Public Safety Committee - Regular Meeting

Okay, it's 5.30. I call the monthly meeting of the Public Safety Committee to order. Roll call. Everyone is here and present. Next, we'll have public comment. If there's somebody here from the public that wishes to make a comment. regarding anything on our agenda or city business, now is the time to do so. We have the microphone up here at the front table so everybody can hear you, and if there's anybody on the internet, they can hear. Anybody care to, yes ma'am, in the back, if you'd come up and state your name and address for the record.

Hello. I hope this is loud enough. I'm Amber Dogs. I reside at 108 Riverview Drive. I'm very grateful for CA for News, or I would have not known that this evening Riverview Drive was on the agenda for this evening. I see that there is a request for no parking on a specific side of Riverview Drive. But I would also like to add, it would be great if we could also get a no parking sign on the side of Court Treatment Center as well. I've made multiple conversations with city staff as well as the police department about vehicles parking on the wrong side of the street repetitively over the last several years, especially as staff from CORE Treatment Center choose to park overnight on the wrong side of the street. Also, in the morning when staff are parked at Freidert or going to work at Freidert, there are staff members from CORE parked on the wrong side of the street. So often there's only one lane of traffic to actually drive through and you can't always see people crossing the sidewalk to go to work at Holy Family or vice versa, vehicles trying to come down from Meadow Lane onto Riverview Drive. So there's not just an issue of making no parking on one side of the street, but also additional signage where there is already no parking necessary, specifically directly in front of Court Treatment Center. Thank you.

Thank you. Anybody else? Yes, sir, in the yellow shirt.

Hi, my name is Brian Seiler. I live at 2112 Summit Street. Over the past maybe 15 years, there have been at least three car accidents on 22nd and Summit. The last one was actually a rollover. People just seemed to fly through there. Now, that area, it's just a two city block, both directions, but they just come flying through, wondering if maybe somebody could put a yield sign or stop sign in that particular area.

Oh, we don't have give and take, but I did see that on the agenda, I believe. And there was a, did you fill, somebody filled out some paperwork. I know we just passed that, I think maybe two months ago, as far as if you want a stop sign, a yield sign, something to do with pedestrian crossing anywhere. We tried to do it. Whatever your request is, you could go on the internet, fill out the paperwork, and then submit it, and then it would go through the process of review. And I did that. Yes. So it is on our agenda tonight along with that, and we'll also hear from the city engineer and their thoughts along with the police and what have you. So it is on the agenda, and we'll be taking that up.

All right. Thank you very much.

Well, thank you. Yes, sir.

Hi there. I'm Eric Walsdorf, and we live at 3414 Meadow Lane. And tonight it was brought up that they're talking about no parking on the northeast section of Lindbergh and Meadow Lane, which is right in front of my house. I guess I'm here because I don't understand the reason why that they want to do it. I mean, I'm not sure what the problem is and what it's going to solve, but I've been a law-abiding citizen, lived there for 29 years, paid our taxes, and now I'm feeling violated or discriminated if they're going to try and take my parking away because I don't park on their lot, but I do at times to use it. And... I guess I don't know what, it's a regular, it's not a busy road, Lindbergh. 35th and Meadow, yes. But Lindbergh is a quiet neighborhood, and I don't see what the need is because you should be able to go. It's a two-way street parking on both sides. by having no parking there to me is going to give aid to the reckless people they're going to drive faster because at times yes there are people that drive reckless and fast i've never seen an accident there because of that i've seen an accident on lindbergh when the guy was going south he missed a curve and what went up on the front lawn so no matter what that was not going to cure anything um and to me If you're talking about you can visibly see the intersection good if you come up, if you're going south on Lindbergh, come up to the stop sign. Nobody ever parks up to the crosswalks, and I don't see what you're going to gain by having no parking in that position. Can you guys comment on that before this, or does it have to go into your discussion later?

It'll go into our discussion later. So if you want to stay around, I may give you the opportunity after hearing our discussion, I probably will call upon you because a lot of times what happens is while we have public input, sometimes we hold the public input for specific items until that item comes up on our agenda. Sure. I'm going to admit to screwing up a little bit, but I'm going to correct for that by when we do bring it up, I will find out if there's anybody that wants to speak specifically to that item, and then they will also have the ability to hear perhaps some of the conversation we've had. So I want to apologize, but... It actually works out good. Now you can speak here on any item, including items on our agenda. And when it comes up, I will once again give the audience the opportunity to speak on that figure.

Okay.

And I appreciate you coming because we try to garner as much information from both sides before we make a decision. So thank you for coming.

Sure.

Thank you. Yes, sir.

