Board of Aldermen - Regular Meeting

Pam, would you do a roll call, please?

Mayor Keim.

Here.

Alderwoman Dobbs. Here. Alderman Fahey.

Here.

Alderman Donovan. Here. Alderman Huey.

Here.

Alderman Eidman. Here. Alderman Steiger.

Here.

Alderman Prince. Here. Alderman Ross.

Here.

Mayor, we have a quorum.

Thank you very much. At this time, I will look for approval of tonight's agenda. Motion to approve.

Second.

Okay, I have a motion and a second. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Thank you very much. We don't have any presentations or personal appearances tonight, so that'll move us along to our city administrator report. Turn it over to Dave.

good evening everyone you've got my report in front of you there's a few extra sheets there i'll go over in a second i just want to go down the list here on a few of these jokers incorporated continues to complete the water service line connections on lehi they should finish up the end of this week middle part of next week and then be moving over to oakwood the week after so what's that the week of the 24th they should be over there they've done some saw cutting over there but the whole crew should be over there in a couple weeks Bowman's completed paving North 6th Street last week. If you haven't gotten up there, the streets they've completed look really nice. They will be back to begin work on Lehey once Jokers gets off Lehey again the week of the 24th. I've mentioned this a few times, but I have some updates. We closed with McBride on July 29th. The building department worked on the land disturbance permit and it's issued now. They are also working on their final record plat. We had a meeting with Cochran and sent that on. Our notes on to Sterling, who's McBride's engineer, yesterday or today. The new homes in the communities are listed on McBride's website now, along with the FAQs and future contact, some updates. I think I had sent you all an email that they had chosen CE Contracting. There's two contractors for the earthwork, and that is uh bloomsdale excavating and ce contracting so you'll see both trucks out there moving dirt putting in the lift station force main etc i mentioned the final plat review that is underway we had an on-site meeting with them yesterday so everything's going uh well there and then i got this about an hour ago so there's one laying at your uh chair. There's some available in the audience. So this is the contractor and vendor meeting that we've discussed. That will be Wednesday, August 26th at the YMCA from 2 to 6, so that's just a general meeting. They're looking for this entire list of contractors, which again is available out there, and then they will set up individual meetings with anybody who's interested, and those meetings will be Thursday, September 3rd, also at the YMCA. Any questions on that? Yes, sir.

A Paragraph 1, I guess, has that job been within the time frame? Somebody questioned me. It seemed like that's taken a long time.

I mean, they're still within their days. Right. Yeah, and we added a stretch of North 6th extended from Lehigh, so they've got an additional 15 days for that, but they're not even at the end of their original amount of days yet.

And on number four and stuff, the municipal code performance bonds, that $1.65 million... What portion does that cover? Because that doesn't seem like that's the water, sewer, and the streets.

So they reached out. There's the default portion of the contract that they have to either give us back the unobligated funds or give us the entire property back, obviously, if they were to default. That does not include the management fee or the additional contingency costs. This $1.65 million would cover that. and the complete straight dirt work. Well, they would either give us that back or give us the unobligated funds back. Okay. Thanks. You're welcome. I want to keep going on a few other ones. I apologize. I want to remind everyone the board budget work session is next Thursday, August 20th. I'll have some handouts in the work session this evening, but next Thursday, which is an off Thursday for us, instead of two weeks, we will meet in two weeks for our regular meeting, but next Thursday we'll meet for a budget work session where we'll go over the FY2027 budget. The department heads will present to you, go over their capital items, and I'll explain some of the other items in next year's budget. There's a few other there if you want to take a look at them, but I do want to also point out there were several trees down last night, a lot of branches. It was apparently a lot windier in town than I thought. I want to thank our guys that went out last night. Some of the water guys and street guys cut up at least two if not three trees laying across the streets last night, so appreciate that. That's all I got.

Any other questions for Dave, regarding his report?

Okay.

Thank you very much. Moving along to some other staff reports. First up tonight, we have Community Development Officer Robert Sullivan.

Good evening, Mayor. Alderman, tonight you have before you my July staff report. I just want to hit a few highlighted items. On the historic preservation side of things, I know it says here that the notice of awards has not been announced. Within a day after me completing this and turning it in, we did get an announcement of the award for that grant, and we have been approved for that. So we're waiting on the state's official sign-off from DNR. And then once that happens, and I expect that to happen soon, sooner than later, but then to actually get the funds, because if it's part of a federal funded grant, we don't know when that money is going to come in necessarily. But we did receive that award, so that's a good thing. Building the code enforcement Stay about the same with occupancy permits and inspections Building permits. We've got a couple new houses going on. So that's that's good to see Planning zoning. We didn't have a meeting Last couple times because we haven't had agenda items Board of Adjustment the same nothing new to report their flood management Kind of typical for August, September, and October, a very minor chance of flooding. Property maintenance, I'm going to skip for a minute because you also have documents there related to property maintenance, so we'll discuss those in a second. As the city administrator mentioned about the progress point construction starting, like you said, the permit for land disturbance was issued. And again, that's just land disturbance only. So we're getting them started with that so they can put the dirt around where they need it to while we're finishing everything up for the infrastructure. Other than that, attended a leadership class for the changing. We did emergency management. If everybody here hasn't had a chance to go to the fire department, the firehouse, Ambulance district houses and of course the county Jail I encourage you to do so it's very very eye-opening what those people do every day So, you know, it's nice to see that and talk to those people and find out what they do Other than that we move along to property maintenance and Before you, you have the same list that I presented last time. Got that same information. The newer items are highlighted items. So if we start with the first one there, that being a dangerous building that was taken to the Heritage Commission. The Heritage Commission reviewed the case and they want to have an architect or engineer look at that and save the home rather than tear it down. So that's information sent to the owner and they have to respond to do that. They have not responded as of yet. If we don't get a response, then the Heritage Commission wants the city to do the same. So we would have to get somebody to take a look at that and then bring that back to you all to decide if we want to expense the funds to try and save it or tear it down. And then we'll have to go back to Heritage Commission with that information. So I will do that however that works out and goes. The next two houses on Market Street there, those are kind of on hold. You can see there that looks like an offer has been made to purchase those properties has been accepted. So everything you see happen before that will go along with the property. Those people that purchase it are under the same requirements under the dangerous building requirements. So they'll have to follow all those whether to tear them down and from what my understanding is they are going to be tearing both of those houses down. The one under foreclosure, still no further action on that one. We are continuing to mow that property. So the bills for mowing that are just racking up against that property. There's just no action from anybody there. The bank hadn't contacted me or anything. So we'll keep up with that one and keep watching the structure to make sure it doesn't deteriorate. We've got one home in the historic district. The owner's going to be taking care of the roof issue on that one. We had another house that was on fire on Walnut and we're revisited with them about closing the garage up because it's the part that remains unsecured it's got some caution tape barely up over there but we wanted to secure that so we're gonna give a little bit of time to do that if they don't get that done then we're gonna have to unfortunately go over there and do that for them and charge accordingly so we got another property on lehe street that was listed as unoccupied and again we haven't been in it Fortunately, we didn't have to pursue that one any farther either was listed for sale and has reportedly been sold So those folks that bought that will be taking care of that problem for us and we'll get that one reoccupied So that's all I have on property maintenance other than we do have three other properties that we're continuing to mow and put charges against all the other vegetation issues are being currently addressed by our police department and And I think, Chief, correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that's working out well the way we're doing that. So they bring hearings to me if we can't get it mowed, but it seems like we're getting most of them mowed before it gets to that point. So I think we're doing okay there, and then we just handle everything else as it comes at us.

Robert, back on your first, on 8th Street and stuff, you had talked about the Heritage Commission wants us to possibly undertake, because it doesn't seem like the owner is going to do anything the way that Pete's been drugged there and stuff. So the Heritage Commission asked us to basically take over the remodel of the house or put it back into...

some structural condition and stuff so who owns the property then well so we don't own the property um the gentleman that owns it no longer obviously no longer lives there because it's vacant but he lives out of state and he doesn't have any real desire to come back here what cost us to go to heritage commission um you know he during our whole back-and-forth negotiations, if you want to call it that, to get this taken care of, he said, well, this is in your historic district, and that's a historic home, and they're not going to let me tear it down. So that's why I went to Heritage Commission. And then Heritage Commission basically had the choice of, and they get to say whether to tear it down or save it. So based on the information of its historic value, they wanted to save it.

