Village Board - Regular Meeting

which all property owners get, let him know that they did cut the weeds and it's in compliance and a short.

So you're telling her that it's compliant? Pardon? Kelly's compliant?

Yeah. But after she cut it, I have a re-inspection for her. So I state that I re-inspected it, the weeds and grass were cut, and I send it out to the property owner so they have a record. There's a record here also. Okay.

I'll forward you so you can see the other stuff then. Yeah, that's fine. She's got a list of everything she wants. I'm going to talk later about it if we need to, but I'll forward those things to you.

Yeah, that's fine. Okay, just so you know. In November of 2018, she had a complaint on her property for the same thing. Okay.

And it has a prominent house position next to the house. Are you waiting for your van? One for now and one for where we want it for later.

Thank you.

And I know, I figured it'd be rude if I started eating popcorn up there.

All right, good evening. We'll get the meeting called to order here for the Village of Waukesha board meeting July 23rd, 2026. If you would all please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you. Roll call.

Stigler. Here. White. Here. Niles.

Here. Adams. Here. Buchholz. Here. Confirmation the meeting agenda was posted properly on or before 630 and then July 22nd?

Yes.

Very well. Citizen comments. Anyone like to speak? Come on up to the microphone. Give us your name and address and you can give us your thoughts.

Sandy Hom West 230 South 3827 Milky Way Road. Just a couple of things I wanted to mention that, I don't know, it's probably almost two weeks ago, a little less, that I went to, I went with Blake from the crematorium place down to one of the outfits while it was operating. And I suggest anyone that's interested in the topic go take advantage of that. I mean... That's actually, you know, firsthand knowledge. And the other thing I wanted to mention as we move ahead on these buildings, I hope there's still a memorial fund for Brunner that had $500 in it, Chris. So I keep checking in to see if that money is still there. And if it is, you know, it's not very much, and no one else, I think, contributed. But, you know, you could buy a bench or something and put a plaque on it, a brass plaque or something. But we're not that far yet. But maybe when the firehouse goes up. Thank you.

Anyone else? All right. We'll move on. Reports. Senior packet for the clerk, treasurer, TPW, fire department, sheriff, lead commissioner, and noncompliance reports. Any comments, questions, concerns on any of them? Okay, hearing none, we'll move on. Approval of previous meeting minutes for June 25, 2026.

I'll make a motion to approve the June 25, 2026 minutes.

Having read them, I will second that. Any discussion? All those in favor of approving the minutes for June 25, 2026, say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? Curious all right moving on to the discussion possible action items up first award bid for the Department of Public Works building Yeah, thanks Chad evening everybody Last week Wednesday, July 15th.

We finally opened bids for the new Department Public Works building here at village hall we received three bids from Ford construction Morton buildings and Alcon LLC and with the low bidder being Ford Construction Company at a base bid cost of $1,508,850. We've since then reviewed their documentation, reviewed their bid, found no issues. We really have no reasons to reject their bid. We've reviewed their qualification statement that all bidders were required to submit. They specialize in commercial construction. They're based out very close to us here in Waukesha. Jim Warzynski, the project manager I've been dealing with, is very involved, asks a lot of questions through the bidding process, seems to have a great handle on the project. For all these reasons and on these bases, we recommend that Ford Construction Company be awarded the contract for this project. for the total that they bid of $1,508,850. If you read through our recommendation, we include some standard language in here as well that obviously construction projects such as this one or any construction project really, the price can vary. This being a lump sum, there's probably hopefully less reason for that, but there are always things that can come up and reason for change orders throughout the project. So we recommend the Village have a contingency in there of at least 10%. So should you award this tonight? We have a notice of award in here. We'd be looking to get them going. I know I just talked to Jim again today. He was just curious about where things are at with the village. They're anxious to get started. If that's the direction the village decides to move in, we'd be looking to move forward with them as soon as possible.