My name is Joe Summers. I live right next to the Eric, 3417 Lindbergh Drive, regarding the no parking on the east side. I've been there 30-plus years. I have never seen an accident, not that I'm aware of. We park on that corner. And when we don't park there, them cars go faster. That's just the way it is. They don't slow down. And even when there's a car parked there and across the street, you get certain people, they don't stop. To me, taking away the parking area isn't going to solve it. You need to come up with a different solution, or that's my opinion on it.

Sure. Thank you for your information. All right. Anyone else care to speak on public input, whether it's on the agenda and you may even get another chance to speak on that later, or something that isn't even on the agenda? You got a problem with the city? It's going once, public input going twice, not hearing anything, it goes three times, I will now call public input closed. Consent agenda. Does anybody want anything on the consent agenda pulled to be worked on individually? Not hearing anything, I'll accept the motion to approve the agenda as is.

I'll make the motion to approve the consent agenda.

Second. Motion and a second to approve the agenda. All those in favor, aye.

Aye.

Opposed, nay. We've got an approved agenda. First item on the agenda is item 26, That's not the right area. I got to go down over here. It's 26-0721. It's the request to prohibit parking on the west side of Riverview Drive from Meadow Lane north to the Holy Family Memorial driveway. And on the north side of Meadow Lane from Riverview Drive west to the Holy Family Memorial driveway. driveway discussion or i'm going to be talking about it but because i'm a whole family employee i'll be talking from down there sure my my understanding is you're recusing yourself from the vote and whatever so you're you can talk on it but you won't vote on it

for item 27-01. I'm here on behalf of Holy Family and Eric Brown. He is our director of plant operations department for Holy Family Memorial. I am a maintenance mechanic, been there for about seven years. This issue has to do with Meadow Lane and Riverview Drive. The corner there, if you see it, I think it was It's one of the pictures that you have there. The overview is the highlights where Meadow Lane turns into Riverview Drive. There is a total of six parking spaces there. Holy Family would like to have permanent parking, no parking there because the semis, they can't go through that neighborhood, so they have to come down Meadow Lane, pull onto Riverside Drive, and then back in to the loading dock. It's right in front of the core building, which already has no parking. Part of the overview, if you walk directly, a lot of the employees will walk directly across the corner of Meadow and Riverview into the parking lot. There is some no parking already in place. Eric Brown from Holy Family is just looking to have that expanded. Going on Riverview Drive, there would be a total of four parking spaces. On Meadow Lane, there would be only two parking spaces. I took some pictures earlier. I talked with City Attorney Eric. Let me look at my notes here. The photo number four is of the Riverview lot. I took those earlier today. There was only a total of six parking spaces from Riverview and Meadow Lane. As you can see, I mean, this is just one corner. I could have walked around the entire parking lot, but that's just one corner lot. There's more than enough adequate parking. And then Holy Family also has the 21st Street lot with the Skywalk. There's more than enough parking. But we've had several close calls with semi-trucks backing up. Picture number eight is what I really wanted the committee to look at. There's a picture of an 18-wheeler, 53-foot semi-trailer trying to back into our loading dock, and then number seven shows he's gotta watch out for vehicles. There's a utility pole right there at the corner. So that's really tight corners. I've been here seven years. They've had a lot of close calls, thankfully. There's been no accidents. Holy Family, we've suffered a 700-ton chiller failure. We got a temporary chiller trailer that's parked on a loading dock, which makes a bad situation even tighter.

That's all I have.

If you have any questions.

Any questions from committee members?

Sorry. This microphone system is a little louder than the old one. I don't necessarily have any questions as far as the request. I think by looking at it with all the documentation, I agree there's adequate parking in the parking lot with it. The one thing, and I'm glad Amber was here as well and spoke on the public comment, how does that affect the core building? Let's say we'd say, let's go with the no parking in that area. How does that then affect the core building since that's all right in front of there as well?

A lot of the, well, CORE's not really part of Holy Family, but a lot of the people that make deliveries to CORE, FedEx, UPS, even personnel pick up and drop off, they'll usually just pull up there on the curb. Holy Family has been allowing them to use our loading dock area. They'll pull into the loading dock area so that they're off of the street if they have parcels to load or unload, people to load or unload. They're usually not there very long.

Okay. But yeah, I mean, looking at it, I'm familiar with that. My wife also works at Holy Family as well and parks in that lot. And that lot's always got, I don't think I've ever seen it at full capacity. Every time I've been there because of having to pick something up from a vehicle or whatnot. Yeah. And then, yeah, like with that being a loading dock right there, I'm surprised you guys haven't had an issue at that point like that. Those pictures that you had, like that's pretty close call, you know, granted they're professional drivers, so they're used to that. But that's still, if you can prevent an accident, you know, and then on top of that, you got that crosswalk that's right there as well. So, I mean, that's a pedestrian area where you could have an issue too. So I'd be in support of the no parking in that area.

