Board of Aldermen - Regular Meeting

Good evening everybody. It is Monday, [clears throat] January 5th, 2026. This is a Carne Board of Alderman meeting. Call the meeting to order. Please stand for the pledge of allegiance. Pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. [clears throat] Sunday, you had a chance to take role. I've taken role. Everyone is present. You have quum.

Great. We'll move on. Uh we have no public hearings noticed this evening. Is there anybody here this evening that would wish to address the board under open public comments? Seeing nobody, we'll move on to the consent agenda. Does anybody on the board have any questions or items of discussion on the consent agenda this evening? Seeing none, if we could entertain a motion to approve the consent agenda as presented. So moved. Second. All in favor? I

oppose. Consent agenda passes as presented. We have no ordinances this evening. We have one resolution. uh a resolution approving a temporary event liquor license and granting permission for use of a city-owned building for the Carne Enrichment Council's wine and chocolate tour to be held from 3:30 to 8:00 p.m. on February 7th, 2026. Sheila,

I received an email request from the executive director of the Carne Enrichment Council um after the board amended the fire old firehouse lease agreement. Now they are allowed to with permission have serve alcohol um at the old firehouse. And this was a request from Lawrence. They always have had the wine and chocolate tour. They're going to continue, but this year they would like to actually have the old firehouse be a stop. I did reach out to um Chief Thomas and he did recommend because at city property to have two officers um offduty officers that Carne enrichment council would be required if you guys do approve this um that's his recommendation. You guys could always take that uh restriction or requirement off, but it is written um with with Chief Thomas' recommendation.

Okay. Thank you for that report. Any questions from the board? Uh to like Captain Allen is here tonight or staff. Two officers. Yes. Off duty. You said off duty and they're not it's not where the city would be paying. They would need to pay the off duty officers for their time. Yes.

It's usually fairly um quiet. It's nowhere near like the whiskey walk is. It's a group of women that have been shopping. There will be a few odd couples in there. Um, just thinking about that, I'm not confident that we need two. Maybe one would do. I mean, I don't know if this is a hard set recommendation by our police. I do not know these women. Who knows? Maybe they do get crazy, but I've not seen it. I think it's just standard that they always have two officers.

Okay. assumes that an officer safety thing. Yeah, it's officer safety thing. Okay. For basically what we practice for as long as I've been here, anytime we work out an offduty event that serves out the hall, it's always been too. So, but that's not in writing. We don't really That's just kind of what we've been reading. Thank you for that. Any other questions from the board? If you could read uh the proposed resolution, please.

A resolution approving a temporary event liquor license and granting permission for use of a city-owned building for the for the Carne Enrichment Council's wine and chocolate tour to be held from 3:30 to 8:00 p.m. on February 7th, 2026. I make a motion to approve. I'll second. All in favor?

I oppose. Resolution passes. We'll [clears throat] move on to items for review and presentation. The first item this evening is our wastewater system improvement financing options. And in the packet this evening, there is a handout. And as we know, the board has received some additional information uh and updates from staff on our weekly updates as well. But what we're looking at doing here is providing a a overview of what options staff uh has come up with and uh for us to consider to finance the proposed wastewater improvements. We all know that we've gone through several different studies and uh gearing up for for this not so um it is an exciting conversation but but um it's an expensive conversation. Nonetheless, we do not have any other options on how to move forward. We do have to move forward. Um, so I I think it's best of us as a board um to to consider the options and and really um m make a decision that that we feel the the community can can stand behind and support. Uh the need here is is is to address years of deferred maintenance of not only to our sewer lines but our pump stations and and our our sewer system itself. Uh we're we're as we know we are running right at capacity. We're below capacity but it does not leave a lot of room for