Okay, thank you. All right, so a couple things. Thank you to Greg and the staff at his firm. They put a tremendous amount of work into this over the last few months to get it to where it's at, to be able to get us to the bid, get through the bid process. There was a lot of questions. I think we sent an email out to the board a couple weeks back saying that we delayed opening by a week because there were so many questions from the different contractors looking to potentially get this awarded to them. As far as what, because there isn't a packet in here, it's 470-some pages long for the entire bid specs that were provided to the contractors. So we didn't give you 470-ish pages of all of that. But Greg's firm with the staff that does these for us, or in general and for us here in this case, put together a great deal amount of information beyond what we had gotten that we had looked at in the prior meetings and voted on to get all the drill done, all the particulars of how many outlets, hose bibs for water, things of that sort. So if you want to see that document, we can surely get it to you. Again, it's 47 pages long, so I didn't anticipate that you wanted to read through all of that. But we are going off of the plans that were previously approved at a meeting. The way we put this whole project together, start to finish, That included that they'll have to do the engineer drawings with the winning firm so that those can be produced to the state for approval from the state's perspective for things that need to be done there. So there's still more that you'll be able to see until we break ground, potentially along the way if there's something that needs to be brought back to the board. But it's all off of what we've already gone through in the prior meetings. So there's not more new in here for you to see because it's what we've already voted on and looked at. a bunch of prior meetings that got up to that point. So having said that, comments, questions, concerns from the board? I have a question.

Go ahead. As far as this is concerned, we were going off of the specs that were provided to us by Morton

Morton provided some pretty basic technical specifications for the building. We flush those out into bidding documents. So, I mean, if we would have just taken the 12 pages Morton gave us, I think we'd still be answering questions from bidders on, you know, We added more detail as well as a number of other sections, front-end documents to their technical details. So we used everything Morton gave us, but added a lot more detail to what they gave us. Correct.

Another question is, as far as the building materials and other things like that, sometimes there are particular brands that we, in these of what their alternative to that would be, which had to be authorized by Chip and yourself?

Correct. So that's really what, I mean, you could look at these documents in every section for every type of material that's being used in the building. We specify a product or a number of products for everything to the walls, to the flooring, to the fixtures, the hose bibs, the outlets, you know, name it. But there also is a substitution process, a product substitution process where they could come to us with an equal product. We'd have the chance to review it. Regardless, they always have to submit for every product going in this building, every material going in this building, they submit a shop drawing to the engineer, to the village. We review it, we accept it. If we have issues with it, we do not accept it. So yes, there's a standard process for them. If they choose to use a different product, they'd, to fill out a substitution request form and we'd have the chance to review. Well, we're not at that point. I mean, so far everyone bid on what we put forward in the 500-some pages of specifications. You know, as this building's being, after we get a pre-construction meeting scheduled and we talk about this, they'll have the chance to say, hey, we see this is what you specified in your project documents. We'd like to use this instead. So most of that has not had the chance to take place yet.

But we will have to sign off.

If there's a change to the document? Yes. If that's the process, yeah. I mean, somebody will. If that comes through me, comes through Chad, comes to the board, we'll decide at that time, I guess.

My concern is that

Of course, yeah, understood.

No one is going to put something in there that is different for a bid alternative that they were using when they bid.

We use the specifications on this project and all project advocates are Bible for the, you know. If it's not what we specified and they want to use it, they have to have a good reason to. We have to make sure it's at least an equal to the product we specified. If not, we would reject it.

Was there any questions? Is there any questions in anybody's mind why there's $120,000 difference between Ford, Morgan, and a lot more for Alcon? Only because, in my experience, I had the good fortune to be awarded probably about 90% of those bids. And I was never the low bid. And the reason I wasn't is because there were particular inaccuracies and other things that were a part of the alternate bid. and I guess I gotta tell you that I'm glad to see the Board of Instruction came in, but I don't know who these guys are, and that's a concern.