Yeah, 99% of those six cars that park there are usually Holy Family employees during first shift, so usually about 3 to 4 o'clock. Most of those are gone until the following morning usually. Sure.

Anyone else? Does our city engineer have anything to chime in?

I'm supportive of it, I guess, because both those streets are narrower than our normal streets, and that's why there's already no parking on the one side of each one. Certainly coming out of Meadowlakes. I've gotten other complaints from people on... liberty place from some of the neighbors there that are saying semi trucks are using that street so i don't know if there's like cars here that then they go out that way or if they're just lost but i think anything we can do to help them get back out on the middle lane and out of that neighborhood probably the better i thought about the four that are here The only problem, if you keep that, then you still can't see the crosswalk. Granted, there's not a lot of traffic on Riverview Drive, but it's certainly a site obstruction from those guys, too. And is that partly where they back into? I didn't get to look at all your pictures. I'm sorry.

The pictures you have here, I'm not sure which one that would be.

That was one that I took, so it wasn't one of them.

Yeah, the seminars would pull forward and then begin backing into it.

Yeah, over here, yeah. So, I don't know. I was supportive of it. I guess I had no...

Anybody in the audience? I know I think Amber, you spoke on it originally. Would you like to have a couple other comments or do you feel it's going your way?

It's just that a sign needs to be placed in front of core treatment center that there's no parking on that side of the street because the only parking on that side of the street is actually further down more towards like the 130th house Thank you.

Looks like our city engineer made a note of that and is going to spend $25 for another sign out there apparently. Thank you very much. Anything else? Otherwise, I'll accept the motion to either approve or disapprove. I'll make the motion to approve second. Motion by Cummings. And second by Beeman.

Did you forget my name?

No. I just keep forgetting to get all the dang Es in it. Second by Beeman to approve the no parking area. Any other comments, questions, concerns? Otherwise, all those in favor, aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. Unanimous. Okay, next item on the agenda is 260722. That happens to be a request to install stop signs at the intersection of South 22nd Street and Summit Street for northbound and southbound traffic on South 22nd Street. City Engineer, you've got...

I don't know if PD has anything else. I know they had all the data and had at least two of the accidents anyway. The rollover that they spoke of and another one November of 25. one in October of 25 was something about unsafe backing. So there were a couple accidents there. Um, I know we recently put up that one stop sign at 21st and summit after that street got, you know, pushed through graded gravel. So, um, looking at this one, I mean, you're going to have accidents. You do that like to see more than probably just these two, usually it's like three or more in a three year period, I think. But, um, the thing that I had noted was there's definite site obstruction on that Southwest corner. And I don't think there's any issue with where they're at. They're out of the vision triangle. What I can tell they're 15, 20 feet back each way. So I don't think there's any, you know, anything we can do about the arborvitaes that are there. So I guess I, you know, there's others, you know, like I went through, through kind of our new policy and the different things on there. Um, It is definitely a long stretch. Those are about two blocks that are 800 feet long each. You've got Washington Middle School that's not too far away, Rubick Field, Steinbecker Field, Emma Redonk Park. So you do have some definitely children in the neighborhood. I know we had that RFB put up at 23rd and Dewey. Traffic volume is probably not an issue. It's definitely still very low traffic volume, some crashes. Whether or not speeding is an issue, I'm not really sure. It would be a PD thing, but I guess I was recommending probably putting a stop sign north-south, so on 22nd Street, running north and south, so that will be opposite of 21st and Summit then. I guess is what I'm recommending if the committee so desires. Does anybody else have any comments? Northbound and southbound. So if you're on 22nd Street going southbound, you would have stop or northbound.

Yes, that is exactly right.

And I don't know if that's the best way or not, but we just put it the other way on 21st and Summit, so I don't want to have people stopping two blocks in a row. You kind of try to alternate. There's a lot of...

But yeah, don't see it because they're not there. But we have a four year old grandson. There are other children.

Yeah, the only thing with technically stop signs are used to assign who has the right away. They are not supposed to be used for speed control. It will likely help with that in this case. But that's not that is never our first reason. because that's an enforcement issue. But if it wasn't for the site restriction, I don't know if I'd be recommending it. But between the other one that we just put up and having a site obstruction, I think it's probably worth having something there.

