City Council - workshop

Okay, are we all ready, set to go?

Okay, all right. Are you on the phone or? No, I don't know where she is. Justin's on the phone. Okay. But we're going to go ahead and get started. The first thing we need to do is approval of.

Move for approval.

September 3rd work session minutes. So we've got a motion. Second. Okay, very good. Is there any discussion of minutes, Gina? Any discussion on the minutes? No? Okay. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Okay, the minutes carry. Thank you. We will now have Chief Silvernail introduce our noon fire marshal.

Good afternoon, Mayor and Council. It's a true honor to present to you our new Fire Marshal, Mr. Peter Jordan. Peter Jordan comes to us with tremendous respect. amount of experience and he's the right person for the city of kirkwood i will tell you and it's been a it was absolutely a delight for him to apply it for us to offer him this position he served 28 years in the central county fire protection district which is in saint peter's area he worked through the ranks he was a firefighter all the way up to fire marshal where he served for the last seven years and he did tremendous things there and when he said he was coming to us like I said, it was, it was phenomenal for us to be able to pick him up. Um, he's already got out in our community. He's, he already has relationships with our contractors. He already knows them. It's been, it's fantastic, but I'm going to stop talking and let him talk.

Okay, great. Thank you. All right.

Well, um, Ms. Mayor, the city administrator and all of the appointees, uh, thanks for having me here. I'm looking forward to, uh, the rest of my career, living out the rest of my career here. I have always been fond of the city. My son just recently graduated from Webster, so I've been a frequent visitor here. It's like a dream come true to be able to work here. So I did cross the bridge and I told the mayor I graduated. So all I have to say right now is I've already been out there and it seems like I'm at home.

Great. Thank you. Welcome. We're happy to have you here.

Thank you.

Thank you, Chief. Thank you. Okay. Now we are going to be working on the rest of hopefully finishing our storm ordinance manual tonight, picking up from the last work session. So Chris and Jennifer.

All right. Good evening, Mayor and City Council. Glad to be back in front of you again to hopefully finish out our discussion for the stormwater manual and ordinance and so Jennifer will continue where we left off in the manual and then we'll follow up with the ordinance changes and if there's additional questions on those ordinance changes we can circle back to those that's what I propose if there's a different order we can certainly do that I think that works

All righty. So where we left off was page 17.

Under the sump pump discharge.

And so that is just, that's just a change stating that some pump needs to discharge into BMP other than stormwater BMP so that the stormwater BMP is there and ready to accept the stormwater.

Mayor, I appreciate the languaging that you put in there that stormwater cannot cause a nuisance to others. I think that was very well worded.

Thank you. Any other comments on that. The next change is page 47. And this is where we are increasing the amount of credit that we're giving for trees. And we're expanding that area around the tree to be included in, if you're using it for a tree credit, that you don't put anything on that area to help with infiltration of the water due to the tree. So we're increasing it from 50 to 150. We're saying that there can be no impervious area within 10 foot radius of that tree. The trees used for stormwater mitigation cannot have any construction activities in that 10 foot area. And then trees used towards the stormwater credit will be identified on the maintenance agreement and on the plans and will be inspected at the intervals that the BMP is inspected. And then it goes in to explain that if the tree dies for whatever reason, and once it's noticed, that the tree would need to be replaced with two individual two-inch caliber trees off of our approved tree list. They could also, if they have other trees on the site that fit that bill, they could also switch up a tree. the A tree for B tree. So that's what that is summarizing.

Mayor, may I? Yes. Can I take us back to page 35, please? You can. Permeable pavers you have can only be used as a BMP for driveways. Is there a reason why if I'm putting in a large patio, I couldn't use permeable pavers for a patio that exceeds the square footage that will be allowed without a BMP?

So permeable pavers for driveways have to mitigate water. You can use permeable pavers for a patio, and you don't have to design them as a BMP, and they would count as pervious on your site. All right.

Yes. So that by itself negates perhaps a square footage.

Correct, yes. This is just referring to the permeable pavers. They're only allowed in a driveway as a BMP. You can't use them in the case of like a patio. You just put them in.

And then that would be considered, though, pervious.

Yes.

And may not trigger the square footage that I now need to do something else. All right, wonderful. Thank you.