At our expense.

Yes, but if we choose to repair it, any of those charges gets charged against the property. Same as like mowing the grass. So yes, it would be at our expense if we do that up front. It would be at our expense as a city, but that gets passed along to the property and then when the property sells, we get that money back. that's a win and if itself correct and that's regardless of whether we fix it or we tear it down but that's why i said it goes back once if if we do it we're going to have somebody look at it and say you know this is what's going to cost to fix it etc we take that to heritage commission they make their decision then i'm going to be bringing it here before you guys to decide what discussion we want to have with the Heritage Commission on whether we want to tear it down or fix it. And that fixing it, if that goes that route, could be something as simple as stabilization, not making it where somebody's going to be able to just up and go in there and live in there unless that's what we choose to do. It could be more about stabilization for safety aspects.

So there's two things come to mind there and stuff. One, it reminds me of a thing we done years ago. Right out just down from Mueller Tower, there was a two-story house burnt. Went on forever. Out-of-state owners, I think, or kids and stuff. We ended up tearing that house down, paid for it. All of the costs and stuff, we applied a lien on it. The problem was it went up for a tax sale, and a tax sale trumps a mechanics lien. So there's no guarantees whatsoever. for us even in a lien on this property to protect taxpayers' funds?

Well, I don't think this is actually considered a mechanics lien. I think, from what I understand it, this is, we're not necessarily first on the list, but predominantly we're first on the list when Funds come in to get paid. It's not really a mechanics lien at that point.

But if it goes up for a tax sale, we have no protection. As for legal opinion, but I'm pretty sure that's right.

I'm following what our ordinance states. So, I mean, that's obviously up to you all. If that's not what we want to do, then we'll proceed with whatever the alderman decided to do.

We've got to get to that point first. We're not there yet.

We'll be there.

Any other questions for Robert regarding his report?

I appreciate the report. Thank you very much.

Next up tonight we have our Tourism Director Aaron Smith.

Everyone, you guys have my report in front of you. I'll hit some highlights as well. We're working on the 2027 budget. This includes the usage of the county transient tax funds. One of the things we're going to work on doing, or we are working on doing, is finding out some routes, so supplementing the trolley to run on Saturdays between the city and some county attractions. We have a small committee working on that. I think we've got some workable routes, so that's pretty exciting. This year also we're going to do less print advertisement. We're moving to putting a lot of money towards streaming commercials on Peacock. So we just had a big grant with the state to get photographs and videos done and from those videos we're going to be

making commercials out of them and streaming on Peacock. So that's also very exciting.

We have a new Pomeroy sign. That's those nice big, what look like cast iron, but they're cast aluminum signs. The liver dumpling signs is one of those. We got that from the Pomeroy Foundation. They're fully paid by grant money. This one is at the end of Sarah's Garden Pergola. It's very prominently featured there. It talks about when we were inducted into the National Historic Registry. And we've been approved for another one at the Giebord Valley House. I've worked with the Foundation for Restoration to get one of those. I think it just makes our history come alive. It lets people know just how much history we have around, and those signs are just really attractive. I also have a list of just some wins that we've had, the programs that I've been able to establish during my tenure. And new in 2027, one of the things we've been working on is, you know, a lot of other towns sell merchandise. It helps people become brand ambassadors. So, you know, people walking around with shirts that say St. Genevieve. We got that nice new brand. So I've been working with Lemon Theory on like a full merchandise catalog. So that's pins, hats. shirts, jackets, things like that. And the way we feel like we can launch it, we don't really have a way to sell them yet. I'm working with the National Park, since that's going to be their building soon, to have a space to sell that, or possibly at the antique mall. But what we'll do is we'll have a catalog. If merchants want to sell our gear, they can go through that catalog. And I think they would probably sign an agreement that says we're going to agree to sell it for this price so that we don't have merchants that are selling things for different prices. But they can just buy stuff wholesale and have it in their shop. And that way it kind of gives us a... the ability to control the brand so nobody's putting our logo on something that, you know, something that says something foul or anything like that. So pretty excited about that as well. Yeah, any questions?

Any numbers on your effect for this year?

Not yet. I'll have them next meeting.

Any estimates?

I was working Lions Club all Saturday, and then I had to go to St. Louis on Sunday. So I was inside a building from early on. I think very similar to last year, if I had to guess, which I think that was about 10,000 on Saturday, 4,000 on Sunday. So holding steady. This has been an interesting... I think with the rising gas prices, I'm noticing that our out-of-market visitors are kind of slowing down. Again, I don't know what to attribute that to, but I think the economy is getting a little bit harder. And one of the first things that goes is travel.

I heard lots about heat, intense sun, and the lack of shade for large parts of it. So I think be what we look at the budget forestry and trees downtown hey save so many of our festivals to be important yeah agreed and new in 2027

Merchandise catalog and shirts. Are these like new things you're going to put together? Yeah. Different types of shirts?

Exactly. Yeah, so using the logo, the new branding that we have, and creating different shirts, water bottles, things like that, things that other welcome centers and places have. And like I said, I think one of the... if you look at the programs that I've worked through, I've kind of talked about, you know, my approach, which is, you know, I feel like, you know, I use a rake analogy. So, you know, the tourists are the leaves, and we want to have enough things, enough points of getting to people that we can kind of rake people into town. I feel like when I got here, we had a rake with one little time. So you've got to build this kind of ecosystem that helps kind of rake people in. And one of those things is like having brand ambassadors, having people that have your merchandise, have merchandise out there. So it's kind of like a walking advertisement, you know, and it's one of those things that everybody does and we just haven't done it.

So it'd be a video for all the businesses. Exactly. Yeah. So Aaron,

I've had a lot of people reach out to me about the dates of JurtaFET. I was just wondering, have you ever been curious about maybe what people would think about Olin JurtaFET in September? If it would ever be possible with the heat?

I mean, you know, that's... What's interesting, I think a lot of people think I'm ahead of every event, and I'm not. These are all hosted by different organizations.

Yeah, there's a committee out.

Yeah, so, you know, there's...

You think numbers could be better?

I mean, I am very interested in why we don't have a lot more festivals and things in September, in October, in April. You know, a lot of our stuff is concentrated in the summer. I get, you know, people are out and about, but it gets hot.

I can share with you the September, October things that have been talked about in the past. But the vendors that go to these, they have a schedule, right?

Yeah.

Jirta Fett, Festival of the Little Hills, on and on and on. And you can't hardly break into a weekend that you don't own already.

Well, I mean... If that's what a lot of the town wants, I mean, I don't know.

They could move it, but I don't know that they'd have fewer vendors than they have already.

And it could be that way the first year or two and then possibly could move up.

Yeah, you never know.

Obviously, like for the vendors, you would have more of a turnout in the months because it is not dead of August, extremely hot. then that would benefit the vendors as well. So, I mean, I don't know if they could possibly squeeze that in. If we could maybe talk about getting into the works and seeing if the committee would look into it. It's worth looking into because I've had a lot of people reach out to me and say, hey, you know, it's just too hot. Is there any way that we can move this to possibly September or even October? before it gets too cold. I think there would be more of a turnout in the longer run. Of course, change is always hard at first.

That's it, yeah. You're exactly right, and a lot of people, they don't want to change. And I will tell you, you know, some preliminary talks that are happening right now with like French Heritage Festival is moving that to April. And so, you know, I think people are realizing like on their own, like it's just too hot.

It's getting hotter and hotter. We're getting more and more extreme weather. So I think that could really benefit people because, you know, like elderly, you know, they can't go bear that heat. No. If you're pregnant, I mean, pregnant women, even pregnant women, you know, they want to go walk the streets and stuff, but they can't get out there in over 100 degree weather. That's too much of a risk for them. There's many factors to take into consideration.

Yeah, and sure, if that's such a family-friendly thing. Yes. And even bringing kids out in that heat. I mean, I worry about it, you know. Like, oh, I have my two-year-old son out in that heat all day. Yeah. It's rough.