Ma'am, could you just give your name and address for the record since you've kind of given to it? Thank you. Just so we have a record of who said what and so we knew who to blame years from now. Other than the mayor, he gets enough blame as it is. Any other questions or concerns? I don't have a problem. I know when I did the reading and the research it kind of suggested I'll take a yield sign or a stop sign, but as you can tell, our engineer is saying, let's do the stop sign, makes more sense to him. So I guess that's what we would be requesting if we're going to authorize something would be the stop signs.

yes sir yeah i i agree with the recommendation of the stop sign i mean i mean just i understand that crash data isn't like overly comprehensive but either way you still look you know what we did get you know october of 25 and then so between october of 25 and then june of 26 he had three crashes i mean that shows there's an issue so i mean having um having so i'm not a fan of the yield signs that people i live by a yield sign that nobody adheres to so So the stop sign is obviously better so at least trying that and then going from there I think would work and I'm glad it went through the policy You know and we went from there the only thing that I would just request and just for discussion like this is I think the first one since we had the policy I Wasn't really clear as far as going into the meeting what the full recommendation was going to be if we had one or not at that point, so I Don't know if that's something that we can do in the future probably can I guess that's where I think their attorney had said that I guess kind of up to the committee but I guess that we could have put our recommendation I suppose that we supported it yeah I mean I saw I saw the policy stuff like we had a lit you know listed out right and then I was like I was like I I was going into it thinking yep we're probably gonna put something there but I wasn't sure like there was nothing like a clear

which i get the discussion too so i mean just just something that just uh i guess think about i don't want to get too off subject with that but yeah but otherwise with this i would support the recommendation we probably could or should i guess just looking for the committee to decide or not try to overly you know swayed you know swayed you guys but i can certainly support it or i guess we could say that anyway yeah i mean because i was just thinking like like when we had all the stuff listed with the policy like like

it fit, so then I was like, okay, you know, it fits because of this, you know what I mean? And then you go from there and so just my thoughts.

Is that a motion?

I'll make the motion to support the recommendation.

Motion by Alder Cummings, second by Alder Beaman to authorize the installation of stop signs Any other questions, concerns, comments? Hearing none, all those in favor, aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. It was unanimous, we approved it. Now, moving on to 260723, which is a request to prohibit parking on the east side of the roadway at the intersection of South 35th Street and Lindbergh Drive.

i don't know i can start once to speak on it first sure i was i brought this to committee i was contacted back in may or june from a resident regarding concerns about the 45 degree bend on the road and difficulty navigating that when parking was full i did reach out to staff and uh They brought back some competing concerns, which were echoed by Mr. Walsdorf and Mr. Summers, about speeding. The concern is that you remove traffic, so I'm sorry, you remove the parking and the cars go faster. Also, we checked the accident history. We saw none that were directly related to that particular part of the road. I did reach back out to the resident, explain this, talk through it, and the resident stated the desire to have this brought to the committee, but also wished not to be identified in doing so. So I said, all right, I will bring it, state the concerns, and decide what to do there. I did bring along a couple of pictures because the ones in the attachments got cut off So for no other reason than that, if anybody would like to look at them, send those down. So the concerns as stated with the resident was the extra lateral width required from the vehicles when going around the corner would cause traffic from both directions to push towards the center line. potentially resulting in an oncoming situation. However, city staff stated that the road was very wide compared to some others, 36 feet, I believe. And additionally, it can result in a very short line of sight when traffic is parked along the roads. I've driven through there a few times myself, made it through safely. When it's clear, it's all clear. And when it isn't, you do have to slow down a little bit, as we did talk about the speeding. So that's about all I have to add on that.

To de-engineer, any other information we need to know other than the road's 36 feet wide?

It's certainly a tight curve, that's for sure, and I guess, I don't know if there's always, you know, cars on both sides, or if you could measure, you know, what kind of clear is between them, but I don't know if there's really no accident history in a very low-volume neighborhood like this, and I agree with them for sure. You pull parking, it's just kind of, promote people to come faster on that curve. So I'm not sure that's a healthy situation. The only thing I thought of today when I went through it again was do we kind of paint the double yellow center line just to help guide where you should be or where the center line is so that, you know, it doesn't mean you're going to stay on your side or not, but at least it would define where the center of the road is was a thought would be. so relatively cheap to do.