Let's see. The next change is in G1. And that is just updating the float process. Because we have the new Tyler system, it needed to be updated. that's the end of the manual changes oh okay so that's all you need to present to us tonight well the other the other change that's not part of the manual that is basically, here we go, that is a procedural change is that on the memo dated September 3rd, item 12, Grading permit will be required for all flat work or other added site impervious area over 100 square foot if not under any other building permit. The current grading permit language in the ordinance allows for us to change the requirements of that permit without changing the ordinance. I've talked with Sarah about that and she concurs.

Can you say that again?

Yeah. Thank you. The current wording in the ordinance doesn't call out areas or anything. It just says the grading permit will be required. Therefore, the change would be on the permit side. And so the permit would be changed to the lower threshold to require a grading permit.

So how easy is that going to be for somebody who's constructing something to find, understand? I mean, it's confusing to me.

So the Tyler system, when you apply, walks you through the things, requirements, and stuff that you need.

I haven't applied on the Tyler system myself.

But it asks questions. I know for new homes and additions and stuff, it asks if you're adding an impervious area. It'll ask how much new... how much you're gonna be grading or your patio is gonna be and so and then that would trigger if you say it's 250 square foot it would trigger you that you would need stormwater mitigation plan and you know that for majority of those types of things are gonna be behind the house and that would be you know that could be a simpler plan you know just kind of showing the house showing the dimensions of what you're adding if you're taking anything out and and if necessary, stormwater calculations.

So it would figure out for you the grading permit then? Pardon? It would figure out for anyone that's looking at the grading permit?

It doesn't do the math for you. Okay. It just triggers the fact that you need a grading permit. Yes.

It's the suggestion since Tyler's new to everybody. It seems like we're having a little roadblock some places. Could we try a couple of examples and you do them so that there's not so many hiccups when the builders come in or the homeowner come in and. guys understand it completely and can explain it completely because I heard a little hesitation there.

Yeah, most of the help for the individuals with Tyler comes through the permit clerks, but I can coordinate with the permit clerks in order to Do you want to chime in? Yeah, please.

So just to be clear, when we configured the program, we ran through multiple tests of every permit type. So what Jennifer is saying is we don't active, like we don't, Regularly submit applications now, but in the year and a half it took us to put this together We went through multiple submissions acting as the applicant and all that so it's not that it has not been done and it's something that we will look at continually when we make changes to make sure and we have we have a Test and a train Environment that we can do things in that are separate from the production environment, and that's that's the way we handle it Okay

City Council Chambers, yeah and since it's already in there as a permit it's it's just changing those parameters, I understand that so yeah um. City Council Chambers, A I think that's covers it all. City Council Chambers, yeah so that's.

Yeah, we believe that covers the manual and the ordinance. Would the council like us to go over the email that was sent over, the clarifications that was sent earlier in the week to follow up from our last discussion? Is there any questions on that?

One question on the manual. And I'm sorry, because I'm coming in late, so you may already know. Were you just talking about 12 from the memo.

Yes, yes.

What was the threshold before before these changes.

It was 2,000 square foot, or if you change your grade over a foot, or if you brought in two truckloads of dirt, or if you are changing the water course in your property.

Okay, so this, we talked about this last week. one of the things you're trying to address are people paving their whole backyard i'm assuming this is hoping to capture some of that correct okay i'm wondering if a hundred is a very low threshold if if currently we have a much higher number and there's a lot of variables involved it sounds like but now we're going to anything over 100 My recollection of when we talked about this several months ago is that it was staff's belief that this was going to capture a lot more projects. Is that still your all's opinion?

I wouldn't necessarily say a lot more. I would say definitely more. I don't know how many projects are done without permits right now.

So I think my hope was that we could find a middle ground somewhere higher than 100, but certainly somewhere where we're not letting people pave the whole backyard. So, which one was it?

Thank you. More questions? Okay, and then this will come before council.

We can do it at the next meeting. Not 17. First. Thank you.

Lori, I'm sorry. Say that again.

If it passes first reading 17, it'll come back October. Following that on the agenda.

And the ordinance first read will be September 17th. Thank you.

Okay. All right. Thank you both very much. Take that. All right, now we are going to have a discussion on a water department appraisal discussion. And I know that Mark sent out something that he's created and thought that was kind of a good model for us to have the conversation off of. Did everybody get one?

I'll make a few more copies. Go ahead. We've got some copies down there to pack.