growth. method does not leave a lot of uh options for for much. Um and and so we a couple meetings ago we had an estimate of roughly 55 and a half million dollars was the kind of the price tag of of what it would take to finance the uh proposed improvements to our sewer wastewater facility. Um over a 30-year term, the options we have are are traditional financing. Um traditional financing would not require us to go to the voters of Carney for approval. Traditional financing is uh obviously we have the authority as a board to uh make those decisions. Um traditional financing is going through whatever normal avenue bank finance company is available. Um we would go through um the standard process but we would be uh reviewed on a case- byase basis. Uh go through you know all banks and have different credit cultures and requirements and it would be a competitive market rate situation. Um, looking at our total cost after we would kind of estimate and use some interest cost and and fees associated with securing the financing. Total repayment over 30 years by taxpayers we estimate to be roughly $108 million. We do have an option as a municipality and that is to um take advantage of a program called SRF, state revolving fund financing. That is a program administered by the uh state of Missouri. Um and that program uh would require us to go through a

formal voter approval process. uh the residents of Carney would have to approve this type of financing, but the attractive piece there is that based off of the interest rate that that program uh has, we would potentially see a $31 million savings in interest only. So when you look at a total project cost of roughly $55.5 million, when you look at the annual cost and the interest rate, the the example we used in our handout was a 1.8% rate to a 5% rate. um you know almost doubling the cost that you know I I just think it would be who of the board to consider um educating the public on on why we think that you know whatever decision we make is the best decision and and and move forward. Obviously, me personally, I I I do think I mean manage debt is not a bad thing. Um to to to keep up with our potential growth and to allow for growth is is one thing, but we've you know, we're we're running at capacity. And so I I think any time that we could look at accomplishing the same thing and and saving $36 million over a 30-year period, um imagine what else we could do with that money in our community um for the same project. Uh I'd like to open it up to to staff, the board, anybody else that has any thoughts or or has any questions on on kind of the the two paths that we see forward. uh one is a traditional financing mechanism that that does not require uh voter approval. Uh we have that authority as a board or to go

through the state revolving fund financing uh program through the state of Missouri that specific debt does require voter approval. But I would hope that if that's the route that we decide to go um that we could educate and and explain why we whatever decision we make is the best way to go. Sheila, do you or or Stephanie from the finance department have anything to add to any of that? The maybe the only thing that um that I should say is that staff really needs direction tonight because the next meeting would require the board of alderman to approve an ordinance placing the question on the ballot if that if you are choosing to give voters the opportunity to choose state revolving funds instead of traditional financing. it. I don't want to speak for the entire board, but but I'll tell you my fear and my fear is what happens if if the board decides to go the SRF financing and and voters don't approve

that was my question the the the issue is then [clears throat] then we would fall back we we'd fall back on the traditional financing but I also think you know going against the the public's desire is um you know as elected representatives we are the voice of the public that that elect us. However, we have a very serious responsibility um in these positions as well and we have to be able to flush the toilet. We have to be able to take showers. Um

clean drinking water is a priority in our community, I'm sure. in and in in these. So, so yes, I I don't think it will be an easy task to receive voter approval for any um increase. And I get it, right? We we all um have to make tough budgeting decisions and and I I I know that, you know, we we also were talking about water and sewer rate increases. that that's how we're going to pay for this proposed debt, right? It it um so uh one way or another, um it's going to be a responsibility of of this board and and the taxpayers to see through these important improvements for the city. And um I would obviously prefer, you know, I usually don't vote or have a say unless it's a tiebreaker, but I would hope that the board would consider strongly of going to our voters and and hopefully they would see the uh importance of saving $31 million over a 30y year period and being able to invest. I think we also want to stress that [clears throat] if we take the if they vote for it, it keeps their payments down because if we don't vote for it, we got to have it anyway. Now, we're paying more money, which means you're going to end up having more cost.