My understanding, if I remember correctly, there were two accidents, one this year, one last year, and none of them had to do with problems because of the parking. I mean, somebody hit the stop sign or something, and somebody hit something else oblivious of who's parked where. The other thing I noticed, like I had asked you, what's the width? and you said 36 feet, the average width of a vehicle is 5.8 feet. So let's say it's six. Technically, you should be able to put six cars side by side. Now, there wouldn't be much room between them, if any, but you could put them there without doing damage. And so you've got two cars, and two cars, that's 24. 24 wide on a 36 wide street, what's the problem? The other thing I'll admit is I went out there on Sunday, last Sunday I believe it was, whoever lives in the corner house as you face north, that corner house over there was having a garage sale. And his garage sale kind of led into the next house garage sale and I'll tell you what, from the corner, to all the way around that first bend, there were cars parked on both sides for that garage sale. And I had no problem driving through there. I turned around, I parked at the end so I could just sit and watch for a while. Nobody had problems going through there. They had to go slow. If there wasn't somebody coming at you, yes, everybody was driving in the middle of the street or even on the wrong side of the road if there was nobody coming at them, so maybe putting a middle stripe might help things, but I could not find why that should be a problem. I think as you mentioned one time too, that with the parking like that, people slow down. And if you recall some of the stuff tonight, there were areas where people are going too fast, not necessarily referring to this particular street, but a couple other ones. Well, yeah, we want them slow. So I don't know, I certainly couldn't approve, No parking. And I think we've heard from one of the neighbors. Now, having heard what I said, and to be a man of my word, is there anybody here in the public that's here on here that has something to say yet? Yes, sir.

But I do agree with what you brought up, the double yellow line. Do I think we need it? No, but I definitely think it would help the Navy and that would heal the people. Anyone else

Alder Cummings.

Yeah, thank you, Mr. Chairperson. Yeah, I definitely echo what Alder Ruckerberg said for the comments with that. In my district, I have two roads that had like a curve that we had accident history on. And on both of those cases, we painted the yellow line, the center stripe. And then, I don't know if you need this as well, but we had the three sticks around the curve just to go and show that there's a curve coming up. And then literally that took away the whole way. We haven't had an accident in those areas since.

And so when I look at the accident history from here, both of them were inattentive driving.

So which obviously, you know, it's not necessarily because of sight lines, it's literally they weren't paying attention and failed to negotiate a curve, right? Or whatever, however that ended up happening. So I would be in support of painting a center stripe but not having a no parking. Or anything else you would need for

Yeah, I think this one's a different situation than the one you're speaking of that I don't think we would need. Yeah, which I wouldn't think that would apply either. At this time, anyway.

But I think, like I said, something to help with the intent of driving, because that's still two of them in a year, essentially. It says 600 South 35th and South 35th Street, Middle Lane.

Right, I believe one of them was struck a sign on the median so that could only be on the other side of Meadow, correct? Yeah Correct it's not related to this side of the road.

Gotcha.

I was just going off on the report Anything else otherwise, I'll accept the motion. It sounds like you are may have made the motion yeah i can officially to deny the request for the no parking but we will put a stripe in the middle of the road correct yeah good i wrote it down right then any other questions or comments not hearing any all those i think we need a second official oh i'm sorry i'll second it second by beeman That's right, I didn't write that down. Motion and a second. All those in favor, say aye.

Aye.

Opposed, nay. Unanimous. Okay, item 260724. budget and request of the mayor.

Thank you. I've been going to every single standing committee just to talk individually with each committee about if they have any requests or questions about the budget. Um, so specifically here would be for public safety. So police and fire, if there's anything you'd like to talk about, uh, or ask about, um, just high level. So I did send out a budget memo to the chairs of the standing committees as well as every department had just outlining guidelines and kind of, uh, how to expect going into the 2027 budget. So Alders Cummings and Reckelberg would have definitely seen that memo. But basically, budget is looking tight. It's not grim, but I did say to the department heads that we're not looking at adding any positions next year. The goal is to retain what we have. a review of every position to see if there could be some efficiencies. So there may be added positions, but it would be coming from efficiencies that we find elsewhere. But it's really to retain our current workforce and to ensure that we're giving them a salary and benefits that are competitive and appropriate for each department. And so again, I've just been going to every committee. You're my fourth committee. So some of you may have seen me already. Last one is Parks and Rec. So if there's anything that you would like to share with me or questions that you have for the budget, I just want to give this opportunity to you now. And of course the chiefs are here.

I was going to say, we have the chiefs here. Would you like to step up to the table or would you like to run away and not admit to anything?

Well, I will just note to their defense, if they don't want to say anything, budgets are due to me by the end of the month here, so they're compiling them still. They just know the guidelines, basically, of the parameters that they have while they're compiling the budget, but they're due at the end of the month. We'll meet in September with each department one-on-one, and then you'll have the budget in October.

And this is an unusual situation, because it is the mayor's budget, and I'd have no doubt that the police chief and the fire chief are going to request certain things, and certain things are not going to make the mayor's budget. And I would like to know what does and what doesn't, because we have the final say. Unfortunately, the final say may mean we have to raise taxes if we say The mayor said no, and we wanna say yes. So you gotta be prepared to maybe take the hit that you're raising taxes more or whatever. So with that having been said, can you share with us what has been requested and what probably is going to make your budget? Not that we're gonna hold you to it because you're gonna have to see everybody's number before you maybe give the 100% approval, but what has... I'm going to ask you, Mayor, I guess, because you know what they've requested, and you can say I'm leaning towards this or I'm not, I guess, if you could do that.