Dogs. Dogs. Dogs.

Absolutely. Yeah. A dog shoe vendor would do really well.

The only thing we know for sure is it's not going to get cooler.

No, yeah.

Our environment, living here, preparing for hotter and hotter weather is what we have to be doing on five- and ten-year plans.

Right, and then the cool months, you know, especially spring, it's tornado season.

And this wouldn't only benefit the vendors, but it would also benefit all the businesses downtown as well. I mean, when you have more people, when you have more, you know, feet on the ground, well, the net ups your sales, so... I think it's something worth looking into, and I'm pretty sure Jamie Inman is, like, the head of that committee. So maybe I can sit down and have a talk with Jamie Inman and go from there.

If you want me to go with you or if you wanted any help with that, just let me know. I'm happy to do that. Thank you, Aaron. Yep. Thank you, Aaron.

All right, this time we're going to open up the floor to public comment. You just want to clarify just one thing real quick before I open up the floor. I believe that a lot of you may be here to talk about single carrier trash service. I want to make it, and we're glad you're here to talk about it. um this is going to be your time the public comment is the period that you'll want to talk i know you may see it later in the agenda i don't want you to wait for that moment because that will be a board discussion so public comment would be your time your opportunity to address the board regarding that topic i do want to clarify what is being voted on and discussed tonight it is we are not voting on a single carrier or contracting with a single carrier, or this is not an ordinance that is going to go into effect. This is us deciding whether or not we want to move forward with getting proposals for a single carrier system to determine if there is merit and if there is benefit to the residents of the city. This is just simply exploratory in a lot of ways, but I just want to be clear because I believe there is some confusion, and I've seen Facebook, things of that nature, I just want to make it clear what's being discussed tonight. It is not a vote on moving to that, and it is not a vote on a single carrier. We're just talking about going out, getting proposals, bringing those back to discuss them further. So with that, I'm going to open up the floor to public comment. Just a couple reminders. Please keep your comments to five minutes or less, and please state your name and address if possible for the record.

Bob Browning, 498 Murphy Street. I'm here to comment on the garbage situation. I'm totally against it because when waste management was the main game in town, it was really bad service. They didn't work with you. Our Republic does a good community service. They have a transfer station out here. As you shut them down, people's going to be dumping their garbage out in the marina and every place else. And I just don't think it's up to the board to dictate what garbage service we get. That's like saying there's one hardware store or, you know, it'd be better off with one roofer in town. I'm totally against it. You might get a better deal, but you're not going to get a better service if you go with the big guy because he can throw his weight around like he did before. I think Republic and Woody are doing a good job And I'd hate to see just one person take over. Thank you.

Hello. I'm Anita Kohler. I live on 615 Klein Street. I just heard about this today, and I'm not going to express a lot of concern other than, like Aaron Smith said, the economy sucks right now. for a lot of people and my concern about doing this is that the price, right now I'm a shopper, I shop around for everything, for food, for clothes, for everything to get the best deal. And when it comes to my trash service and all the other things that I can control, I can shop around and get the best deal. And you know, if one trash company is gonna start charging me really higher, I start looking around for another trash company that will give me a better price. And that's usually how I operate on every level. So my concern with going with this would be locking in a price that's fair for everyone and affordable, but also we can't control it if it's going to keep raising. And I've seen trash prices raise over the years. When I first moved to St. Genevieve, I've been here for 37 years. I was only paying $25 for my trash pickup. Now I'm paying $65 for my trash pickup. And so it keeps going up, and then sometimes I'll pipe it up to $90, and I'll call them on what's going on, and they'll give me back the deal that I had. And I want to be able to negotiate that, because I'm in charge of my wallet, and I want to be able to control my wallet. But if something is on a bill, like the water bill and sewer bill, which has also tripled since I've moved here, is this going to be a problem in the future? I also have concerns because I have neighbors who don't use the trash service at all. Is this going to be optional? Can we opt out of this? Because I have a neighbor who recycles, uses compost. They don't use the trash service at all. And I know other people who don't use the trash service either. So my question is, is this going to be fair to everyone? Is the price going to be fair? How much control do I have? Am I letting go of my control of my money? That's what I'm concerned about, and I think that's what you're going to find a lot of people are concerned about. They don't want to lose control of their money on another thing. So that was just all I had to say. Thank you.

My name is Karen Stupi. I live at 410 Second Road Drive, and I really didn't know about the track service thing. I know it's been discussed. I've kind of seen a few things, but You know, I didn't really realize if this was a final vote tonight or not or, you know, how this was progressing. But I have concerns just as the lady that spoke before me. I mean, you know, that we're not really given the opportunity to, you know, pick our trash service. And I know I've dealt with some trash services that, yeah, continually raise your prices every month. They charge you, you know, the taxes, they charge you for fuel surcharges. Right now, I just paid my trash bill through top tier trash service and the bill was $343. That's $28.75 a month. So I don't feel like that's bad. I know some people are paying $65 and more for trash service, but I feel like people should have the option. I agree with her that we should have the option to be able to pick the trash provider we want at the price that we want. Unless you can really find a great deal out there. I understand with the streets that with all of these heavy trash trucks, school buses, you know, tractor trailers on our roads. Totally understand trying to keep fewer vehicles, the trash trucks on the road. And it does make sense, but I feel like, you know, we should be given the opportunity to kind of speak our piece like, you know, and then too, you know, is everybody going to be charged for a trash service on their water bill? And maybe they don't need a trash service. That's not right. And you don't really need that service. So that's one of my concerns also. But I just want to let you know what I'm paying right now, and I feel like it's reasonable. I'm just concerned about a huge bill everyone tacked to my water bill, which is already expensive. So just voicing my concerns there. But thank you.

Hi, my name is Tracy Eddington. I live at St. Whitney's Drive. I'm here to also speak about the proposal for the contract with a single residential trash provider and placing that charge on the city utility bills. I understand why the city's considering this. Fewer garbage trucks could potentially reduce street wear, and a citywide contract could maybe offer consistent rates or additional services. But what we really maybe need to think about is what problem are we trying to solve And does solving it require eliminating residents' freedom to choose their own providers? The city has the authority to regulate collection schedules, routes, containers, transportation, and disposal. If a concern is nuisance properties, inadequate collection, or how the trash is collected, I would first ask what the city can't accomplish through the authority it already has. Second, our current system provides consumer choice and ongoing competition. If residents are not satisfied with the company's price, reliability, or service, right now we have the choice to go to another provider. That gives that company an incentive to earn and keep our business. Under a single provider system, competition happens when the contract's bid. Once it's awarded, we can't take our business elsewhere if the service declines or the prices increase. If competing haulers leave the St. Genevieve area, we can't assume that same competition will exist when the contract is rebid years from now. We need to consider what responsibilities the City would be assuming if this contract situation were approved. Today, a mis-pickup, a bill dispute, a rate increase, or a customer service problem is a situation between the resident and the company. If the City chooses the provider, requires us to use it, and puts that charge on our bills, those all become City Hall issues. Why should the city voluntarily assume billing, collections, customer complaints, and contract administration for a service that is already being provided by private businesses? I also found Missouri Law Section 260-215, which allows cities to charge for solid waste service, but requires that charge to be stated separately and prohibits withholding another utility service simply because the solid waste charge has not been paid. Before proceeding, residents deserve a clear explanation from the city about how this statute applies to the proposal. Finally, we need some numbers before we make this decision. What are the residents actually paying today and what would the comparable service cost under a new contract? What would we pay in two, three, maybe even five years? What kinds of increases are allowable? What will it cost the city to administer the billing, the collections, the complaints, and the contract? And if a legitimate concern is the street, what is the estimated annual dollar savings that would happen to our street maintenance budget? It's great to think that might save us some money, but if that's actually the case, we should be able to justify that with numbers. St. Genevieve already has a functioning, regulated, competitive market, and before the city eliminates that competition, and assumed new responsibilities, it should be able to demonstrate with the actual numbers that doing so provides a substantial benefit that cannot already be achieved. The question is not whether a single provider system can work, it's whether that's a good choice for St. Genevieve. Thank you.