Why don't you hand out yours, because yours is a little different than what I have. Actually, you know what? Let's hand out this one. I'm not sure how much different it is, but just pass it on now. Thank you. What do you have there, Paul?

You know, one of the things that I think we all want to keep in mind, this is the one service that's a commodity. This is the one service that's a commodity that all of our citizens are consuming. So we need to get this right, so.

Yeah, we have one chance to get this right. Hopefully we can do this right, so then if we ever want to look at electricity, we can kind of use this as a base camp. But this is just a draft roadmap. And I call it a roadmap because we have six smart people here, so I expect lots of detours along the way. And what I try to do is say, all right, if we're going to look at this from the very beginning, what do we want to do? Well, step one is evaluate the system and the capital needs. We've already done that through the CMT report from last year. So I think that was a good start that got us all on this and kind of got the... Got the blood flowing. You know, I think we need to go back and kind of review the staffing levels, the expertise we have going forward. Can we keep the department going forward? Can we not keep the department going forward just because I know we have staffing issues?

So that's one area that we still need to kind of... Maybe we should talk with Darren about that now.

What you think the staffing levels... For about half of what you've had at one time, Chris, or is it even less?

No, it's less. So at one point we were, so at full staff, the water department is at 18 employees. We are down four in water distribution. At one point we were down eight. So we've been able to fill four of those positions. So with, with qualified individuals that um, enjoy working. So, um, I feel like we're on the upper uphill trend of staffing the department. Um, and we could be fully staffed in a couple of months.

All right. Along those lines. I know we've had a couple of water breaks this summer with the staff you have, how, how have those gone? And then how's the outsourcing gone?

So we have utilized the outside contractor a number of times. Council Member Schaefer asked me this question, I think it was yesterday. So we have used them on about one to two times per week. I don't have finances with me. However, we are not... even close to where we thought we would be with uh you know a full um the full 150 000 um we're we're somewhere in the in the ballpark at 50 to 60 000 spent good that's good okay all right

Can I ask a question? Sure. Again, I'm trying to get some clarity to the agenda item in what we're doing, and it says we're going to talk about the appraiser appraisal discussion, and I appreciate Mark's But it looks like we're talking about some process stuff, and we're not talking about whether we go for an appraisal or not. So since we're trying to stay agenda driven, I think your background, I wish we had done this months ago, but since we're going to just talk appraisal discussion, I'm just prepared to talk about whatever that means.

I appreciate that, and that's obviously on this list here.

Right, so if you jump to number three, I would recommend you jump to three and what you have on three and four, and Let's not get too deep into process and what we have and don't have. Because I think, you know, for us to make an informed decision as a city council, we need information.

What I would like to accomplish today is by the time we leave here, I would like for this council to give authority to Darren to either do an RFP to reach out for companies to do an appraisal, or for us to say certain companies, we want you, Darren, to contact these companies, one, two, three, and four, to get an estimate on appraisals. That's a great discussion point. That's my goal for today. And then I wanted to get there by saying, all right, why are we getting there? And we can jump to that.

I would hope we would just jump to it again. If we have a broader discussion about where we are, how we got here, that's not what I see on this agenda. And I think, and not that I would say the person next to me is going, uh-huh, uh-huh, uh-huh. I know she might be listening to some music. She's shaking her head, isn't she? She said, no way, Gina, no way. But it's given us some background, and I can't tell you how much I appreciate this overview. But in fairness to those of us here, if you don't mind jumping to what appears to be your number three and maybe some of your number four, right?

In order to get to number three, which is retain the appraiser, I'm going to jump back just a little bit. Okay, I'll defer to your better judgment. Keep or sell? And we've already kind of looked at the keep scenario. There's some more in-depth here that I was planning on going to, but based on Gina's discussion and comments, I won't. So now we're going to step to the other side of the equation of the sale. All right, why do we want to retain an appraiser? Well, I think we need to get one. so that we ensure the city gets the top dollar for our asset you know we have this asset that's arguably worth i believe is somewhere between 30 and maybe 35 and 40 million dollars um just based upon the the numbers the pure revenue it gets and then we have the assets itself the hard assets so that's where i was going to go in here so i'm going to jump in there real quick too so we're looking for an appraisal that's great have no problem with that that's a great idea i'm all for it

But what are we getting appraised? Are we just getting appraised?

