to review the findings and once again there's uh bring it back to the design team and then propose um any additional um provide any different any additional information that's needed uh to complete this test phase this is a little bit difficult um based off you know what we want to provide you is like a number of bells per dollar just so we can understand how much it's going to cost per test well and on average with with a well installer and then the work that be required we'd be looking at about 100,000 per well again you have to determine how many are required estimated timeline to complete phase three we're assuming it's going to take from January 27th to about mid July August to get all that information again that includes um initial assessments initial assessments to sourcing a well installer testing the wells providing a technical report the summary and then discussing further actions with the council so in in The Proposal is a project schedule for your review and uh again this proposal piece is for phase one so that is $88,000 to complete the initial assessments and do some data gathered background information um that the city has and then moving moving it down the road does anybody have any questions on the proposal at this point Jak we had previously had some w t that uh the only Wells I'm aware of in town is it looks like this month back in the 90s when you guys his drilled Wells out by white water so as you head down to the campground you got that the road curb sharp and you got that Ro that kind of shoots off into the woods look to be about down that way okay there any data P from that or if I remember from the reports I turned those into both and M but there still was some NE in there not as high as we're getting outby obviously but they did do some live studies in there how do uh residential wells work do they have to report anything like we have some wells I'm sure sky and perhaps 665 you do there true typically residential else there's no requirement for reporting unless you do individual testing yourselves uh there is requirements by ndh to do testing of public facilities and buildings and they have a predefined schedule that they typically a year to so that information is is typically limited they look at things like equal ey and a handful of parameters so is is ever possible to request water samples from them I mean it's obviously to the homeowner if they want to do that but could that request ever be made and run samples on theirselves or it depends on so when you ask for samples it depends on what your test $50 the last time I check turn that in and that would be dependent on the home owner to do that but yeah we can request that people who have wells are on and I mean I understand that's not a full full scale image of what we would find as a industrial well but would give us maybe some idea of what the source we're dealing with yeah you'll get you'll get an initial U snapshot of basically the water chemistry in quality so some of the some of the challenge with groundw is over time it changes especially in high demand so as you start to pull farther out the aquifer and actually establish that cor of depression that occurs then you start to really see the chemistry changes so are there any other questions about the proposal yeah absolutely um so Becky reached out and mentioned that there were some questions about conducting rate study I talked with Ryan Goldman who is um is part of our team and has a lot of experience with funding and and uh assisting with rates and in our conversation today I do have some notes here and I'd like to walk you through those and what I want to qualify too is if you have any further questions I can't answer them I'll definitely go back to Brian and have more conversation and we'll come right back and and answer those um but the synopsis from and conversation about the race study is with the current position white lakes in um it's kind of B's opinion that it's likely either option is going to cost approximately the same and while that's hard to believe um from the GetGo it really depends on the fact that if you look at it in in two scenarios in two lights uh we have a near term 20 years where uh the Sea of White Lake is looking to make major improvements with say a large cost where you're going to have to hit your affordability threshold for a PFA loan So within that 20 years we what we see here is that we're going to end up having to maximize pability threshold um prior to getting additional grants to make improvements on the water treatment systems after the 20-year long Peri period the cheaper option will be the one with the less operating expenses so the East Ranch Water Board it's it's our opinion that the East Ranch Water Board would be cheaper since the onm and repair costs are ultimately shared costs it comes down to sample size of how many people are through a water system by doubling the system there will be an economy of scale and there therefore will be to reduce onm cost that has to be shared by the communities but if we talk about near term right now and then we'll can talk about post the post 20e term so the 20year snapshot is going to ultimately depend on how the funding plays out uh the PFA program provides afford affordability based grants to maintain water supply costs at roughly 1.2% of medium household income once cost exceed that 1.2% Medium household income brats basically come into play and cover that Gap that affability Gap the current mhi which is