Good evening. My name is Nan Evers. The reason I'm not here to talk to you about the trash pickup is I want to first of all explain that we all shop around for things. We might shop around for home insurance or auto insurance. Well, I had that happen with the trash for me. I had been going with Republic to begin with. I really liked that they had the recycling. But the bill kept going up and up and up. And the last time I had a bill with them, it was over $140 for three months. So I talked to friends, I talked to family that had trash service, and they gave me a couple names, and so I checked them out. I decided I would go with Woody's that is over in Farmington, and their bill was quite a bit different. In fact, I would say over $200 a year if I went with Woody's and dropped Republic. So when I called Republic, it was just amazing. I told them that I did not want their service any longer. And all of a sudden, their price was comparable with Woody's. They said, oh, well, we can give you that. And I said, well, I've been asking you for rates that maybe you could go down a little bit since I'm a senior citizen. I only have a bag or two at the most. And they said, well, we'll do that for you. And I said, no, you know, it was like, you know, you've really, you know, that's not fair that, you know, all of a sudden the price would go down. And I asked him, I said, what do I do with the trash cans? I had one for recycling and, you know, one for the regular trash. Well, they would let me bring it out there or they would pick it up. But to pick it up, it would cost me $10 for each can that they came and got. And I said, you mean it's going to cost me $20 to give you my, or you to get my cans back? Yes, ma'am. So luckily I was able to find a friend that had a truck and he took them out to, you know, the place out there by Derrick wing and returned them. And we did, I did not have to pay the $20. So, you know, I found that, you know, they just, they're, they're a big company. In fact, they're all over Republic is. My son lives out in Nevada. They have Republic for their trash. I think that if we go with somebody that's big, that they're going to just keep maybe not being fair to us as a small town here. Four of the people that live on my street have changed their trash to Woody's because of Republic's prices. One other thing I wanted to mention was we have these big dumpsters. I see one by Head Start. Over where Broomfield used to have his auto, I think it's, is it Mr. Muzinka has it there. People go there and throw their trash in there. And they're not paying anything. And I've always paid my bills way back when when it was Tudor's Refuge. So that was, you know, over 40 years ago. So, you know, that's something you're going to have to maybe address too because, you know, they're not paying anything. And the people that are, you know, legitimate and, you know, doing what we should be doing, you know, are not getting, you know, the service that we should be. So thank you very much.

Hi, I'm Diana Bookholz. And I lived in St. Genevieve for two years and six months now, and I've never had a trash collector. And I do all my recycling, and I do have my trash. Everything is taken care of. I don't have to pay for anything. So I don't feel like I should pay for a service that I don't use. And I'm concerned about handing over. was a monopoly for trash service, leading us to have no control over the price increase. And that's all I have to say.

Good evening, Board. This is Dale Klump, 1 Balser Drive, Jay's Laundromat, and 748 Claymont. I haven't had a trash bill now for six or seven years. I compost and recycle. I haul food waste to the farm animals. If I ever have a little bit of trash, I take it to my farm on Middlethrow and burn it. A concern for the laundromat I have is how is the payment going to be structured? I'm a large, large water user and a very small trash user. Is it a flat rate per meter? Is it percentage of what your water bill is going to be or whatever? I have big concerns about that. Thank you for listening to my concerns.

Any other public?

Hi, my name is Jeff Mossinghoff. I live at 101 North 7th Street. I came here with the purpose to speak on the trash thing. I just want to echo what everybody else has already said. I want my freedom of choice. We've had to change trash companies because of price issues or service issues. We found one that we like and we'd like to keep it. But I have another subject that I'd like to speak about that I really didn't intend on speaking about. You guys are talking about street paving. And two, three years ago, whenever they redid North 7th Street, I live on the corner of 7th and Jefferson. My house faces 7th Street. They came down the street. Our daughter lives next door to us. She has a retaining wall. The people across the street have a retaining wall. They made a nice smooth finish up to both of those retaining walls. Where they went out in front of my house, they left a three inch curb about yay far from my grass, okay? And so you just had this little, this big divot that people would trip over. My wife and I know Steve Wilson. Rachel and so I had texted Steve and asked if they could come put some more asphalt in it and make it smooth up to my yard so there wasn't this tripping hazard. My daughter's friends were coming over there in the evening and the little boy actually tripped over it and fell and scraped up his arm and when I sent that picture to Steve the next day he had the city come out and fill it with gravel which was fine. That 7th Street is level there. That gravel is still there. It's not an issue. The last year when they did Jefferson Street, it's a hill there. They did the same thing along my yard as it went up Jefferson Street. They left me an almost four inch curb along the edge of my yard. I tried to put dirt in it. I tried to get grass to grow on it. There was... close to two feet of old blacktop so there was no dirt below where I was trying to put dirt to get grass to grow. So every time it would rain and the water would run down through there and just wash that dirt out. So I had to take a pickaxe and bust up the old blacktop in my yard. The grass had kind of crept out over a little bit I had to bust that up, fill it up with dirt, and put sod over it to get something to take root and take hold there. So my hope and suggestion would be as these pavers are paving these streets, don't leave a three or four inch curb along somebody's yard where it becomes a tripping hazard and some kind of divot there. So that's my request. For the papers, based on my experience of two different streets being paved on either side of my house. Thank you.

I'm also from and I live on Gettinger Street, 745 Gettinger Street. And I agree that, is it really your responsibility to control where we buy our trash from and get our trash. I mean, you're supposed to work for the people. And I know you did a survey, but the survey was not well done at all because you didn't give all the town. If you're going to do a survey, do it to where everybody knows about it and votes on it. Because everybody you talk to, as you said here, a lot of them didn't know until they got here. that you're going to be talking about this. And I think you need to do a much better job. There's a lot of things that needs to be done in St. John. But let the people decide. I mean, competition is what drives our country. And if we don't have competition and you're picking out what we can do, is that really our America? We are a constitutional republic. And we, the people, are supposed to be in charge, not the government, city or otherwise.

Any other public comment at this time? Okay. Thank you all very much. We'll close out public comment, and we will move along to tonight's consent agenda.

I do want to point out that you have revised minutes at your seat, so just take a look at that.

Do you approve?

Second.

Okay, I have a motion and a second. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Okay, thank you very much. We do not have any old business to discuss tonight. We just do have a couple of new business items. First up tonight is Resolution 2026-48. This is a resolution authorizing city staff in the city of St. Genevieve, Missouri to proceed with a notification of a two-year period for change in solid waste services in compliance with state regulations.

I don't know what an explanation is. So this is a carryover of our conversation from three weeks ago where I shared with you the survey that was made available to the entire public and the responses from about 35 citizens. We got back that they paid anywhere and I think some of that was reflected tonight from $25 a month to $67 a month, depending on the four local trash haulers. We also reached out to all four local haulers, invited them all here for the meeting. I actually met with Republic Waste Management and Top Tier. Republic and Waste Management showed up here, gave you some feedback. I reached out to Woody's via email, phone call, twice phone call, never got a response. But that night, I answered your questions. The Republic and Waste Management representatives answered your questions on trucks, on the process. And just to reiterate, the process is a two-year process. So tonight, your resolution is basically asking if you want to go forward, give city staff the approval to send out the letters to Republic. Waste management, top tier, and Woody's saying that we are going to consider going to a single hauler in two years. What would happen then is we'd get our waste services committee back together. We'd talk about what we want. The bill does not have to be part of the water bill. None of those services have to be provided by the city. That can be kept on the provider. That will raise the cost a little. We can ask for them to include recycling. We can ask for them to include bulk item. We can ask for them to include yard waste. We can basically, that's what we'll talk about probably for the first six months. And then we'll put together an RFP. We'll put out the RFP, request for proposal. We'll get responses. We'll pull the committee back together, look at the responses, the requests, And if you all want to vote on a request at that time, you can, or you do not have to.

Are we in open discussion about this?

That's what I was going to ask.

Sure. I don't know. We've done this twice already, and we came to the same conclusion. I realize that we're trying to look at something that we don't know what the numbers are. I understand that, but... You know, I've had not one positive comment made to me about it, and I think from the people here tonight it's pretty overwhelming, but I think we need to find something else to justify our time with. I'm so low.