Let's get there. Let me go through. You're getting there.

All right. I'm going to let you go.

All right. First, okay, we can talk about that first. If we're going to get an appraisal, then what do we want appraised?

Yeah, exactly.

All right. I think every one of us up here has, I'll call it a wish list. of what we might want at the end of the day on this. And I'm going to say, I know Paul's wishlist includes the cell towers on top of the water towers, I think.

I'll wait and I'll elaborate.

That's just one. Somebody else threw out a wishlist of, hey, let's get free water for the pool. All right. So I consider that a wish list. All right. You're not going to get something if you don't ask for it. Right. So we got to let's include everything we can. You know, if we want free water for the ice rink and for the swimming pool, let's put that on the list.

And that's that's not part of the appraisal.

Well, at the end of the day, I think it is.

No, that's a negotiation and it's a business.

A cell tower sale can be appraised. You have the future value, the present value of the future value income stream.

We're not talking, I was not talking about selling the cell tower portion. I was talking about retaining the cell tower portion as revenue to the city in perpetuity.

forever all right okay down in the tower is a total different story same thing over on rose hill i don't want to get off track it's a wish list whatever your wishes i'm not and i'm not prepared today to have everyone submit a wish list as of right now i want everyone to go back home and think about it and say what do we want to be part of the appraisal that's what i'm waiting to talk about And that can be discussed today. And then we come down to a better thing, a better assets part of it next week. But that doesn't stop Darren, hopefully, from going forward with the RFP.

He needs some direction to what we all want to look at. And I think that's what should be talked about today.

But that can be talked about today. But again, I don't want that to be a final decision. Absolutely not. All right. So along those lines, we have all of us, Mayor, myself, Paul, and Gina on the old council met or didn't meet. We had a telephone Zoom conference with, I think it was Kurt Gaty with the regulatory compliance. And he mentioned four appraisers that the... the PSC has accepted their reports in the past. All right, so I've identified these four. Are there more? Yes. Deb, I'm sure you have people from your connections with the state. Okay. But I don't want to use Mark McLean appraisals because no one knows who they are and the PSC won't accept my appraisal. So I want to make sure we use someone who's well-known.

Did you have something?

There is an actual law we have to follow for this.

Yes.

And it requires, because we're a large utility, we have to have three appraisals. And they have to come with a fair market value for the PSC to determine what that is. And so I think... my belief is we need to really make sure we're following the process laid out by the law in order to set ourselves up if that was to move forward we need to make sure we're following what psc requires and what their expectations are so we're not getting one appraisal we would have to get at least three

I would say we need one initially to evaluate. If it comes back at a low number, we may stop. If it comes back at a high number, then we move.

I just want to make sure that we all understand the law and what the rules are and that everybody here who's looking at this, if we get one, we're going to have to go back if we decide to go forward.

I would ask for clarity from, you know, at some point, Darren, because that was not something the PSC rep shared with the group when we had that meeting. He talked about it a little bit differently. So for us not to worry about that now, but I definitely think Darren can do the follow-up on that because that is not information that the PSC gave us.

Just for note, it's Chapter 393.

We have about 10,000 meters, and so that's why we're qualified.

That's correct.

And I think Missouri American Water, I'll use them as an example, they would get an appraisal, too. So that would be one of the three.

That's one of the three. We don't have to independently get three ourselves.

And I'm going to jump back a little bit. Because we purchased our water wholesale from Missouri American Water.

Correct.

Private equity most likely has no interest in us, which is good and bad. I mean, the good thing is private equity, I want everyone to do their own research on this, but my research comes up with trouble with private equity. There's lots of lawsuits that have come out.

We produced our own and be a different story.

But I want everyone to do their own. The other side of the coin is private equity will pay you a lot more money for this asset

And they'll take all the equity that they can get out of the system and not fix things. And then the taxpayers, the rate payers, will have to fix that problem down.

That's where the lawsuits come from.

So we don't want that.

We are citizens.

Exactly.

So what someone explained to me is private equity wants 20% return. Zero American water would want about 8% to 10% return. The city of Corkwood wants a 0% return. So those are the three different.

Sorry, what was that last thing? Who gets? Corkwood.

We would not do this for a rate of return. We're doing this as a Do we argue differently, though, on that? That's kind of the analogy to someone else.