um medium household income of white Lakes is estimated to be 7,583 based off of census data and other data that's available online at a maximum affordability of 1.2% this would equate to roughly 84 $847 per year per equivalent residential un user that's the individual resident who be paying or home that be paying for this the available data online provide that there's roughly 851 households in Hood Lakes so when you when you do the math this means that a Max portability is would generate roughly $720,000 in annual revenue from residential users past data has shown that approximately 5% of the water use in Ho Lakes is commercial or industrial so using that metric we can inflate the non-residential portions of roughly $760,000 um per year um as the max affordability for uh for Lakes what this means is that the maxim expenditure for the city would have would have a water supply is that $760,000 and above that per year the grants then would kick in for the specific question of mine there would be an operating cost uh for either the East Range waterboard or the well option these operating costs would include onm for the distribution system so to simplify it if we assume that after um either option if we assume for groundwater or East Range water board you know there's an onm cost of roughly $150,000 per water system this leaves Point Lake with six $10,000 in available yearly Revenue to be used for Debt Service so that's the Gap that you have to meet in order to take your affordability threshold before additional Grant kicks in and that's ultimately because P lakes does not carry a lot of debt on its current water system so again to use these grants you can get that that debt portability level before you can maximize the grant so assuming interest rate of roughly 2% in a long term of 20 years the cost per $1 million in debt is about $60,000 so if we look at your $610,000 available this means that the affordability threshold is roughly 10 million that's what we can expect to have to pay up to prior to Grants so what this means is in um like a $12 million project the cost of to the city is going to have to be 10 million and then above that you can get grant for like 2 million and a $50 million project will also cost the city $10 million so there's a level here that once you get that $10 million it's kind of irregardless of how what the project cost is it's going to be covered by a grant through PFA now with this in mind there's a couple scenarios we want to run through an option of being under 10 million and then there's an option of looking at it above 22 million which I'll get into here uh in a second if the project costs less than 10 million which would only occur in the groundwater um pump the groundwater um option is if a water treatment plan is not required if it's just Wells it's it's likely that the project would cut C would be under 10 million but that's extremely unlikely just knowing the Region's General groundw water and what we're seeing across the state of the groundwater systems there's likely going to be treatment required if the grant needs to be Max so if the grant needs needs exceed the maximum Grant available then you could pay more than 10 million in debt currently the max affordability Grant is 5 million and what this means is so once you meet your Grant your Grant affordability threshhold um the current state statute is that they will cover 5 million Grant there's legislation that is currently being um pursued that will extend that from 5 million to 12 M million so what this means for Hoy Lakes is by the time a project is selected you would be able to spend up to 22 million before you're on the back end of the Grant and you have to have additional costs so that would be your range 10 million to 2020 to 22 million and again these numbers are rough estimates by that's if that passes it that's if it's passes it's 15 milli so the bottom line is either project is so the other we want to play is if either project goes above the 20 the 22 million cap that we're estimating once the legislation passes you'd have to find additional funding to obviously meute that that funding Gap from 22 million to whatever the project cost is uh in discussions with local Representatives agencies such as David G NPC provided in recent discussions that um you know if if you're looking for funding where do you go to well you go to direct Appropriations and in many cases a joint venture has proven to be more successful in finding funding than simply a project on its own and what that means is that in the eyes of the legislator the regionalization would be more preferable opposed to the city of P Lakes pursuing its own water treatment plant or water system improvements so the bottom line is there's some there's some play with the money there and how it handles But ultimately under 20 under 20 years you would be looking at maximizing your affordability for the next 20 some years which does not change your rates ultim to pay off the loan so now considering the post term post 20 years when the grants when the loans paid off and now we're looking at strictly onm cost to drive the factor so as for mentioned after the 20-year program the cheaper option is East Ranch waterboard system from a qualitative standpoint I want to say this a couple times because in doing um this desktop analysis and having some conversation um it's difficult at this time to provide a quantitative number on what a rate can be based on multiple factors we're talking