Well, I would say there's 111 people responded to the survey, 76% of them said that they were at least interested in exploring this as an option. I don't know what could be wrong with exploring as an option if we were able to come up with a significantly lower price. There's an economy of scale. Instead of having four companies divide up each having 200 customers to have one person having 800. There is an economy of scale. Predictably, prices would go down and the demand of quality would be written into the proposal. I don't think we can ignore those people. The people that come up and talk to me all were more interested in having this discussion than not having it. I don't have a personal relationship with my trash hauler. He doesn't even get out of the truck when he comes down. I think it looks to me it's like sewage. You flush the toilet and it disappears. If we know we've got the lowest price and the best quality, I don't care if the truck is red or yellow or whatever it is. And there's a reason other city suburbs move to have a single hauler. Four trucks go by my house every day to pick up one or two loads. To reduce that to one truck with our new streets and all, would only make sense for the maintenance of the streets. So I think we owe it to the people who didn't speak out tonight, but the 75% of 111 and people I've talked to who wants to at least explore this. Doesn't mean we have to do it.

To be fair, it's not how many trucks are on the streets, it's the size of the trucks. If you limit it to one company, They're not going to be coming in here with the smaller trucks to do that many properties. They're going to be using their biggest trucks possible. It's not going to keep from damaging the streets.

We can mandate what size trucks they use. We can mandate it now and not take away the people's choice. We could also have service at $13 a month. We could also get recycling back. We could also get bulk services back. But there's more trucks on the street. No, it doesn't. We actually have more trucks now than we do. So this would absolutely reduce the number of trucks, Joe. There's been a lot of information that's been circulating that's not true. It's not mandatory to get trash service. Just because you don't agree with that doesn't mean it's not true. Let me finish. It is not mandatory to do this. So if you're not using trash service now, you do not have to do trash service in the future. That would be part of the RFP. It would not be mandatory. If you're commercial, it does not affect you. This does not connect dumpsters and commercial densities. This is only for residential, and it's not mandatory. So, ma'am, if you're not using trash now, you don't have to use trash in the future. So that's two of the biggest misconceptions that most people have. They think it's mandatory and that it might be for their business. So those are pretty important facts. We've attempted to do this twice, but we've never actually put it out for an RFP. So we're talking about numbers that nobody knows. Nobody in this room knows what the price might be and what the services might offer. Is that correct, Alderman Prince?

No, we did get preliminary pricing before.

We never put it out for an RFP. We've never put it out for an hour.

We didn't have to because the preliminary prices that came forward were higher than what most people were paying now.

Everyone that the city administrator put together, I don't know, were there 15 people on that list, towns and municipalities?

Yes, 14 or 15.

There were 14 or 15 towns that were averaging $13, $14, $15. Everyone here has had multiple issues with trash service where they have to stop the $65 fees and they had to go and shop and spend all this time. there is power to negotiate from a city standpoint. Now, are you reducing the individual's person's Liberty to pick a trash carry? Yes. But then the city does have that ability to go out and negotiate for the city as a whole. So instead of having a one account, you can have thousands of accounts that you're going to go out there and negotiate with that city. So does it limit that one individual person? Yes. But it doesn't give them huge purchasing power. It does. And if you go and look at the data, All these cities renew. Washington, the city of Washington just renewed a 10-year contract. They've liked it so much for the last 10 years that they renewed another one. Frederictown renewed another contract. Perryville, they're doing their own, they do their own city services. If you talk to those two carriers in here, almost everyone renews their carriers. Talk to people that live at Lake Forest. They like it and they're happy with what they're doing. So that would be, I'd encourage you to find somebody. You go to any major city, they all have single carriers. You have those overlapping routes on all of our new streets and overlapping routes are going to kill us. So there's... There is huge advantages and we don't know the numbers yet. This is not a requirement to do. We just want to be able to get the numbers and make a decision. Does it make sense for St. John to go? Because we have never had that. We don't have good numbers and we're speculating on what it would be. And we can stop surcharges. We can stop fuel increases. It's all written into the contract that you can't have those things. So people putting out that information that we're going to get these price increases, we lock them in. You say 3% for the next five years, you get a 3% increase for the next five years, and they bid on that. So you can do that. So there's been a lot of misinformation of people trying to scare people, and we really don't even know what the numbers are going to be.

All of them are us.

Yes, you know us. listening to these fine folks coming here with their input and their concerns. That's great. The thing is, people have got to realize this is just the beginning. We need to find out what do the people want. They didn't want to exempt certain people. They didn't want certain service. These are things the committee has to put together and then talk to the carriers and then put a proposal together and come back to the board in which new people will have an opportunity to talk and say something if you like it or not. So this is just the start of a process here. It's not a gun deal. Not until we finalize it, you know, and make a proposal and go into a bill.

You know what's disheartening about this? At the last meeting, we had two of the big guns here. We gave them numerous questions. And where are they at tonight? Why aren't they here?

Both of them reached out and asked if I wanted them to come tonight, and I said, you know, I didn't have any requests for them.

But that's all part of this fact-finding is, you know, are they going to have small trucks? Are they going to, you know?

Well, I guess we get that. It's what we asked for in the proposal. We put that out. If we want small trucks, we put it out there to be able to find out what we get.

I just want to... There are good arguments on either side. I don't want to get involved in that. What this is, is there's a statute that requires before a city can take over the trash hauling themselves, so a city can provide the service, which not many cities do, but some do, or before a city can have a single hauler contracted for the city, a notice has to be provided, not really to the public, but to the trash haulers. And then there's a two year waiting period after this notice before you can do a single provider trash service or the city take it over. The reason, as I understand it, for that is that trash companies make investments in the future, and it's not fair to them for a city just to clean them out and say, we're picking one of you and the rest of you can't have this business here. So all of this, and I'm not saying anything one way or the other about whether you should move forward with this or not. I'm just saying that's all you're doing is approving, providing the notice to the current trash haulers of an intent to either provide it yourself as a city or to provide it with a single provider. And then all these debates are important and they should happen. And maybe you want to stop it now, but they can also happen in two years. It can't happen before two years. So if you're worried about your bill this year, this won't affect it. If you're worried about your bill next year, it won't affect it. The earliest to get affected is August of 2028 because we have to give them a two-year notice. And so this is what this process is so that you can have these discussions and get that information um and then decide if you want to do it or not but you can't even decide to do it unless you give this to your notice so the legislature's kicked us so far out that we can't really make a decision until two years from now and there'll be elections and intervening so it may not be in the same board members i may not be up here either so so that i just want to make sure that's clear to everybody that this is a technical issue. Quite frankly, I don't think the board has to approve it. It's a ministerial act, so the city can provide the notice. But I think the idea is the board should approve that going forward rather than just having it without board input. Sorry, I just thought that was important because we're so preliminary.

You know, a few years ago when we did away with public works, the biggest comment I heard about was Were we going to be able to control costs? Was it going to price itself out of the ballpark? You know, this is the same thing here. I mean, we don't have any control over what these contracts are going to be in the future. You know, and the fact of eliminating free enterprise, I have a free enterprise and stuff, and I like the fact that I can do that as an American, and I'm going to stand up for that, right? I don't want to put two small guys out of business that's already invested in Vehicles, you know to do this service and containers and stuff.

So I Am on Patrick and Joe side here I believe that we owe the people at least to go down the road to see where we stand I've had negative and I've had positive feedback for this whole issue kind of evens itself out in both ways and I've seen some issues with trash around my neighborhood with people burning and stuff should not be done in town. But I also understand that elderly might only have one or two bags and that can be negative for them for financial purposes. However, I think that still we need to at least look into it. And that's where I stand.

So if we want to look into things like that, then why don't we look at the costs and stuff for the city doing it themselves? Other cities do that. I bet you there's a lot of them in the state of Missouri that do that themselves. And we're going to look at a complete program and give everybody their options. Why don't we look at that also?

Well, you can as part of this process once you provide the notice. You can't take it over as a city unless you provide this notice to the county.

So you still have a notice even with taking it over ourselves.