Well, I'm going to debate that for a second, because why keep an asset or a liability, which is what this is? Why would we keep a liability if there's no revenue, no dividend, as our former CAO used to call it? Why would we keep something that doesn't? You wouldn't stay in business yourself if you weren't getting some kind of dividend.

My answer to that is dividend doesn't come back to the general fund because this is a standalone entity. And we can discuss this later. Gina has also kind of raised the point. Create our own board.

I have no problem with that either.

And then you create it for the residents, the consumers. Yep. All right? You build your reserves. Yep. And then you don't have to raise your rates every year to get your 5%, 6% dividend. The dividend is lower rates to the residents, the consumers.

That's correct. That's the dividend. It depends on what the rate is that Missouri-America Water is going to charge us. We're good until 2041, and then they can change that rate that they sell wholesale water to us. And so down the road, what are they going to sell the water to us for? They always want to sell water, but at what rate?

That's controlled also by the PSC.

So there's the good PSC and the bad PSC, I guess.

I'm just trying to understand. There's the PSC there. We can't control that.

No, I get it.

If they jump it up by 10%, then we have to jump up our base, and we still own it. We have to jump it up by 10%. That's irregardless of what

Again, focus us back. I'm going to be Ms. Focus Queen tonight. We can have a robust discussion on that, again, which is a concept that I, depending on what we do with some of our enterprise funds, but if we can get to the appraisal process and the If we can, are we making some movement towards one of the pieces of information we need before we have some of these other robust discussions is what is the potential value and option if we were to explore a sale, which we haven't even said we're going to do it, but we need information. And your information in here, it says we got to have some idea of what our system, whatever we decide is, is worth.

Right. Correct.

So that's what we're talking about. So we were talking about a board and all that other stuff.

Let's not get off track. Before you make a motion. I know. This is important, which I just found this out, and I wish Sarah was here. The Missouri Public Service Commission has the right to come back and change contracts. So if we were to enter into a contract with Missouri American Water, and part of the contract says they're going to only increase our rates by the amount of CPI every year, the public service commission can say, uh-uh, that's not fair to all the other consumers of Missouri American water, so we're going to make you pay the same increase that everybody else pays.

The PESC told us that there's, what, two rates in the state of Missouri. So there's no caveat for, I mean, we're in the same rate category. They used to have some individual, but I think they indicated the two different rates. I don't have that information in front of me. So any sense that we could manipulate or that somebody's going to manipulate our rates, if we do that, is not factual at this point. Correct. So...

And I think that's important to know when we're negotiating with them, Paul.

And so back to what are we negotiating for? What are we going out, just hear me out, for the appraisal? Are we going to talk about, I see you have a list here of things that we're going to talk about. That's what we have to have so that Darren has a better idea of what he's looking for for an appraisal for. Not just the water system that we have, but all the other ancillary things that somebody else would like. Like our pump stations and our towers and our storage tanks. And the storage tanks are in the park. The park department should get the lease revenue off of that, I believe, over there because it's in the park. But again, this is all for debate.

So you're not saying sell it, you're saying lease it.

Well, let's get back on focus here.

I'm going to make a suggestion that I think the staff, it would be great if the staff could come back with what the core items need to be appraised, what are other optional items, and recommendation on what that rfp could look like and then we could evaluate that because i would like to know from the staff all the pieces that i don't feel qualified to understand that we try to go to but i would like to see what they would say should be appraised and an appraisal what's beautiful about that is that helps us understand what the value of what we have so When we go and are thinking about our debt, we look at that as compared to our assets. And by understanding what our asset values are, that gives us some perspective. So I'm a proponent of understanding what our distribution assets are, and I'm happy to make the motion to move that or give direction to staff on that. But I don't know that it's of value for me to, I can guess, But I don't know that that's good use of the time we would have the staffs better qualified for that.

I think for an appraised, the motion I would like to see, at least to discuss, is to give Darren the authority either for an RFP or to reach out to, at a minimum, these four or five that the PSC recommended, And I don't think we need to know the specific assets. We're going to need an appraisal of our water department.

We're going to have two different ones because you've got one that's going to be PSC driven and the assets is not part of the PSC package the way I understand it. You can sell it for whatever you want, whatever the buyer or seller wants. We already did this in Kirkwood. We already bought stuff for way more than we need to. So why don't we figure out what we're selling as a water department and which is the number of pipes, the number of miles.