about 20 years of the loan had Point LS moving through 20 years the 20-year period to pay off the loan of where it's based off PFA and Grant affordability um and after that point it's going to depend on onm costs your medium hous income which can change significantly in 20 years um and depending on economic development things like new Range uh if we have a new group of individuals coming in um you know the blueco collar worker you know increasing that that Medium household income versus if Point lakes continues trending towards more retirees lowering medium household income that really changes what your rate structure could look and it forecast in 20 years so again it's kind of hard to qualitative or quantily uh say it's going to be 70 you know $760 or whatever it might be perspectively so we use a qualitative analysis here to talk about relations with the Easter R water board versus the groundw option so if we talk about on andm costs for the EAS range water board versus groundwater um ultimately The Source water quality treatment costs need to be considered when you look at embarrass pit which is the East which is you begin getting water from the East Ranch Water Board and we talk about groundwater we have an interesting situation where ultimately the embarrass is found is is fed from a groundwater source and so we're anticipating water quality to be very similar but we also know that the VAR bit water quality as there's a project that's right aurar going on and from from the early analysis it's showing that that's going to be fairly economical to treat and require little little treatment um and that's specifically because the embarrassed pit receives a bulk of its input from groundwater and transient flow through the Lal sand ban um that's adjacent to mine Lake and embarass gber um one comment I want to provide here too is is in order to understand what water quality treatment levels needed for groundwater ultimately we need to move through the assessment phases of the proposal and understand what the water quality is going to be um determining again that level level of chemical additive that's needed so again it's hard to put a number um specifically on the groundwater system but we recognize that as they're both groundwater fed there's probably a very similar cost that's going to be there so it comes down to onm cost comparison um and ultimately if we look at this from a from a high level again the option of joining the East Ranch Water Board will likely have lower costs and again economy of scale you doubling the amount of residents and users that are that are purchasing water and so those onm costs are going to be be divided you know amongst all those users and so if we kind of look at employee cost a low and benefits and you know we could be you could be seeing where it's shared employee C in employee as an opportunity you know you're going to be having less employee costs less benefit costs and specifically from a maintenance perspective um it's typical to see for one facility of $4 million in 20 years in rehab costs well so that that breaks down for L is that's roughly $200,000 a year on average again for a 20y year $4 million cost if you're doubling your service area including other communities you're effectively reducing that by %. so you go from having a 20 $200,000 k a year average to potentially $100,000 um in shared costs lastly the groundw treatment system will have onm costs when you compareed to the current water treatment due to due to reduced complexity and what I mean by that is you know for where you guys are at today with your high your high cost for treatment we know it's going to go down but again when you compare that to the level of water quality in the East Range uh the East Range waterboard has the embarrassed pit we anticipating to be very similar so the synopsis for this um in long winded explanation I provided you is in the near term they're going to be roughly the same post 20 years it comes down to onm costs and again without understanding the groundwater quality uh that's available um it's a little bit difficult to provide a quantitative analysis But ultimately you know from a high level we can say from a quality qualitative standpoint that looking at the two systems looking at the two options is definitely assume that LE ran water board option is going to provide less a lower onm cost through the purchase of the water versus handling it and fabricating and making it um yourselves so that's so ultimately um in talking with Brian is he's recommending that we don't necessarily proceed with a great study you know understanding that it's not going to provide a lot of tangible information especially with the amount of uh estimating and assumptions that we going to have to be taken into it if you guys would like to proceed with it we're more than happy to but we just feel that it's just not going to provide a valuable tool at this time uh based on the information provided uh back of the nap calculation is our current rate is $62 a month the guesstimated increase to cover up to that $10 million would be $70 a month so rates as they stand today would have to go up $8 a month to get us to that affordability and then the following that what we recommend is once you maximize your affordability start looking at waterm projects um within the city because those are going to be almost 100% Grant eligible now there is some some cost to that and that's why I say Almost 100% And that depends on the application