Yeah, I think that you get some of that on all projects, and I don't know the reason why they're lower. This is a lump sum project, so they didn't break it out in terms of we have X amount of dollars to this, X amount of dollars to this, suspect it's based on some of the subcontractors and vendors that they're using are cheaper than Morton's. Um, it could be a number of reasons, but I can tell you everyone bid on the same, same project, same products. Everyone's looking at the same items that they are giving us a cost for. Um, Forward, you know, to be honest, I don't work a whole lot in this realm in buildings in the area. Our group that does is based out of Iowa. I haven't worked with Ford, Morton, or Alcon. We vetted them all the same, you know, regardless of we looked at their, before they submitted a bid, we looked at their qualification statement, made sure they were qualified to bid on the project, make sure they've completed similar projects. You know in their packet that they submitted they have a list of dozens of similar projects. They've completed commercial work in the area Yeah, I mean Yeah, let me pull up the list here 1996 This year, what they have listed is Redemption Church, which is a $3 million project, Superior Crane, $5 million project, a couple rental buildings in 2025, Payne and Dolan Scale House, KHS Interior Office Remodel, office building, Cloisters Condos Complex, People's Bank in Milwaukee, Whitestone Church. I don't know where a number of these are, but I know as you get down in 2023, they did the City of Milwaukee Park Shelter, or City of Waukesha Park Shelters, I should say. City of Waukesha Park and Rec Storage Building, City of Waukesha Fire Remodels, Waukesha Iron Building.

Okay, that's fine.

They've completed a lot of similar, and they're based out here in Waukesha.

My biggest concern has been since I started in this job is the fact that best price doesn't mean anything if it's not the best value. And I'm concerned about looking out for that. And I know all the members on the board here are very concerned about that. Chad's done a huge amount of work on this, and I certainly trust his judgment on this. But I just have to put a record, got to say, I am... concerned about our getting the best value, and I'm sure we've taken a lot to go to get to that, but I think it need be said. It's got to be the best value. And if anything turns up with board construction that it's not, I think we need to address it.

If you want to look at their website, you can see there's a bunch of stuff that's projects they have shown in here.

Well, I kind of think don't leave we have the bid specs out here You're gonna be watching that to make sure they follow the bid specs during the construction, correct? Yeah, absolutely I mean, I think part of our job we're gonna get what we put out there for a bid. So Ford construction has been around I've seen their equipment already and stuff. They're not fly-by-nights

At least three of the buildings showing as projects on their website are similar to this. Elder's Towing in Waukesha had an addition or new building they put up, BGS Glass, right down on St. Paul's got one, and a couple others in here.

No.

My question is satisfied as far as this is concerned. You guys are out in the marketplace, I mean, more than I am. I've never seen Ford Construction, thus the reason for my questions. And as a consequence, I just wanted to know who these guys are. And, Chad, I wouldn't mind just knowing, what's their, is it FordConstructionCompany.com? Is that their website?

Fordconstructioninc.com. Yep. Fordconstructioninc.

Just Fordconstructioninc? Fordconstructioninc.com. All right. Thank you for that.

Yep.

And they're based on Poplar Drive here in the Waukesha City. All right, other comments, questions, things to discuss?

The only one I have, Chad, would be, is your firm going to get the approved state of plan approved, or is Ford Company going to do that?

That was part of Ford's bid. So included in their cost, the $1.5 million was for them. Essentially, there's a design-build aspect to this for electric, some of the mechanical items, HVAC, plumbing. So they'll be submitting that. That'll be the first thing they are authorized to do.

Yeah, I was just curious if your firm was doing anything else.

That'll be Ford. Ford will be doing that.

I'd like to say in all the years that I've lived in the village of Waukesha, or town of Waukesha, whatever you want to call it, I've never seen a project submitted this way. I have no idea what we're bidding on. I have no idea... what I'm voting on. I have seen no paperwork. I've seen a shell of a building. I have a little bit of problem with that. And my other question is, is you guys overseeing the job, is that included in the 1.5?

It is not.

So therefore, we're gonna be higher yet.

You know, the work they've done to this point that we've already voted and approved is an add-on to that, yes.

But everything they do from here on in, too, is added on to it.

Correct.

Plus all the changes we're going to be doing is going to be added on to that. I'm sure.

If there are changes that would require any additional costs... then yes, that's what the contingency is that Greg mentioned, or that's standard for these types of projects, just like we do for the road projects. We typically build in another 10% on top of the road projects, just the same, when we do work order changes and stuff for the road. So there is money set aside from that perspective. As Greg mentioned, we would put 10% of the budgeted amount to the side. I don't anticipate, I could be wrong, but I'm not anticipating there's gonna be any major changes to the design of the building or to the construction of it that would require an additional cost. There's possibility that some of them may reduce it if we end up with something that would be changed. That's all hypothetical if there is a change. So they've got, as we've said, somewhere around 500 pages, give or take, all the very specifics of what this building has to be, and they've given us what they said the price is gonna be of that.