So you have to provide the notice even if you're going to provide the service yourself. You can get an estimated budget from several cities. There's not many cities. I think Crystal City... which is your alma mater. I think they do it, but I don't know if anybody else.

There's a couple that have single service in-house.

There are issues with that too. Because then you have it all in the house. Then you have insurance, you have work comp, and trash. It would take a long time probably to recoup those big investments. But you can do that.

We're going to look at the whole picture. Let's look at the whole picture.

We need to approve this tonight first of all before we do that. Move to approve resolution 2026-48. Second. Okay.

I have a motion and a second for Resolution 2026-48. I am going to call a roll call on this. Pam, would you do a roll call, please?

Alderwoman Dobbs? Yes. Alderman Fahey?

Yes.

Alderman Donovan?

No.

Alderman Huey?

No.

Alderman Steiger?

Yes.

Alderman Prince?

No.

Alderman Eidman?

No.

Alderman Ross?

Yes.

Four yes, four no.

I guess this falls to me to break this tie. I'm going to vote yes. I would like to see what the benefit could be. I don't think that there's any harm in presenting some options to the people and then letting... letting their chips fall from there and see how this looks. I think as a city, we're tasked with trying to provide services and benefit to our people. I think that's paramount to what we do. whether it's providing services to attract new residents or to take care of our existing. I think we always need to keep exploring ways to do that. So this is an exploration of that. It's not a decision to clearly move forward with that, but I would like to see it, and then we can present data to you all once we know it and we have that data to present. can you please you know do the whole picture and stuff do it if we take it over ourselves yeah absolutely okay um next up tonight we do have scheduled a first and second reading potentially for bill number 4733 This is an ordinance authorizing and directing the issuance, sale, and delivery of general obligation bonds, series 2026 of the City of St. Genevieve, Missouri, prescribing the form and details of said bonds, providing for the levy and collection of an annual tax for the purpose of paying the principal of and interest on said bonds as they become due, and authorizing certain other documents and actions in connection therewith. Motion to approve. Second. Okay, I have a motion and a second. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed?

And what was the reason for needing a second reading on this? Is it time? Yes. A motion for a second reading? Second.

Okay, I have a motion and a second for a second reading of bill number 4733. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed?

Okay.

This will be a second reading of Bill number 4733. This is an ordinance authorizing and directing the issuance, sale, and delivery of general obligation bonds series 2026 of the City of St. Genevieve, Missouri, prescribing the form and details of said bonds, providing for the levy and collection of an annual tax for the purpose of paying the principal of and interest on said bonds as they become due, and authorizing certain other documents and actions in connection therewith. Motion to approve. Second. Okay, I believe I have a motion and a second. Pam, would you do a roll call, please?

Alderman Steiger? Yes. Alderman Prince? Yes. Alderman Ross? Yes. Alderman Eidman? Yes. Alderman Huey?

Yes.

Alderman Donovan?

Yes.

Alderman Fahey?

Yes.

Alderwoman Dobbs? Yes. Eight yes, zero no's. Bill number 4733 now becomes ordinance 4654. Thank you very much.

And last up in our new business tonight, we have a first reading of bill number 4734. This is an ordinance authorizing the city of St. Genevieve to purchase real property for future water plant development.

Just a quick question. Did we tie this closing date to the tearing down of the house? It's in the contract, yes. It's in the contract. Contingency. Motion to approve.

Second. Okay, I have a motion and a second. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Okay, thank you all very much. Any other business to bring forth tonight, right now, to discuss? I know we talked about Jurta Fett at the opening of the meeting, during Erin's report. I just want to thank all the members of the committee for another wonderful event. I know it's a labor of love and it's a lot of work, and I want to thank them personally for all that they do to put that on. I think it's wonderful for our town. We have a lot of friends and family that come in from out of town to take part, so it's become a great tradition. So just my thanks to all the committee members and all the people that help out, all the volunteers. So if there is no other business to discuss at this time, we will adjourn and move into work session.

Thank you.

tonight's work session to order at this time i'm looking for approval of tonight's work session agenda motion to approve second okay i have a motion and a second all in favor aye any opposed okay first item of business tonight um the tree just limb disposal dump site all of that just catch all let's put it so a few months ago we discussed the brush site and train noise

And we came up with some solutions. I wanted to tell you a few things and ask a question. That is, we installed the signs. We've installed the cameras. We've increased patrol. We believe it's going to be better. But we also talked that night. We've also worked with MLC on train noise. But one of the things that came out that night was that they had suggested we put a barricade at the crossing so they don't have to blow their horn there. And that night, there wasn't complete agreement on whether we wanted to do that or not. And you all asked to bring it back to you in a few months. I do believe there is some improvement with the train noise. There is improvement with the a brush site, so I'm here to ask, do you want to pursue having a barricade at the Division Street railroad crossing?

Yes, sir. I can answer that right now. FAA will not let you put that barricade. There you go. That's simple right there. I can have Mr. Thomas here, the airfield president, he will quote it from the FAA manual. the access to that airfield, as we provided 100% of the time. Gotcha. So I will answer that.

What was the barricade, like we were going to put like a chain there?

I mean, we didn't really talk about that. They were just asking for a barricade of some sort in the evening so that the train doesn't have to blow its whistle when it goes by.

Yeah, so that the trash disposal site would be closed.

but would most likely not allow air... Trash. Limb disposal. Not trash.

Not the T word. Is there such a thing as... Because I know those railroad crossing signs are expensive, and that doesn't save a lot of money anyway, does it?

No, they still have to do it. Let's just... I mean, I'm not disputing your thing there. That sounds reasonable. But let's just say we are allowed to do it. Who's going to do it? That's what I was going to ask. No, not when we're going to do it. Who's going to do it? Who's going to go out there and do that? And open it up.

We used to lock the cemetery, but it was never getting done because it kept getting dropped.

I don't see... I think this new company, RJ Corman, is doing a much better job. Okay. Oh, go ahead. I'm sorry.

I can totally answer that one because I live right next to the railroad tracks. So, RJ Corman is actually doing an excellent job of keeping the sound down down there. Now, I don't know, okay, so I've been kind of accustomed to the sound for a while, so it doesn't really bother me unless I'm outside when it, you know, I mean, of course, we're blowing a whistle right in your ear when you're outside. You can't really hear yourself think. However, if I'm inside, I really don't hear it because I'm just so used to it. But I was hearing it before RJ Corman took over. Like, if I was in the shower even, I could hear the bam, bam, and it would like almost vibrate things. I'm not hearing that right now. Now, if any people in the ward, in ward one, would come to me and say, hey, I'm still hearing it, it's still an issue or whatever, I have yet to hear it over the last several months. So, since RJ Corman took over, at least the last two months. So, I... you know, say to them, please come to me and tell me if it's still an issue for the people, because I'm not hearing this, and I think R.J. Corman's doing an excellent job. And I'm right there by the tracks.

Yeah, we're not going to totally eliminate it, but this company is doing a much better job. Yes.

Did they get moved? Are they stacking the trains differently?

I have reached out to them to ask if they got any headway. I can't remember, Alderman Fahey, if you were at that meeting where RJ Corman said they had contacts with the organization, the federal organization that controls the movement of a derailer. I have not heard back from them yet. But I have heard from people who live down there that it is better that... I do not know the technicalities of horn blowing, but apparently, you know, it's being, instead of just laying into it and waking everybody up.

Well, now they're doing all their switching up where it's supposed to be done, where it's been done for many, many years, before the previous company was bringing it down in a single lane and letting the cars bump into each other down there. Now it's all concentrated back up where it's always been. And, I mean, yeah, I'm sure the people up there are still hearing it some, but... I don't think so.

No. It's still where it has been for the last several years. They cannot move that derailleur. That's the issue.

I know, but they were doing it on a single line. They were letting the cars bump into each other down the line instead of doing it on a single line.

They're just not coming more up towards the residential area, and I think they're having more caution of what they're doing. I think whoever's in charge of this whole operation is thinking, hey, The city of St. Genevieve, the people are not happy with this operation. We need to tone it down a little bit because I think that's what they're doing. The derailleur has still not been moved. It's still in the same spot it's been because that's what was told to us, that they could not move that derailleur.