with PFA but it's a it's a mechanism that you can use while you're paying off your debt service that you're making critical improvements that would ultimately impact the cityport Lakes either way and show rates so napping M our current is $62 mon for just the water it will be a 25 pass 25 um the required it' be have to be about $70 yeah 1.2% of your Medan possible would come so we're looking at guaranteed increasing our water bill despite it costing less to treat the water because they've put all the infrastructure and Pap after 20 years it drops potentially very strong potentially on there all cost will increase in yes and does this have to increase income Med Medi income so our income all of a sudden jumps to $100,000 a year then our rate has to go up during after that right it's definitely it's dependent on the um the medum housing but it drops correct then your then your affordability thrustful drops you get more Grant to cover the gaps even after the fact so like we're five years in Andes down we can lower our rate and then the grant just covers what's the difference or that's a good question I will check into that one that I don't know I will say for the Wastewater Plant we were required to sign an agreement stating that our rate would increase number you know for the next how many years for the duration what 2% yeah it is yeah so we we were required that agreement it could have changed since then but we did have to that so basically either way we go it's a guarantee we're not going to reduce our water P for the residents they still correct in the next 20 years specifically on the infrastructure needs and whether I don't know about anybody else but I had quite a few people talk me and asked me we're going support the new water system and virtually everybody that I talked to I said you realize your chances are that your water BS could go up they said yeah well it' be worth it to get off of the system and onome and understanding yeah I mean Jake was kind enough to take me through the plant the other day and because I had asked him for the tour and looking at the water coming in the lake and I've been on the lake fishing I've been in the lake swimming and everybody knows it's it's not good not only that the cost of the chemicals and the treatment that he's going to put into it it it seems that most people want better water in town and to to think of even considering the we is kind of a pig and really compared to having the availability of the Easter waterboard Supply right there and it will provide better water to the city and to think of well we're going to save a few bucks by Contin to treat this and provide this Quality Water to people I I think actually that that' be my opinion speak to any of the recent developments changing where you're adding chemicals and potentially reducing of chemical we're trying like like reduce the costs um right now we're talking about getting a main chemical that will settle faster as Dave saw when he was there we're still getting a lot of block coming up going over the bear and going in for filters but um you know we're looking at getting new tanks in after um February 1st I believe the new tanks you guys have moved are coming in that to drop the current cost to the current chemical are beating quite a bit and all I can say is we're trying ell's working his butt off to it did you want additional time to provide me with any questions you have for and I can get those to them and then you consider the next meeting would you want to reject now you guys said your preliminary meeting did you get any responses to the questions that were yet uh the primary response I received from both the township and aora was that they're more than happy to do anything that they can to get Str system short of paying bills for us um they're really interested in working together uh obviously you know um luk put the Highway 110 project together to upsize the pipe and you know they're doing all the work that they can to make sure that it's as seamless as possible for us to join a lot of the specific questions I received they don't have answers to U make up from board cost sharing you know cost sharing will be set forth by the engineers based on percentage of usage but what does that mean for the board what does that mean for anything like that they they're willing to work through that process with us and make sure that everyone's I was at the meeting they had a public meeting year or two ago I went there and asked a lot of questions about it and they told me basically what youve already said that they would be more than glad to upside the size of the name all the way to the holiday so that the only thing the city o have can be concern still line from here to there and and there's a lot of discussion about where does the ownership cut off because there's residents in the township between the Aurora property you know Aurora boundaries and lakes boundaries who are interested in joining so is that Township infrastructure is it split Township white Lakes you know what what that all looks like and again how is the what's the Manpower look like is it water board employees or is it contracted somehow through one the cities or Jo it seems like preliminarily they're interested in everyone having their own employees and then the the city entity who works the facility charging them the water board to run the plant and it would allow for additional weekends off as opposed to now we're in every other weekend you know