I still don't know that I can vote on something that I don't even know what the heck we're doing.

Go ahead. I don't understand that, to be honest with you. We've looked at plans. We all put our two cents worth in on the drawings. We were involved with the firewall. We were involved with the concrete. This building, I started this thing five years ago with Jerry. All we wanted to do was put up a pole barn to put trucks inside. That's what started this. And this is what we've gotten to. So to say there's no plans, we did a lot of planning from that point to this. That building that I originally wanted to do, this is way above and beyond that building. So there must have been plans to do this. I don't understand.

Well, I'm not saying there's no plans. Well, you just did say that. I've seen plans.

Okay.

Of the building.

Right.

I have no idea what's going in it as far as electrical, as far as plumbing, as far as.

That's all in the bidding, isn't it? Well, how do we know what we're getting? That's still coming. How do we know what we're getting? We're getting what's in the bids. The bidding we approved of here a while ago already.

I have no idea what's in the bids. I never saw it. I didn't even know they were opening the bids until two days before.

So you want to see the 500-page document is what you're saying?

Well, yeah, I'd like to.

Okay. That's fine. We're already bid on it, so at this point it's whether or not we approve the project and proceed with this contractor that we'd be awarding it to. The total dollar amount we budgeted was two million for this project. So if you add in the cost contingency like we talked about, plus I don't know exactly what the final total for Greg and his work on this is, start to finish, but you add all that together and we're well under two million dollars. um last at this point we haven't even started yet but again they've already bid that's what they're agreeing to is that the total dollar amount is going to be the month that they've bid us they have 500 pages of specifications of what the building is and that's what they've gone through and looked at and determined this is what they're going to charge us for that. If there's changes, it would likely be because we're making changes or we're agreeing to a change. As I said before, some of those could, if there is one, hypothetically, don't know if there will be, but if there is one, it could be an increase in cost or it could be a decrease in cost. Maybe it's we, they say you don't need 35 trees or whatever the number is on the outside. And they say, let's put 20 in or something. Well, that's 15 trees difference, right? That's just, I made up a number there as an example, but there's things that could go either way that way. So they've been out, they did site visit, correct? They did a couple, yeah. So they've been out, they've looked at the property. They didn't just look at some pages and say, yep, here's what we're gonna charge you. They've put a lot of work into this. And again, as I said, to start with Greg there, That was partly why we pushed this off by a second week, because the fourth was in there as well, just to give all the contractors enough time to do their due diligence on this to give us a fair price that they were gonna get charges for it. So I have no, yeah, we can definitely email those specs out to you if you wanna see them. I have no problem with that. I'm not hiding anything. The way it was bidded or not bid, but the way that it was voted on was that I was allowed to finalize that with Greg, and then we proceeded to it. And that's what we did. So any other discussion or a motion?

I will make a motion to accept the bid from Ford Construction for $1 million.

I will second the bid.

All right. Further discussion? OK. Hearing nothing further, all those in favor, say aye. Aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? No. Okay. Up next is the proposal for the 2026 illicit discharge detection and elimination. Also IDDE is referred to as in the Department of Public Works Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program, or SWPPP.

We call it SWPPP.

Yep. Inspection Services.