That That's a really good point, uh, Alderman Holt. And that's I I I don't want to sound like it's a do this or that's going to happen, but

it's what it is. I mean, it's just reality. [cough] [clears throat] We don't like to be in that situation. Sorry guys, I got stuff my throat. But we don't like [clears throat] to get in that situation. But the bottom line of it is the city's been in this this position before to where we couldn't grow because we didn't have we couldn't issue building permits because we didn't have sewer for it. We also know that if a town doesn't grow, it dies. And when we get in that stagnated period is when you're you start losing businesses. That's when you start losing other things. If we don't do this, if we say, "Well, okay, we're not." The voter said no, so we're just not going to do that. That's just really not an option. It's not reality because the town then will dwindle. Then you're never going to have the tax money that you need to ever get to that point down the road. Um, we just have to let the, you know, constituents know that it's a bad deal, but it has to be done. It's not a, well, this is a nice thing to have. It's a no, it has to be be done. Um, and the question is is how cheap do you want to do it? Do you want to save 30 million or not? Well, and I think I think one of the ba main things that we need to across to the voters is this is not a new tax. Um this is a vote to save [snorts] $31 million.

Correct?

You vote yes, you're going to save $31 million. You vote no and you're gonna you just cost yourself and everybody else in the city of Carney $31 million. And being an elected official, we have to be good stewards of money. And and being good stewards of money is not saying, "No, I don't want to go to a voter. I want to spend an extra $31 million. To me, that that doesn't make sense. Why would we spend $31 million? Give the voters a chance.

Y if they say no, okay, fine. We've still got to do it because we've we've put this off. You know, previous administrations have kicked this ball down the can or can down the road for years and now we're stuck. We have to do it. And a yes vote saves $31 million. I mean, to me, that's that's a no-brainer. Yeah. I mean, and I really think we need to stress to them that this is going to happen. One way or the other, it's gonna happen. Yep.

Because it it just you have to have a sewer plan, right? A yes vote simply saves you $31 million over the course of the loan. Correct. Are we trying to have this on the B on the ballot in April?

Yes. So, time is of the essence and we do need to educate our voters. I think that we will get um I don't think this will be too hard to communicate to them. I could be mistaken, but I really think that they can see the black and white numbers and the logic behind it. Um, and I think that our radio station, our chamber, a variety of people will help us get this word out.

Yeah. I I and and [clears throat] Alderman Leman, when we're talking about when I was mentioning education and I I think that that message really is key is this is obviously proprietary funding. Mhm. Uh so to repay this debt is repaid by your monthly sewer bill portion of that. And so um one way or another taxpayers are are going to pay for improvements to the system they use. Right. Um just how much do you want to pay? Right. Right. So good.

Um, Alderman King, did you have anything to add there, sir? Not to put you on the spot or anything, but I just heard from everybody else. Okay. I think is it safe to say then the consensus from the board for staff is to get working on an ordinance for us to consider at our next meeting to put it on the April ballot for this SRF financing option? Absolutely. On the ballot. Yeah. Okay. Is that what staff needed on that item? Yes. Thank you. Uh, next is wastewater billing options volume versus uh winter average. I think Sheila's going to cover that item.

Yeah, let me just introduce it and then you guys can ask whatever questions. Currently, um the city uses the volume method of sewer billing, which means that all of the water that anyone uses gets charged sewer on it, whether or not it is used outdoors for outdoor watering, for a swimming pool, whatever. Um when HDR was here on December 15th, one of the option well the option that they brought to you during that presentation was switching from the volume method of sewer billing to everyone in the city going that is in a at a house a residence going to the winter water average uh method of sewer billing. So what would happen is whatever water you use during the winter months, December, January, and February, that would be averaged and then for the whole rest of the year, you would be built on that amount of sewer no matter how much water you used. One of the questions that I asked them is um is there an option instead of having everyone be on volume or everyone being on the winter water average? Is there a me a a way that people could have choice so that they could either choose whichever was more beneficial to them, the volume method or the winter water average? and they said yes that also is a choice. [clears throat] They need feedback on which way the board would like to go so that they can kind of look at and calculate what rates would be. Um I just want to make this