Well, I can't, because I don't know what they have requested yet, because their budgets are due to me by the end of the month. So they're still working on them, so I don't know exactly what they're going to be asking for.

i mean they know that that you know that it's not going to be i'll ask them what are you asking for that you don't know whether it's going to make it or not yet but what is on your hot list if boy i would really we really need this to function properly if you would please sure um for fire department

there'll probably be some things I would like to request, um, just because, um, I have to advocate for what I feel as the fire chief is the, um, what we need to protect the city and what our industry standards, things like that. Um, as far as operate operational costs, um, I'm looking at, um, status quo and I'll say probably, um, it's in the operating is some personnel that, um, it's kind of a, I don't know if you'll have questions for me, but I'd have to explain is that we have a battalion chief on every day. Um, that'll be one thing that I'll be requesting. Um, and I have, again, it kind of comes down to that's where meeting with the mayor and finance director. Um, I have a plan laid out and things like that. Um, all the details and that's where that would, that would be. Um, but that's probably one of my number one things. Otherwise, um, I will have to say my predecessor, uh, retired chief blazer, um, since he became chief and, uh, the times we were in has kept, uh, everything very, very lean. And because of that, our, our department has operated, um, lean and there just isn't a lot of room, uh, to make cuts. So I'm going to be looking at, uh, at least a status status quo from, from last year. Um, we found some things to move around, uh, like that. but that's kind of what I'm looking at.

Yeah, but moving it from your budget to the mayor probably won't, the mayor's budget won't work.

Maybe that's how you get it done.

Yeah.

I will just add on, so for like with Chief Kranick, part of the conversation, the big picture that probably won't be, won't happen in 2027, but will be the station configuration. You're going to officially get a study, a completed study soon here with station configuration and how that should look. So, you know, part of the budget conversations this year was we put money in for the study. Now, how do we implement it? And it won't be a one-year fix because that's going to be a very expensive proposition. But, you know, part of the conversation will be that. And, you know, also with Chief Musial about a built station and needs for their growth too. Um, you know, that's one thing that we budgeted in the past that, that some of you may not know because you weren't here. Um, that'll come up. Same thing with like the fire engine.

You know, we budgeted for three years, four years of the ladder truck.

I think that's might be our last year or we had our last year. Um, but we won't have it for, you know, a couple of years here yet or a year or so at least yet. Um, so those are the things that I would like to make sure that the newer council members are aware of that, uh, things we budgeted for in the past. We don't want to just forget about them. this study is going to be very important and we should make sure we're allocating resources every year and not just let it sit on the shelf.

And I'll just make one quick comment on that, that as we move closer, that study is getting close to being completed and being involved in that. I think one thing that needs to be understood is that study hopefully is, is the premise for a strategic plan. So this is not a quick fix, a one year fix, anything like that. And I think we're going to have to have some probably tough and spirited conversations about how we want as a city, uh, to move forward with some of those recommendations, um, in order to provide our citizens with, uh, perfect, uh, protection that they, um, expect and deserve. Um, so it's going to be a challenge, but, um, I think it's a good basis for that.

Yeah, the police department, we're pretty status quo. We left, I'm sorry, we had a position and a half that we are not going to fill through attrition. So there's some savings for the city on that. We distributed responsibilities. So that's going to be a change in 27. I guess the biggest expense that I can think of is going to be our taser request. We've been doing some research on replacing our tasers. They are well beyond their life expectancy. They're actually failing. A taser will not replace them. They're sold or repair them. And we have, I believe, two spares left. Taser made the example or the analogy that our tasers are essentially a vehicle with 300,000 miles on it. That it's great that they're still working, but they're failing. And when a taser fails, it does turn into a liability. So it's extremely important that we figure out how to purchase those. I've been dealing with finance. And we're looking at some options on how to handle that going forward, but we're still kind of in the middle of it.

That's a big ticket item, believe it or not. Correct? That was a couple hundred thousand.

What's that?

That was a couple hundred thousand.

Several.

Yeah.

Yep. And so that's a good point. Chief just whispered over to me. Capital requests are also a separate process that's going on right now. That's through COG. You may have heard Capital Allocation Work Group as well. So they rank out the capital requests as well in a separate process before it even gets to my desk too. And things like committee recommendations score higher in those capital requests. So... That's why we have these meetings, too, just to see if there's anything now. Because if there is something you would like to see, now is the time to let us know. Because you still can make a change on the floor the Monday before Thanksgiving to change the budget. But usually it's very difficult to implement something, especially if it's a road project or, let's say, tasers you wanted in at the last minute. It would be tough to throw in there. So if there is something, now is the time.