Which is incorrect.

Yes, and they can, but they're saying, no, we're not.

Union Pacific chooses not to. Let's be very clear about who's causing that problem. That is Union Pacific. They can hear me right now. They are the problem with the derailleur. Yes. That's all I got. We won't worry about the barricade. There's no barricade. Okay. So two. Next item tonight is budget handout.

Everybody's favorite time.

So you have a packet in front of you. I'm going to go over that packet real quick. And then describe a few things. No, you're fine. So you have this in front of you. Top page. I obviously used the spreadsheet that Happy had created. I tweaked it a little bit. It's not as big. It is not as big. If you'd like it bigger, I can produce that. So this is an overview of the entire budget with a step raise only. It includes a 5.6% health insurance premium, safety merit of $100, and all of the capital items that are later on in the packet. I'm going to go over a few things. I was going to try to pull it up. Give me just a moment. I had it pulled up, and it went away. So let's do this.

You want... Do you want me to move?

Here we go.

Am I in the way? Here, I'll move.

These are all color coded here. So this is the starting, this is our best guess, right? This is the budget. This is our best guess at the starting general revenue, October 1st, but it's a very educated guess. This is revenue for fiscal 27. This are operating expenses, so payroll and operating expenses for fiscal 27. So HAPI created this sheet so that you could see in the operating category, salary, benefits, equipment, supplies, are we living within what we're bringing in a year? And you can see this is the difference. This is revenue for one year projected. This is expenses for one year projected. This is what's left. But we also have this reserve. If you come over, this is our grant expenses for fiscal 27. add that to these totals now you have a new expense total that leaves a fund balance of a million seven seventy nine three thirty five these are the capital expenses in general fund that the department heads are going to go over next week and ask you if they can spend those amounts these are the capital expenses in general fund if you go down and we'll go down here in a minute these are the capital expenses in the enterprise funds if you subtract this amount along with the other expenses from the money we take in, this is 450,000 red, which this number is always red. Subtract that from our starting revenue, gives you year-end revenue for fiscal 27. Then the 54% is the percent of a year's expenditures that we would have if all you know what broke loose and we didn't have any revenue. we would have 54% covered. Last year, that went down to like 42 or 43. Two years ago, you all passed a resolution saying we could go down, but we needed to get back to 50 by 2028. This puts us at 54%. These are our best educated guesses on where reserves are in each of the enterprise funds. These are the expenses in those enterprise funds. Operating expenses. So water, sewer, van, cemetery. These are payroll because we do have payroll in water and sewer. These are those operational expenses. These are capital. I'm sorry, these are debt service. So these are our payments on our debt in those enterprise funds. These are the capital items that we'll talk about next week in the enterprise funds. Those total here. So that's the department total for water, sewer, cemetery. And then if you take the starting amount, the revenue, subtract expenses, this is what's left at the end of the year. So this is where we're projected to start all funds at the beginning of the year. And then down here is where we'd be projected to end. I apologize that I kind of went through that quickly. That's this. The second one back is the same thing. With a step raise plus a 3.8% increase. I apologize. The second one back in your packet has a 3.8. That, if you remember, we paid CBIS to do a salary study a couple years ago. Every year then they get back to us on what their research shows would be the standard increase for that year. They've told us 3.8% for 2026. So this is your step raise only. We're going one column over for everybody. This is everybody going one column over and getting a 3.8% increase.

Which the 3.8, the step raise plus 3.8 puts us at 54%. And without it, it's way up to 57, which is kind of artificially high, isn't it? Our goal is 50.

It's real high. It's not artificially high. I misunderstood what you're saying. Well, I mean, we should for 50, right? Right. We had a good year. And yes, we were able to come back up. So if we come back next Thursday and there's some things here that are cut that you want to add, this will go down, but it can still say above 54. We didn't cut much. You'll see in the next handout. So this handout are those capital item expenses. The first column is what was asked. The second column is what I've recommended. And then after next week, we'll have the third column approved. So these are the majority of items that we'll discuss next week, along with a few other items. And those few other include, I put together this document for you. We've talked a lot about economic development. So this document walks you through what we're talking about doing in-house with economic development. It kind of starts with what we've talked about, what our strengths are, what our weaknesses are, a proposed budget for economic development, where that money will come from, some measurables that I would suggest to make sure this works, and then kind of a three-year plan for economic development. Last two things you have, if you remember, you asked me to go out and ask the two organizations that have been, it was actually three, actually four. There's the CMO RPC, Parkland Ready, the Chamber of Commerce, and now the new ProSaintGenerate organization. Parkland Ready contracted with Scott Sattler, if you remember, to do their economic development services. They decided, and this was prior to the August election, they decided in June to cancel that contract since Scott was running for election and they didn't want any sort of conflict of interest there. So that contract no longer exists, so we do not have to pay to be a member of Parkland Ready. we were paying for their economic development services, and that no longer exists right now. CMO RPC, we pay every year. They help us apply for grants. They tell us about grants that are eligible. They work on our GIS system. They do quite a bit for us. The other two organizations, if you remember, we give the chamber $6,000 annually, and what we talked about was either, from an economic development standpoint, increasing that to $10,000, Possibly if we could, but who would get that money? So I asked Chamber and Pro St. Gen to prepare some plans for you that says, if we get this money, this is what we would do. You have those in your hand to look at, and we can discuss again next Thursday. My question for you is, so the department heads will be here next week to go over their capital items. I'll be here to go over the administrative and legislative pieces of it. Do you want these two organizations here?

Well, we don't normally have this. It could be a very big discussion compared to going through the rest. It could, but here's... We're talking millions of dollars in capital. We're talking $10,000. But that money is going to be in the budget no matter what, right?

Not necessarily.

My recommendation is in there, but it doesn't have to be. But once, I mean, let's just say we keep it in there.

Once it's approved, then we can invite them to the table to... Yeah, you could approve the line at $10,000 and then invite them in to talk about what they want to do with that. Yes. This is Chamber, right? Chamber and Pro St. Jim.

Wow. I think we need to be good neighbors in the chamber.

We normally pay $6,000. What we've talked about is expanding our footprint in economic development.

And that was more money. It doesn't necessarily mean more money for the chamber. It doesn't mean more money for pro se gin. It could mean no money for either one. But this is separate than the payment that we already... No, this is that line.

So you're talking about going from 6 to 10, and we don't know where the other, all of it's going to go, just one or the other or both or whatever, but increasing that to 10, correct?

Yeah, there's a recommendation on there for both.

I remember last year we were trying to cut the funds completely. And now we're going to increase it?

Well, let's save that discussion for next Thursday. But Dave's got a recommendation on there for you to look at.

But I'm also hearing you'd prefer just to stick to the department leads next week.

Well, no, I mean the idea of having a discussion without them here. And approving the funds and then maybe bringing them back in. Okay. I like Joe's idea. That's pretty solid. Yeah. Because if they come and do a presentation, they might be here for at least 15, 20 minutes each. Right. That's going to add, you know, 45 minutes on to an evening.

Well, and if you're reading through their proposals and you have questions, I think just formulate those questions and we'll get them in to answer them.

You want to do them all tomorrow or next week? Me? That's fine.

I really... I don't have a... I'm sorry. I mean, I think that's a bit much. Yeah, I agree. Personally, I mean, we've... I think we've discussed enough, you know, with, at a minimum, the chamber, I think. You know, Pro St. Gen would be new. I mean, they came, I think, what, about a month ago? But I think maybe let's get through our conversation on Thursday, next Thursday, and then let's see. You want to bring them in and kind of chat through their... Recommendations.

I do have one last item. You can ask any questions you want. One of the items on the water capital expense is on-site water tank. We started at $100. We've gotten multiple quotes.

It's the fourth line item under water.

$180. The reason I bring this particular one up I can't remember if Corey showed pictures of this in a meeting, but this onsite water tank, if any of you want to meet tomorrow and go down there is in really bad shape. It is on site at the water plant.

Oh, okay. I'm sorry.