when you're have wab or have Aurora in the township who potentially have licensed employees you're then splitting that between five employees instead of two so would run it and then charge back or it would be Alles who have licensed employes so kind of a rotating shift L provides this weeks next week they also said that the makeup of the board would change with L's Representatives on also so we wouldn't just be something writing check on yeah and and that was a question that was probably one the first asked is are we interested in just being a customer you know buying a bul product for them or are we interested in being a partner and based on the conversations I've had here I was pretty ad that this Council was interested in being a partner in the facility not just bu and with the breakdowns of water usage L makes up about 50% if you were to put them on together yeah approaching 50% yeah does that fall into the cost of the facility and infrastructure as well so the way the agreement is put together too is there is jurisdictions for each Community that's in the agreement there's shared infrastructure and then there's jurisdictional infrastructure which each City would be required of and the agreement will listed out so as what Becky was kind of alluding to too is there'll be a piece here where um a on Entry you would not negotiate but you would discuss which infrastructure is jurisdictional which which infrastructure is going to be shared and then each water their costs and then white Lakes would still be responsible for their jurisdictional costs um that could be like discussion on where the pipeline comes from where end in Aurora to where it comes in white lakes and those sort of components so potentially it could look like joint cost being the facility itself the water name going to Aurora the water name going through Aurora and the water being to White leges all being responsible for white leges that well it just be discussed with the strange water board again yeah if you think about the jurisdictions in terms of the township and aora like the township doesn't have a water tower but they need a water tower and so those types of conversations that's why the agreement was set up the way it is point L is a little different because we have our own large system and so it would just be the pieces of connection as well as the shared parts of the infrastruct specifically in the in the the plant itself and the raw water intake yeah I know earlier discussions you know we identified the two the wells and the connection with Aurora but it sounds like I me from like Dave what you mentioned you're in favor of just sticking the one option of joining if it required I would make a motion to do so because I I don't believe that putting all the money into test Wells and everything else when we look at the cost and ear only talking basically 6in Wells whereas a municipal W is going to be 24 to 36 in and you look at the water in some of the municipalities around here that do have wells that's dealing with some of the same stuff we've got in Lake water the tannin and manganese T are in open water but the water is pretty poor quality in some of the municipalities on the Range that are stuck on all water I mean this is this is a Sure Shot and as you said the quality of the water in the lake is much better than what we've got coming into our kitchen faes you did say it's roughly simar the ground and again it's it's best case similar obviously need the evaluation um the first kind of expand to on timeline here is we did talk about timeline during the the uh the meeting and just to kind of understand some major Milestones just to provide so the council can have fur the discussion if he wants but ultimately in looking at the Timeline so the the critical piece here is the 110 improvements and through Aurora if there's a decision to be made on on upsizing some of the pipe to allow for that connection from Aurora's public water system to put things that project is slated for September of next year and so in discussion we recognize that if the if the council can decide which Avenue what to proceed with specifically by Spring and Into Summer that's roughly the timeline that we're looking at right now um what's being happened through Aurora is that it it's just being planned to make those Improvement upgrades uh to do the work as Becky has been talking about um because ultimately it's just a contract deduct on our part since we are working with the county and Aurora um so ultimately it was decided late in the game not to do that we could just take it so there is some some protection in the schedule here but if a decision could be slated by next spring early summer that would be the best how much is the town white is going to go on system 12% 12% of the current Aurora put Aurora Township split is the township it's you're looking at Pineville cenic acres and then the S they have mentioned that they meeting that they were hoping to to extend it farther into town white in addition to what and if there's a line run from aora too you know there's entities or properties off of that roadway that would be interested in Giants that cor right and like B said so the the connection was just established um to Pineville and to cener so those those communities will be brought on um fairly soon actually so but there was nothing self on the town of white south of Aurora there was no expansion in that area nothing planned or current nothing's planned okay so um I did hear