Somewhere along the line, I had a conversation with the chief or somebody, and it had to do with, well, you can lease them.

That was me.

Yeah, and I said, make sure that Sean knows about leasing counts against your bonding numbers. And if you're going after main qualified money on your borrowing, you've got to add those in there. I mean, I... I had somebody screw up a, rented a $200 copying machine on a lease, and it came close to screwing us up when we went to bond for $15 million.

Yeah, and that's the conversations we have to have is, is this capital? Do we want to try and get it in the operating budget? Because the life of a taser is seven years, but it can last 10, but you're borrowing, In this case, probably 10 for that. So you don't want to necessarily do that. We've been doing that over the years. The problem is if it's a one big expenditure in one year, that's different, where if you replace all the tasers, that would be a little different. We've put into the operating budget for firearms and different things where we used to borrow because it was that one big expense. Police vehicles, we don't borrow for anymore. We have them in our regular rotation now. So we have to just determine, you know, how much is to get 60 tasers, 60-some tasers, right? How much does that cost in one big soup? Or, you know, do a couple of them live where you only have to get half this year, half next year, and we can then put it in our operational budget versus borrowing, which is what?

That's the first place we want to go to. Depending upon where you are in your life cycle, you can borrow for some, pay for some. But when moving forward, you try to make a better... plan going forward as opposed to, okay, I can live with it. We'll borrow for this, but we'll pay for that. But we'd like to pay for all of them or something like that someday. So like you said, seven to 10 years, you start looking, well, okay, we're going to put five or 10 in the budget.

Exactly.

Yeah. Excellent.

Yes.

Super.

I figured you'd like that. That's the conservative way of doing it, isn't that? Yeah.

You do your best.

That's the correct way of doing it now. But it's just that first cost. I mean, that's going to be the thing. That's going to be the question is if you have to replace them all, you may see a borrowed request because that's the only way to make sure it does happen. But then be on a good replacement plan for every four years. You could get new ones if that's, you know, or five or whatever it is.

Yes, sir.

Yeah, my only two cents with the whole thing is, especially when you have, you know, a potential tight budget, is, like, obviously look at what your core thing is to operate, to function safely. Like, you don't want to put the city at risk. I mean, a taser is a huge thing. The thing I would be a little disappointed in hearing with that is that we didn't have a maintenance plan already to, you know, that we have to now all of a sudden, you know, buy it all right away. Like, I think I'm... I know it's on record, but I look at the school district and the pickle they got in, where all of a sudden here now, their maintenance plan clearly was not effective, which is why they got to where they're at. Like, I'd like to see that for all of our departments, we have a full-on, you know, here's your end of life. We can already budget already. You know, this is how we're going to keep it going. So there's never a, we have to figure out how we're going to do a big purchase when it's tight. Because you don't know, like, you don't know seven years out, 10 years out, what it's going to look like. You can project all you want, but, you know, economies go up and down and everything else, right? But at least if you have the consistent plan, then you're never in that situation. So...

I think that's, I mean, we did it with radios now. We have a radio line we just talked about. So radios, we had a big expense a couple years ago just because, well, the county switched frequencies for one, or something you can explain better than I can.

Yeah, it's the Y can or whatever, but we all had to.

Yeah, you're right. So things come up that you don't know. And we've slowly, items like this, like cop cars, were always borrowed, which that's the only way we could pay for them because we didn't have it in the general fund. We finally got them into the general fund.

Just one thing I've got to add about the tasers. The problem with ordering or buying several a year is an item like that. The technology is, is always changing. Cartridges are changing. Batteries are changing. The way to download the software from the taser to the computer is changing. So we need to stay consistent. All our officers need to stay consistent with the same taser. So right now they're on 10, uh, let's say a year or two ago they were on seven. So if we would have bought seven, sevens are not compatible with 10. So that's, that's kind of why we have to do the big lump sum. And, and I understand about preparing for it more. Um, but we all need to be consistent as far as what we're carrying.

Yep. Yeah, and I've been in law enforcement training for a while, so, like, I get the whole training, you know, piece of it on top of that, and, yeah.

I think a good example maybe for where you're headed to is election equipment, so the actual voting equipment. It's very expensive when it happens, and the technology changes and everything. So what we did instead of thinking we're going to buy a new one every year is we just budget $20,000 a year. roll it over into the next year for that line item. So when year four comes, you're not buying one every year, but at least you have the money in year four. It's there. Correct. It's there. So same scenario probably with tasers.