So if you drive to the water plant, you want to go in the side door. There's a tank right behind you. There's holes in the ceiling. Oh Lord. Okay. So it needs to be replaced. I'm not saying we approve it tonight, but I'm saying if you think you're agreeable to include this one item, we'd like to go ahead and start the process of getting a bid, getting it set, and bringing it to you soon. By the way, in full disclosure, this is $360,000. It's $180,000 this year and $180,000 next year. What was the other quote? Oh, they wouldn't give a quote. Nope. So we went out to two companies, and Corey's talking to a third. The first company said, we're not touching that thing.

What, demolition or putting a new one?

Repairing what's there. What kind of roof is it? I mean, is it shingle or is it metal? It's an old, what did you call it, bolt?

It's a water tower. So yeah, up top it's kind of... Kind of down, but not full down, but yeah.

So the ceiling of the water tower, it's not really a roof, it's the cap. Yes, sir.

Are we using it?

100%.

Yeah. The condition is in.

All the water goes through it. So Dave, why did you change from 100,000 to 180 to move the time frame up?

Because that's what, when Corey and I talked months ago, it was going to be repairs. But now that we've had engineers come look at it from multiple companies, they've said... This needs a full-blown remodel. Remodel is a poor choice of words. But, and then one group said, we're not touching it. The other group said, yeah, we can do it. It's $360,000. They'll spread it over four years, but then it's $400,000.

Or it's $360,000 spread over two. Right. What's the time frame for getting it repaired and having it back insured? They think they can get here and get the majority of the work.

This is if we go here soon. the majority of the work done before the holidays, but they would have to paint probably early next year.

Well, I think it's important.

It is important.

And that price included, that's the ceiling also, the inside structures. I have pictures on my phone, but there are several beams that are rusted, so as they're taking care of that, coating it, and like I said, paint will be coming in spring once it gets warmer. Is there a project of how long it'll last? I mean, it's going to Is it going to be long-term, or would we face having to replace it later? No, once you do that, the maintenance on it, it's just like our other tower.

I mean, if we're building a new water tower or water plant in 10 years... I mean, we can't band-aid it for 10. I know it's a dumb question, but I'm asking it. We can't band-aid it for 10 years if we're building a new water plant in 10 years? Because we won't use it at the new water plant, will we? We can't. You think it would be reusable for you?

It would be built right there. It would still be on-site storage. Right now, we make all the water inside the plant. It sends it out there. And when the pump sleep M-road, Maxwell, point-based call for it, then it pulls back out of that tank. Without that tank, we run 24-7. Yeah, that's my main plan at all times.

So we very well reuse it with the new water. Yes.

Will there be a disruption during this?

No, it will be running 24-7. Well, I'll watch my ears.

Instead of filling the tanks, we have a smart pump, and it's on a VFD, so variable speed drive.

We'll have to break that up and down and keep the pressure.

So how long will that take to repair?

You didn't say I'm getting a roof. I haven't got that date, but it was. 10 to 12 weeks? Or 8 to 10 weeks? No, it was 10 to 12.

10 to 12 to get the roof built and 10 to 12 weeks of round o'clock?

No, 10 to 12 weeks. That's them building it off-site. Oh, okay. They bring it on and then, I don't know, I can touch base with Zach tomorrow, kind of estimated.

So while they're working on it, what happens?

We make the plan 24-7.

And that's supposed to take how long?

I think they're looking for a little direction. Do we feel like that's something that we want to go ahead and have them start working on? Do we have a choice?

I mean, plus if we wait, it'll be more expensive later.

Yeah, exactly. Yeah. Okay. We will proceed. And then rest everybody steady up for budget, and we'll be here next Thursday for that.

Dave, I have a question. Yes, sir. I guess it can be asked now. I see on the water there's a line there to the building you had on 590 Market on water. Then I see the same thing down here on Seward. Is that the same project or is that two different projects?

That is the same project, total cost of $450 spread across water and sewer. $450? Correct. That's what we're budgeting. So, I mean, it may come in less or more, but we think that's about right. We've talked to a few individuals, and I think Happy actually did too. Okay. I just wondered if it was redundant here.

Yep.

One project.

All right. All right. On the bottom of the proposed, it's got the increases for IT, health insurance. Can you go through that real fast?

Yeah, down at the bottom of this document, it shows some of the major expenses. Down at the bottom it says IT management, 3.7% increase. That's for 27. Health insurance, 5.6% increase. We negotiated that a few months back. And then liability, casualty, workers' comp, cyber, that's an 18% decrease.

On the IT management, is that like our forward slash agreement? Yes. And when's that up?

In a year and a half, not soon enough. Not soon enough.

How confident are we on our revenue stream coming in? Do we have anything that we are potentially not going to do show up?

So all those, that revenue, by the way, if anybody wants it, Here's a copy of all, you know, 40 or 50 pages, if you want to look at it line by line. Those revenues, the tax revenues, are under Estaboy. So I will, like I would tell you, property taxes are currently at 394, 481, and there's going to be a little more trickle in. So we budgeted at 395 next year. We did not budget for an increase. And that's pretty consistent amongst the sales taxes, property taxes. We budgeted either right at where we're this year or lower. One in particular, which is the county road tax, we budgeted lower.

So the total city taxes, paying your property taxes, $395,000?

That's for general revenue. There's also a property tax for cemetery, bank.

Okay. All right. We have their marching orders for next Thursday, I guess.

So on the proposed economic development budget, where is that?

It's spread across multiple lines.

Just so we've got this, can you go through this briefly, the two-page proposal?

Yep.

So on the first page, so we're talking about this document.

kind of gives a purpose that we've talked about and it talks there's a list there previous board discussions tracking new business housing subdivision development downtown business development infrastructure improvements and partnerships and then out to the right of those kind of what staff have get from those discussions so like for instance under infrastructure it says infrastructure physical digital and technical is necessary to attract support growth so we have to have you know, good streets, but we also have to have place or AI. We have to have infrastructure. And then there's a common theme, which is kind of a summary of that. Top section says the board has consistently expressed an interest in growing the city's economic base. The question is how we allocate resources to move from discussing economic development to actively pursuing it. Bottom of that page lists what we determined through all those conversations with the board and in-house as strengths and opportunities. If you flip the page, that's the proposed economic development budget. So business recruitment and development, $14,000. I'm going to use that line. It has a little 1 next to it. That 1... then refers down to measurables. So my suggestion is if we're going to spend $14,000 on business recruitment and development, we have some measurables of contacting 50 prospective businesses and developing 10 qualified leads. That total $75,000, Alderman Steiger asks where exactly is that? That's spread across multiple lines. So there's some of it in community development. There's some of it in tourism. There's some of it in administrative. There's some of it in Fund 23, which is TTC. But multiple dollars from those areas were brought together for this 75 or 77. I can't remember if I changed this since I handed it to you. Does it say 75? 75,000. Where does that money come from? If you go down to funding it, it comes from current general revenue and tourism budget. It comes from existing staff. So some of it isn't really money. It's just us. Robert, Aaron, and myself reallocating some of the things we do to do more economic development. It comes from existing economic development funds. We talked about the $6,000 we spent previous years. It comes from the county transient tax, and it comes from some grants and partnerships. Aaron's been pretty open about that, the MMG, the SEM, and the MPD. Did I get those right? I'm stepping up, man. And then the last thing there is a three-year outlook. My focus would be year one to build foundation, identify available properties. Year two, aggressive recruitment, expand incentives, market properties. And year three, the goal here is obviously to expand the tax base. I flew through that. Any questions?

No, that's great. Wonderful speech.

All right. Budget work session next Thursday. I'm moving us along. Work session item number three, real estate. There's an option to close this if we so choose. Is that suggested?

Would appear so, yeah.

Okay.

Motion to go into closed session for real estate.

Okay. Okay, so I have a motion and a second to move into closed session for real estate.

Alderman Steiger. Yes. Alderman Prince. Yep. Alderman Ross. Yes.

Yes.

Alderman Eidman. Yes. Alderman Huey. Yes. Alderman Donovan. Yes. Alderman Fahey. Yes. Alderman Dobbs. Yes. Motion carried.

Thank you.

Thank you. 🎵 🎵 Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you.

from closed session anything else to discuss tonight okay see you next Thursday for budget work session okay next Thursday 6 p.m. right here