We're agreeing with you, Paul, but today, right now, what I'm trying to do is I want to get Darren on the phone tomorrow morning to an appraiser saying, hey, we want our water department appraised. What do you need from us?

Oh, okay.

That's all I'm trying to get at today. I want to get this ball rolling.

Did Ren and his staff figure out what they want included?

You can flush that out with whoever you're discussing with to go ahead and get an appraisal.

If an appraisal is going to cost $150,000, we might all say, hold on a second.

If it costs $60,000 and I say, all right, well, let's do it, but we're gonna get the money from it. We gotta get started. We just need to get the ball rolling.

Okay. And the key is we get professionals to do this, not outside, not internal. We have experts, but we need to move into a professional realm when we start trying to assess value.

Well, yeah, that's why we got the four names.

I know, and I'm just reinforcing that and concurring with Mr. McLean. then it's time we, and again, cost.

I know, I know.

It's a video. I'll circle it on my calendar. You know, it's time that we start, even if it's going to cost some money, it's going to be money well spent on behalf of this community. Okay, this is exciting. So we have a next step.

I have a question.

We need actual direction given. Okay.

Okay, hold on. I ask a question before we go to a motion. What is location in Kirkwood slash Leffingwell property? What are we referring to?

There's been some discussion of going down the road with a potential buyer, specifically Missouri American Water. They have discussed putting a substation or a service station.

Is that the Morazic building that we're referring to or the current water? I'm just curious of how that has anything to do with... of our water department. It probably doesn't.

It's kind of a wish list. We want them in Kirkwood, for sure.

If that's a wish list, that's great. It doesn't have anything to do with appraisal. Exactly. Yeah. That's okay. Yeah.

It's a good question. Thanks for getting us back on track. Well, that was my question. Okay. So, the clerk has told us we need a motion. I think I heard Sheila say she was ready with a motion.

Mark, do you want to do it? Well,

I make a motion that we authorize Darren to contact the four appraisers, at a minimum, the four appraisers on here, Betas, Steinen, Goodman, Schneider, and Chris Stallings. And if anyone else has, Deb, if you know of anyone, Justin, Sheila, if anyone knows anyone, pass the name along. Do we start with all four appraisers?

Oh, that is something we... Oh, for an RFP.

Yeah, for an RFP. I'd heard earlier an RFP versus just call and ask them.

Yeah, I don't know the legalities of that. I always like to...

I can check with Sarah just to make sure that we do.

Are you asking contacted for appraisers to... You're not...

asking him to directing him to contact the four appraisers to to engage in a conversation for estimates for an appraisal for the kirkwood water distribution center and maybe s and assets that cover everything

That sound good, Darren? Yes.

Okay. With a cost. With a cost. And then the idea being that they would then, we'd get an estimate of the cost. Get an estimate. We'll bring that back to you. Exactly. And then once we get that estimate and we narrow it down to one or two, have the council all together, maybe do a conference call like we do with the guy from the PSC.

And we've got... Dave Kuntz, we've got that already in the CMT report, they can just go back and look at that they know the number of miles and everything right so if they're looking for a little more information, they can go back to that and get the overview that we've already paid for right yeah. Dave Kuntz, i'm good with that.

Okay, any more discussion.

I want to ask why we're not going through an official RFP process for this to open it up to make sure we're not missing someone rather than all of us finding people. Is there a reason why we wouldn't just issue it as an RFP?

My only reason was... This gets the ball rolling quicker. We can do an RFP also. RFPs take time. Yes. In the past, staff would draft one in two or three weeks, show it to us. We'd make some changes. Two or three weeks later, we'd get the changes back.

And a couple weeks later, get in the paper and then... Are we bypassing a process that we have in place that... I mean, it just... My concern, we're bypassing a process.

The city's done this before, just hired an appraisal for, I know for the Amerasic, they hired an appraiser. So again, I don't know that there's a process.

CMT.

Hiring vendors should be a standard process.

Yeah, but that doesn't mean it has.

But I know I still have that conversation. I mean, we're giving Darren the authority to contact these. Right. Or have this conversation, figure out the details of what maybe would be included. And if we want to go out for RFP, we still can. Okay. Right. Then we have a better idea of what would be in it and what we're asking for.

I just wanted to bring it up that I'm concerned we're not going through an official process.