Yep. Yeah. That's, that's kind of where I was going with that. Yeah. So, cause like, this is just personal talking. Like at some point you can't raise just like, there is not an option. You can't raise taxes anymore. Like, you know what I mean? Like we're already taxed too much as a,

country that's just my own personal thing but so correct that's all i got anybody else have anything okay yep anybody else otherwise thank you mayor no thank you all appreciate it and i think you gentlemen got through this or risk-free i don't think you need to expect a phone call tomorrow morning when you get to the office going report to them that's good if you have any questions let me know so thank you thank you so much okay there's no action on that item we had our discussion the next item on the agenda is 26 oh i'm sorry oh Yeah, 260725, which is the ambulance service agreement between Roncalli High School and the City of Manitowoc Fire Rescue. Chief, if you want to. I'm sure there'll be some questions. Anybody have any questions or comments?

No, I personally think the next two are pretty self-explanatory when you read it. So I make a motion to go and approve.

There's a motion and a second to approve the service agreement. I have a question, I guess, and that is I noticed, if I find it, I made a note, it's under item 6C. It says events canceled less than two hours prior to the scheduled start time will be charged a minimum of two hours. The problem is, in the agreement, I cannot find out what the so-called hourly charge is. And when I checked with our attorney, he says, well, you know, when you approve all the fines, fees, and forfeitures, that wasn't one of the items on that big list. what are we gonna charge them and do we need to get that In something, you know what I mean?

Into the agreement. I believe, if my memory serves correctly, and I can find out for sure, obviously, is I believe it's $100 an hour we charge. These two contracts are for the football standby. So both Lincoln and Roncalli, when they have a home game at Rubick Field, request an ambulance. And these are the two contracts for us saying we'll be there for sure. I believe they charge $100. It's $100 or $110 an hour to cover the two members that are there for those two hours.

Okay. Yep. I got no problem with that. The problem is what authorizes you to charge the $110. I would ask that the attorney, and then, of course, I'm sure you've got to go back to the, lincoln and uh ron collier whoever and say oh by the way we put that rate in the contract because it didn't exist before uh but uh yes if we were to alter for for this uh to be approved then yes we'd need to go back and and get those uh because it's a contract yeah i uh I would ask that the city attorney review this contract and if he would insert under item six C, either add to that particular item or put one right after that that says it's, you know, the hourly rate is $100 or 110. and then go through whatever authorization they have to do at the schools. But I mean, they're gonna agree to something where they didn't know what it was anyway, and you were gonna charge them that. So I mean, I don't think they're gonna have a problem with it, but I'd like to see that we've got some place to point to that says, well, that's the hourly rate. I mean, otherwise, you could be like some shyster attorney and go, well, it's 500 an hour.

Sure. So the fee that we charge is the same we've been charged. I'll just tell you, the same we've been charging for the last five years. Sure. So then would you like that in these agreements before they're passed tonight?

I think we could approve them with the modification, and then we could sign them at city council or before the city council. But why hold it up?

Yeah, I was just going to say, with having a kid on Lincoln, next week already is their first game. This week is, you know, they've got a scrimmage in Green Bay Southwest, and then the following week right after that is their first game. So, like, you know, Roncalli, without knowing their schedule, I'm sure they're right there as well. So I don't know if we can hold it up without a signed agreement, without them getting services for a technicality. So, but I could certainly make a motion to go and approve it with that pen and ink.

Correct, yeah.

But like I said, don't know what they would be charged per hour other than he's going to go back to the office and say, well, they didn't cancel in two hours. Charge them $100 or $110. All we're asking for is it's documented. And the attorney said the same thing. It should be documented. So if they got to resign it, they resign it. If they don't want to, well, then they don't. And they're not going to get coverage. And I don't think they want that. All I know is I don't care where you go on a Friday night. You always see a rescue squad somewhere. It's on football field. And, you know, the high school is playing, you know, I mean. So, you know. I've got a motion and a second to add that 100, well, whatever the chief says it is, finds out that that would be added under that so that it's documented so that we've got some place to point to that says that's what the charge is. Like I said, I had talked with our city attorney and he goes, yeah, that's a good point. We don't have it documented anywhere, so. With that said, all those in favor of the motion to add that, aye. Aye. Unanimous. And we also have the 260726, which has the same dilemma.

Yes, it's the exact same, correct.

Yep.

Yeah, I'll make the same motion to add the addendum to it.

Okay, I've got a motion second. Everybody understands that, I'm assuming, and nobody's got a question. Therefore, I'll call the vote. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. Unanimous. I think we ran out of items. We've got a motion to adjourn. Second. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed nay. Go ahead.