really clear. So [clears throat] for our utilities, when we charge our water and our wastewater rates, those rates are set at the amount that cover the cost [cough] of [clears throat] providing that service. And so in order for them to set those rates, they have to make some assumptions. It's very easy to make an assumption [clears throat] of how much water somebody is going to use if you're on volume or if the entire city is going to the winter water average. It's a little bit more difficult when you are so there's more risk to the city as far as as setting rates when you give people an option. However, um sometimes people like to have options. And so really tonight's discussion um is would you like to continue doing volume only? The whole reason that we looked at winter water average is because we have had a few citizens who have been spending a lot of money on uh watering their lawns or on pools um things where they're using doing a lot of outdoor watering and they don't feel like they should be having to pay uh sewer charges on all of that watering when it is not going into the sewer system. And so I did check and Smithville, uh, North Kansas City, Liberty, and Gladstone, um, all do offer winter water average. The city of Excelsia Springs doesn't offer winter water average. They offer a summer credit, a summer water credit. So they kind of did a different take on it.

Um but it is when you set fees, you are setting fees for the service that people are using. And so winter water average is very common around um the community, but we have not offered that. And but but some people not a lot um you know I tried to sit we did have one person that came to our meeting and I've been here for three years and personally [clears throat] I believe maybe five people have asked out of all of the people me directly um but still I do know that there are some people that have asked [clears throat] for it. So, it's a option for you guys to consider um and really looking for direction on that so that we can get some have HDR come back to our next meeting kind of give you guys the rates that are calculated um based on that on the direction from you tonight and um kind of start getting more clarity on how rates are going to need to reset for cost recovery.

I need some clarity here. Yes. [clears throat] I was understanding that we would set this up and the customer could choose which way they want it. You're saying no, it's either all one way or all the other way, right? No, you can also have customers have choice also. Okay. You have all three of those options. So, you could stick with volume only. You could go to winter water average only. Or you could offer choice. Well, if you go to winter water average, then the seniors lose their benefits.

If you required everyone to uh to go I would I would offer I would continue offering that senior discount as is. there's more risk for the city when you when you give an option. And so to help with uh make sure that to lessen the risk, I would say that if somebody is getting the benefit of um of the winter water average, so not having to pay on all of their water usage for sewer, then you should that credit should not be available for somebody that is picking the winter water average if you give choice.

Does that make sense? It's my thought. I think options are always good. Um my original concern with the options was, you know, if that's going to create any internal issues for staff or billing issues and kind of all those things internally. Um and it sounds like it's not going to create any extra issues or steps for staff or any billing issues or anything. It's a rate selection. So, and we're limiting it to a choice of once a year. And so once a year you'll just allow people to make their election and you'll pick the right and if they choose then the winter water they pay a bit higher rate but on a different unless

amount. Yes. unless so um but then they can't get the senior thing but on the regular volume they can choose to use their senior discount if they would like to.

Yes. Um, and a majority of people that do a lot, I won't use the word excessive, but a lot of watering are usually people in the newer neighborhoods that have newer lawns, newer trees, all these things that you have to pay attention to that. But that doesn't last very long. First year or two and then that's over. And our percentage of pools in Carney is what? Less than 5% of our homes have pools. Maybe less than that, 3 or 4%. So, I don't see that it's a problem to give them the option if they understand the differences and how that's going to work.

I I'm I'm with you, Jerry. I think Here's where my my opinion and thoughts. You know, for as long as I've been on the board, I would say probably I don't know, four dozen times I've received contacts since 2019 on you know, residents that are high irrigation users. And um you know our our only option since I've been on the board in 2019 is to hey if you don't want to pay sewer on irrigating your lawn, you pay 3,500 bucks for a new meter to be set. You have a minimum sewer fee and that you know we haven't had a hard time collecting excess money from that small group of people. I think this is a good opportunity for us to show some good faith for us to say, "Hey, we know now that we now know rather that we have options for you."

Um, give the constituents an opportunity to make whatever decision they feel is best for them. And it and it I do concur. I think it is a small number. So, I think that does also dilute our risk as well. Um,

I think so, too. And I realize that it is a risk, but I do think that dilutes it. And if they can make that option, you know, if you are moving into a new neighborhood, then you know that and you're going to deal with new lawn and new shrubs and trees. So that year you do the waste water one or if you have a pool, you do it every year.