a motion from Dave to move forward with joining the Easter water board and appointing Jake and I to that committee I guess my largest concerns from as a resident and as a representative from lakes that we get representation on the board uh in conjunction with the amount we use so we have equal say in what it looks like moving forward um as far as setting costs and things like that we should we should have a say in that if we're making up half half of the East Range waterboard usage at least um same with cost I don't necessarily want hoyes to pay for everyone else is water um if we're paying for half facility then again we should have half represent and things like that um and the same goes with the employment I don't I take see us lose employees and they get to keep theirs those are my concerns May if I just interject one thing winding down in the next month my 30-year career as a municipal lawyer uh the one thing that I struck me over the last two years uh as I've gone around you know I represent numerous cities and the costs of the costs of doing business have increased so significantly and just even distrib by the labor market because the labor market has changed so much in the last few years just the cost of do business not only with the labor market but it's a big driver than a lot of other things too um regionalization is I mean it's a reality of of a place like Iron Range where I mean you have all these small communities that are you know stand alone but they are in you know relatively close Geographic proximity to other communities the logistics can work out the you know just the concept of regionalization on so much of what you do whether it's with something like this or with Public Safety uh or parts and wck uh you know youth programs um it's a reality because because at some point for a lot of these small cities standing alone and doing it on your own is from a cost standpoint is not going to be sustainable it's just not you can only increase the levy and you have to I mean you have to increase the levy to do business but at some point we reach a breaking point where just we can't increase the levy anymore and the amount of funds that you get in from state or other outside sources is not enough to backfill that so I think you know just I mean it's a reality of what you're going to be facing over the next many years is exactly what PR motion is here and that is to join the you know Jo Waters board and see if you can be part of the project so I just wanted to interject that and I'm not oppos to regionalization it's looking back in history we have the schools are example white Lakes had multiple schools uh they came went down to one u b had their school I had multiple schools we had to join for financial reasons and 20 years after that then one we left with we we have the rundown School W CL their school we have the school in Aurora um you look at the Catholic churches um financially they had to join um now we're looking at the water CL their church and o l is losing their Church um I don't want ho Lakes to lose another thing and just being after thought so yeah I think one of the priorities will be you know like the funding and the the costs but also protect our interests as for white lakes and not have everything you know end up being Aurora's employees or you we still keep the shared services with white L yeah I guess on my lot like they just talking L think do their c um more a better quality of water bring um but I think before we make any big steps we get a lot of our questions answer that and then getting that Community inut I'm like well this is what it will TOS this is how rates will go up if we hook in with Aurora so it's kind of crystal clear to the public like yes we want better quality of watering better quality water with a but this is what public big decisions are made and um with appointing me and Jake to meet with them we'll we'll work through a lot of those questions um obviously some of it will take a formal joint HS agreement but we'll we'll try to nail down some answers to those questions I do know that we were on a time crunch to the last meeting and so um we didn't spend you know we spent an hour together kind of talking about the big scope and so we can definitely work on getting into the more specific questions moving forward all right are we moving forward then if Dave has a motion to move forward with these meetings and some so this is just like meet with them and get notely yeah just just to meet with them get some specifics ironed out you won't have answers to all the questions you have sure um which is part of you know the unknown of going forward with the project but we'll we'll get answers to many as we can then two with not going ahead with looking at the wells in town that's saving R to do a postc f I think [Music] we is that a second motion and second all those in favor oppos motion Carri we'll continue the discussions more concrete answers to provide there good thank you all right 11.2 pay request number two for Max gr Construction in the amount of 17,1817 [Music] any questions or any need a motion to is this for the the back building they're making or uh yep so it's for the entire Arena project um it includes quite a few updates including the parking lot and concrete in the front of the building building a back building for the ice plant lighting improvements Ada improvements including bleachers new doors I'll support support all those in favor motion carried 11.3 resolution