And inside of that, do we need to have conversations with all four of them? Will one or two of them start giving us information to help us know what it looks like?

We'll see. Give a lot. They're in that discretion.

Yeah, let me see what – I would assume that after you talk to a couple of them, you're getting an idea of what you're looking at as far as appraisal price, which is what I understand. I mean, that's kind of what you're –

And I appreciate we might have skipped processes in the past, but I don't think this is a time to skip our processes. And buying a piece of property versus selling one, I think, is very different.

It would be nice to know if we even had one, so that would be good. And just a side comment, any numbers the public hears thrown out here, those are just numbers being thrown out. So don't take it and run with it. And that's why we're going to do a professional appraiser with their expertise and due diligence. And we all can say numbers, but any numbers that we say probably are just our numbers. Yes.

And the good thing about this, Darren, we can hit the ground running because go back six, eight, ten months ago, Paul and Al Reinecker kind of got the ball rolling on this.

But who's counting?

Okay, 14 and 14 months and six days and how many hours?

I'm sweating tears.

Kind of got the ball rolling. So that's why we can kind of hit the ground running on this.

CMT report would be helpful.

Yes. Yeah. And that's just going to be the assets. It's not going to be real estate or any of that included in here. This is just going to be for the piping and the pumping systems and all of that.

That's to be discussed.

I mean, you can ask them at a later date, hey, we'd also like a value of this, this, this.

We need the assets, so we don't have a need for a tank anymore or pumping stations.

And I would agree. Let's ask our staff. We've got very good staff here. Let's utilize them. Let's ask them to come back with assets.

that we have that we would like to sell as part of the water if that ever went down that direction okay so we have a motion um yes so any more discussion would you reread the motion please i'm going to have to go back to my reporting to write it out i don't have the full motion right now but mark yeah the just contact a minimum of four wait a minimum of four appraisers mark

what he's saying okay all right so that's what it is right now is the motion all right all right do i amend the motion now or wait until just up to four there you go works for me versus minimum of four okay yep okay second that yeah there's your amendment

Okay, so all in favor of the motion as amended, say aye.

Aye.

Opposed, nay. All right, got direction.

There we go. That's what we're after. Thank you.

Thank you, Gina, for keeping us focused. Thank you. You're welcome. Thank you, Mark, for the work that you did on this. I like that seat.

Yeah, she's going to be down there from now on.

gonna sit below us and just look up and rule on, you know, I'm learning.

Okay. At the last work session, we had work session agenda topics. However, Gina did not get to participate in that. So we're opening that up for her to participate now.

Thank you. How many minutes do I have?

Two.

No. So I understand that I'm kind of limited to two or three items. And so I do hope that we have this every meeting, I guess. Part of my concern for Darren is we may have some duplicates or things that might be together. So as he's planning out work sessions going forward, there might be a bunch for Chris or a bunch for Jonathan that might make it scheduling a little more. easier doing it, but I'll do my two-ish ones, and then my other, I won't tell you how many can be addressed every week. One of them is a review of the intergovernmental contracts, which include, given the fact there's a decision potentially by the end of the year, but I would throw all of them in there. and that would give new council members and Darren a chance to have some information on those. And the other is kind of a broad, I threw a lot of things in there, but just some updates and some understanding of boards, commissions, and ad hoc committees. And within that, I'd like us to have an update regarding the CFC, the lighting committee, Add hop committee rules and also a further discussion. Is it time for a charter commission to review the charter? So I do have several things under there. The utility board was going to be one of them, but that's kind of, you know, so a lot of that's kind of a broad category in my. might include a lot of things. And for Darren and the mayor to schedule, you might want to know other thoughts which might be in that. So I'll stop. But thank you for the opportunity. Absolutely.

Okay.

36 seconds, Gina.

I just want it noted, I'm at 17 right now.

two divided by five weeks will get me there as long as i don't add i just keep adding all right we are need to go into closed motion may i have a motion please Okay, would you please read it?

Sure.

Thank you, Paul.

Oh, that's right. I got to read it. Hang on, I do it to myself. You fall into that trap every time. Yeah, I do. I'm just trying to move things along. I'm just trying to close the meeting pursuant to RSMO chapter 610-0211 legal.

Okay, great. Thank you. Okay, we will adjourn to... Oh, second.

I need to do a roll call. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.