Well, and and Sheila and I had our one-on-one today. Um, this was the big topic and yes, I have a pool in my backyard, but essentially I if it's a if it's a warm year, last part of April, May, June, July, August, and some of September is when my pools open And the biggest cost for me is in the spring when I add 13,000 gallons of water to my pool. And then ever so often during the the hot summer months, I have to add water because of evaporation. But after our meeting, I went home and and did some calculations. And granted, mine's not an indoor or an ingground pool, but it's still 27,000 gallons of water. And when when I did the calculations for me to request the winter water average saves me no money because I pay a higher sewer rate. It's kind of like a level pay across 12 months. And the amount of water that I use for my

pool and for those four or five months of increased water use versus a higher rate across 12 months, I don't save any money. So for me, unless I've got an ingground pool that's going to going to have 50,000 gallons of water that I'm going to refill it every year, the the winter water average is not a a money-saving option for me. Now, if I had a lawn irrigation system, that might be a different story. But having said that, that limits the amount of people that would use this even more. Now we're down to the irrigation people almost exclusively. And and to to say, okay, we're going to do the winter water average across the board. Everybody's going to be on it. I don't I if you'd asked me when I left the meeting, my one-on-one meeting with Sheila this afternoon, I have had a different answer. But after doing the calculations, I can't say that that the winter water average is going to benefit anybody other than a lawn irrigation system who doesn't want to spend the $3,500 for a new meter. uh pools aren't going to use enough water that that it really saves on on the sewer rate. So, anybody else have anything to to add or or

any questions? If [clears throat] a neighborhood pool is going to fill up in the spring, can they call ahead and say, "I'm filling up with this many gallons," and not have to pay for that sewer. There is a one time a year pool credit,

Stephanie. Yeah, we've we've tried to address some of that some of the discrepancies or I don't know that you would call it a discrepancy, but some of the different usage that's happening. We've last year when when we passed the credits for um large irrigation or large pool one time pool use um we tried to give people some some leeway to accommodate for that. But um you know I look at it as a big picture. you have to pay for your system costs no matter no matter what it is. So it really for me I always think it really doesn't matter how you charge um your number has to be the same at the end one way or the other. Um so I I tend to agree with you. It's that number that has to fund what it cost to maintain your system is the same at the end. And so we can make it as linear as linear of a calculation as we want to make it or we can give people all kinds of options. Um but um I don't I don't see people changing probably. People people like consistency. They don't like to think about it or they think about it too late, you know, or that sort of thing. So, um, options are always good if you want to give people options, but but I feel like in the end, people will probably pay close to the same amount whichever way they pick. It'll just look different.

I think it still will give them a sense of control, a sense of an option. Um, and you're correct, we already do allow for those anomalies like that once a year pool fill up and stuff. So, so if we do the option method, does that pool fill up credit stay or does it go away? That's a board decision, right? It's not a staff decision. It's a board decision.

And that's a question. Well, I would think if they're going to do the winter water average that that would probably go away. But if you leave it as an option, well, if they choose that option, okay, then it goes away. See, I I'm not for we blanketly do the winner average for everybody or we do the volume things for everybody. But if somebody chooses to do the option, gives them the choice. Yes.

Gives them the choice. Well, with that comes strings. Choices both ways. Yeah. Seniors lose their discount. The poor people lose their discount because now they took in this choice. See what I'm saying? So if they go the winner, seniors lose their discount. The pool people lose their discount. If they choose volume, they both get their discounts, do they? Yeah. Do we continue? Because this stays exactly like it is now. [clears throat]

They just have to know that what they're what they're getting, but also what they're giving up. Mhm. And education is going to be critical. But like Stephanie said, either way, it's got to get there. Somebody's got to get there. It's a bit of a wash, I I think, in the long run. But I know a lot of people who just they really like having that autonomy to make their own choice. And then if they've made their choice, they're less likely to grumble. I mean, doesn't mean they won't, but they're less likely. [clears throat]

Do you need a direction tonight on this? Yes, please. So, give them options or not. Give them options. And again, seniors lose their benefit and poor people lose their benefit with that option. I think yes. If you choose that, if you choose to go to the winter water average, then those go away, right? So, we're making them to choose and then how do they know when to make the change? They can make that change at any point, but you only get once one time a year.