Yeah, so this is part of the village's MS4 permit to the DNR. These are annual requirements of that permit. As you know, every March we submit an annual report for the village to the DNR detailing the status of certain, the compliance of six or seven programs within the village's permit. Many of those programs just require updates once per permit term. These two specific programs require annual updates. And so that's what's detailed in this proposal. The IDDE, illicit discharge detection elimination, that is a screening of major outfalls within the village. So the village has 11 total major outfalls that are classified as major by the DNR. We've divided them up into four groups, so once every year we're screening two or three of them. Essentially we do dry weather screenings, make sure nothing's flowing through them. If something were to be flowing through them at the time of the screening, we would collect a sample and test it for different contaminants, send it off to a lab, et cetera. All this is put into a report and then submitted to the DNR with the Village's annual report. Last year, I think, for the three screenings we did, nothing was flowing, so it was a very simple report. There was obviously no contaminants detected. Secondly, the second part of this is the annual inspection of the public works facility here, the SWPPP portion. DNR requires an annual inspection and report on all essentially public works facilities for municipalities. So we did the same thing last year. We walked through with Rob, did just a visual inspection, took pictures, put it all into a report, and again, submitted that to the DNR as part of the village's annual report. Work this year will be very consistent with what we did last year. The cost for the illicit discharge portion varies depending on whether the outfalls are flowing or whether they're dry. The maximum cost for the infield inspections would be $1,050. The summary report for that would be a lump sum of $3,800. And then we have a field data collection tools and testing supply lump sum of $400. And then the Public Works SWPPP portion, the inspection and report for that is a lump sum of $1,200 for a maximum fee total of $6,450. This would likely all be completed this summer, early fall time period with a latest submittal date, completion date of next March, which is the due date for the village's annual report. Happy to answer any questions on that work.

This is all pretty mandatory anyway. It's mandatory, yeah.

The DNR would be asking questions if this wasn't submitted with the Village's annual report.

Remind me again, what's the part that we're having Rob do to save some costs? That's not part of what's listed here.

That was something separate, right? Yeah, he is able to do some of the inspection, so I think the cost... You have to compare it to last year. The cost for the SWIP portion is lower because Rob can do some of the inspection himself. As he gets more familiar with the reporting, et cetera, he could potentially do all of it himself. And honestly, if we're at that point already and Rob wants to do it, we would just not, Rob would do it and we would not do that $1,200 part, or yeah, $1,200 for the SWIP. Have to have that discussion separately with Rob, but. I don't know if he can do all of that inspection by himself or not. Okay.

All right. Other questions or a motion to authorize this? I'll make the motion to approve authorization for Rupert Mielke to do the work as discussed with the fees associated that are in the packet. Is there a second? No second. All right. Any other discussion?

The consequences would be and again the villagers went through this on several programs that would be a DNR audit They would you know go through all the villages records They would find out that you're not doing it and there'd likely be a fee associated with that Any other discussion

All right. All those in favor of approving the proposal to have Rooker-Milkey do the work as discussed, say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? Okay. Sunbury Alcohol. Anything else for you, Craig? You good?

I think I'm good. Okay. Thank you. Thanks.

temporary alcohol beverage license for southeast wisconsin emergency support group doing business as friends with food for an event at fox river county park on august 1st anything on that chris you want to discuss always it's in the packet as far as the license and such goes

It's a one-day event, correct?

Sarah, you can come up to the microphone if you want just to give any details. Just give us your name and address, please.

Yes, hello. My name is Sarah Roth. My address is 1278 Swallow Road in Waukesha, Wisconsin. Yes, it is just a one-day event on August 1st. We held the event last year, but it was at Minooka Park, so our license application went through the city.

I do want to just... I think it's in two different places, but I want to confirm it. One segment says alcohol. It refers to as alcohol that's being kept in coolers to stuff in a vehicle. Yes. I just want to confirm, though, that this is just beer and wine based on the park, right? Yes, just beer and wine. It's not going to be bourbon or anything like that? No hard liquor, absolutely. Just want to make sure.

Mm-hmm.

Okay, everything's in the packet, gentlemen. Any questions or a motion?

Make a motion we approve the temporary license for Southeast Wisconsin Emergency Support Group.

Okay. Is there a second? Who's up? I'll second. Al? Okay.

It's friends with food so I'm on their board it's a choice food pantry look at on Grandview Avenue it's been an operation ever since kovats about five years now so anyone who needs food can come in while the pantry is open they don't have to prove that they are are within income restrictions or anything, and then they can go with a grocery cart through the line, pick out whatever food they want, and then take it home with them.

Is it like a food pantry?

Yep, it's very similar to a food pantry.

Okay, now this event you're having, who are the clients, or who are the people that are going to be in attendance?