for America in Grant Program okay so it was a tight timeline so I'm going to ask you to both approve the application and also the grant agreement um so Kenny and I sat down and worked through the America and blue Grant together this provides uh trees shrubs and flowers to communities with a CN Railway in them and so it's we were awarded a $25,000 one toone match for the Midway beautification which is something we talked about when we were doing that project we anticipate planning 20 maple trees 20 oak trees and 15 White Pines the Maple and oak trees are $200 a piece and the white pines are $1,000 a piece six feet um in addition of $2,000 will be sent on shrubs and flowers and these are estimates and the total of that will be 25,000 which is reimbursable by a rant uh we were also able to utilize in-kind services and Professional Services as matching dollars and so I did engage with the ranger ATD club and the Garden Club and both entities are willing to help us with in kind Services planting trees flowers and shrubs in the area and so I anticipate the outof pocket cost to the city will be about $6,500 for Tops soil mulch signage and then you do have to pay $1,500 as a membership of American and Bloom but you can use that for matching know is is that a one time payment or no one time uh and that's the lowest as we're one of the smallest communities goes up by on population so the uh number three here is approving the application and then number four will be approving so the total project cost is $55,000 we're going to get 25,000 back on the Grant and still have to cough up $30,000 uh a majority of that will be intime services so it'll be no out of pocket expense to the city it'll be labor costs for Public Works Ranger ATV and you said the out pocket expense would be 6,500 yes total project 55,000 only paid 6,500 do you want a separate motion for each of one this just for the Midway area or is it supped to go down to the beach area as well uh it is it's for the um that entire par property [Music] Lake I should also mention I did also look into um butterfly garden type grants they don't have any funding in this funding cycle um and and there's there's one that the city would eligible for uh but it's primarily for like butterfly Highway type things and so the city would get money to provide flowers for the butterfly highway but we also provide grants to Residents so they can have stopping spots for the butterflies to but like I said they don't have any fun SP yeah I think it's a $55,000 worth of improvements to only have to pay 65 seems Seems like a pretty good deal um I will make a motion to approve the resolution to apply for the grant there's been a motion and support all those in favor opposed motion carried and approving the resolution means we have to approve the grant agreement is there a motion to approve the actual Grant agreement for this motion motion is there second support motion and support all those in favor motion is Carri 11.5 ordinance number 246 to the 2025 fee schedule the fee schedule has been posted for no less than 10 days as required and if you approve it tonight go effect did anyone have any I know we've talked about it a couple times there any other questions or comments before it gets approved hearing none we'll need a motion to accept the new schedule make that Mo motion is there support motion and support all those in favor opposed motion carried and what color are our books this year they're going to be orangee the orange books put as the green book the orange book for 2025 11.6 St Louis County cooperative agreement for State Highway 110 so this is the agreement for the project for K Kennedy Memorial that will be going through town next year uh essentially it's the agreement between the two parties usually if there's something we're going to pay for it's spelled out in here there isn't and so the only thing that burdens the city on this agreement is the requirement that we once the county installs the lighting for the street the city will then take ownership of the lighting and maintenance we do now we maintain the street lights to our main the metal ones minota power is no longer maintaining but if you push them really hard they will but they're going to stop maintaining um they will only maintain lights on wooden pools from now on so if we keep these metal the city's going to end up with them one are there any assurances or things like that we can do to make sure this is done by water [Music] fir the county and the arena Constructors Max gray are all very aware about water cronal and that it's going to be a very very busy time they have all assured us that roadways will be passable and the arena law they going to do whole stretch all at once or block by block or what I don't know what their construction plan is they did say they're going to use the back road through the arena lot as the pass through for town they talked about doing flagging so one lane at a time um but remember we're also hoping to have West over completely torn up at that time as well so uh for the city's feo project so it it'll be a busy construction year maybe the water Carnival committee can give Max gr workers some incentive to have it done get some free risked for us um yeah it is a straightforward agreement um there's no cost to us spelled out in here so is there a motion to approve the agreement with st [Music] County I'll support that if that all those in favor motion Carri th to number 12 adjournment all those in favor