Yeah. Correct. I think that um obviously it's something that we'll have to put out a thing. Colleen here can pull something together, get it on social media. When would be when would this go into effect? It would go into effect with the new rates. New rates. Okay. And when are we thinking those will? Um, typically you uh set new rates every February. So on their March bill, no.

Okay. But if they're on the volume method now and they don't make a change, it's not they're not going to see anything other than the people that are going to make a change are going to be the ones that are coming in that says, "Hey, I'm filling my pool. Why do I have to Well, here we have this option. Exactly. I've never I don't believe I have ever received a complaint or had to have a conversation with the resident about filling up a pool. I have them annually about people paying for sewer services on their irrigation that they're not using. Yeah. I've never had anybody ask me about poop.

When we planted all those trees down um 33, we got a lot of comments from some of the people that they were in their backyard because it was a really dry year and they were having to water them to keep them alive. And um yeah, we had several people come in and be very vocal.

I I I I think what I'm seeing is is the board split here. So I I am going to ask us to go ahead uh I guess to go and put it to a formal vote one way or another. Um so if you are for providing residents the option to either stay on the current sewer billing method or offer an optional billing method of the winter wwater water average and under the winter water average billing method. Senior discount would not be eligible under that program. Nor would a pool fill credit

credit consideration. Um so I guess if you could entertain a motion to provide those options to residents um so staff could have time to get working on uh new rates for our February meeting. I make a motion to provide both rate options, the volumebased and the winter water average to our citizens with those conditions of removing the Yes, with those two.

So have uh Alderman Spencer motion on the table seconded by Alder Alderman King. All in favor? I I [clears throat] oppose. All right. We'll move on. Uh I have no mayor's communications this evening. We'll move on to the city administrator's report. The only thing I just want to remind everyone with the Martin Luther King Jr. holiday, our next meeting will be on Tuesday, January 20th. Alderman Spitzer, nothing. Alderman King, I do not have anything. Alderman Hull. Alderman Leman,

I do have something I would like to uh say kudos to staff. Um I noticed on the uh flash update for today that um we have something new coming out to the community. It's a community newsletter that will be going out by email.

The Carne Current. Yeah, it's right. And and I think that's that's a great idea. Um it just furthers our transparency. Um, and you know, we get a weekly update via email. And I I just I don't know whose idea it was, whether it was Sheila's or or our communications director, but I think that's a just a fabulous idea to to have that going out. um keeps our citizens informed and and keeps us even more transparent. So kudos to staff. Yeah, Alderman M. I think our continued and intentional improvement on our social media messaging, um all of our communications, and now this newsletter. um you know, in the past we've not to discredit any of us that have been here for a while or or any that served before us, but um you you just try to always do a little better and grow up a little bit and I'm super proud of of our efforts there. So,

absolutely. All right. Uh, we do have an executive session notice up this evening, a close session per RSMO 61021 subsection 1 for legal actions or litigation involving a public governmental body and any confidential or privileged communication between a public governmental body or its representatives and its attorneys and RSM61021 subsection 12 to discuss matters pertaining to negotiated contracts. Our meeting will be adjourned from the close session. So this does conclude our open public portion of the meeting if we can consider a motion to enter into executive session. So moved. Second. All in favor? I'm sorry. I need a roll call vote. You can pull the board, please. Alderman King.

Hi. Alderman. Hi. Alderman Leman. Hi. Alderwoman Spencer. Hi. Vote is unanimous. Everybody have a nice evening. Thank you for being here. Thanks everyone.