We're mostly having community members come to the event. It's our annual fundraiser, so we're selling tickets, and we'll be providing alcoholic beverage activity Activities bounce houses games. So it's family friendly event So a lot of our board members a lot of the volunteers and their families are coming and just local community members It's not really targeting the actual families who who are coming. Although we do have some of the families that Participate in the pantry will be coming to the event too, but it's mostly targeted for the greater community. I

Okay, the fact that you are very similar to a food pantry is the answer that I needed. Yes. So thank you for that.

Of course. Okay.

Good question. Anybody else? All right, hearing none, all those in favor of approving the temporary alcohol license for August 1st, as we have discussed, say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? That carries. Up next will be the specific operator's license for Sarah for the same purposes here. Looks like as far as the packet goes, everything is in order for that.

I think she's missing. Where's the establishment?

It is just for this one-time event would be my, I just needed to have that operator's license for this one-time event.

Yep, it writes to that line is blank. So we'll have to write that in.

Okay.

All right, is there a motion? I'll make a motion to award the operator's license to Sarah Roth for the August 1st Box River Park event put on by the Southeast Wisconsin Emergency Support Group, Friends with Food. Okay, is there a second?

I'll second. Okay, any other discussion? All right. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? That carries. We're good to go.

Thank you so much for your time. Sarah?

Okay, up next is the... ALS agreements or ALS intercept services agreement between the village of Vernon and village of Waukesha if you recall This was updated back in February of this year and Vernon has approached because they need to make adjustments to the Fees involved. So if you look at this document, it is word-for-word The same as the February version With one minor change, I think there was a spot I saw that instead of saying Village or Vernon Fire Department, they said Vernon FD. Otherwise, the wording is exactly the same. And the only other difference then is that it goes from 450 per run to 550 per run. If we utilize these services with them.

I got a question on that cheese thing. I happened to catch Vernon's meeting when they discussed this. Are we sending them a check every time that we get this? Are they billing us or how is that being done? Because they were saying that we owe them money at that meeting.

It says right in here under number six it's pay off fees within 30 days of receipt of a monthly invoice from the Vernon Fire Department billing service or from the Village of Vernon as applicable so we get a monthly bill.

According to them, we're not getting on. They said they have not received any money from us. Okay. Well, okay, I guess that's my point. What's going on here? Why aren't they doing that or what?

I don't know. Okay.

So we do have to pay them every time they make a run that gets transported.

If we use their intercept services as described in this agreement, they would charge us, direct us.

My question is, too, is this a one-way street? In other words, when we make their calls and we transport one for them, do we get $550? That's not in here. I don't know what kind of agreement this is. It's one-sided to me.

No, this is just for their paramedics assisting us.

So we have to write up our own for them to do if we want to do the same thing, correct? We would need to, yes, if we want to charge us.

So we don't currently have an agreement with Vernon such that they use our services and we have the right.

That's what I'm saying, Roger. We don't have anything like that. We don't have anything. This is one-sided.

Well, everything is by mutual aid. So every time a fire truck goes one way or the other over the village borders, there's not fees associated with any of that. This is strictly them trying to recoup the costs for their paramedics assisting us at that level of service when we need it. Not every time, but it's when we need it.

This is just because it's a specialized service and we don't, that we don't, I mean, they've got to pay for extra materials and equipment. Correct. So if they have a large fire. It's a specialized.

Yeah. So if our ladder truck goes south, we don't charge them for that. If their fire truck comes north for a crash or something, they don't charge us that way. It's strictly to the paramedic service as described in here.

I'm just looking at the fire department's report. Do we respond to their report? They respond to ours more by a long shot than we do to theirs.

Yep. And I'll remind everybody, too, that our license for this service is because we're piggybacking off of Vernon. Currently, we don't have our own paramedic license.

I don't think we have enough paramedics to sustain a license. So we're piggybacking off of Vernon's.

Correct.

Okay.

Ultimately, these again, these are EMS-based fees, right? So this is money going to Vernon by way of the bills that go to the patient. This isn't us having to pay each time, us being the village of Waukesha for each one of these. We're cutting the check, but it's a pass-through, essentially, because our EMS billing is billing for our fire department to go to the incident. They assist us with it. and then we pay them this portion. Chief, correct me if I'm wrong in how I'm explaining this, but this is like if one of their paramedics jumps in our rig and assists us as we drive to the hospital with this patient. If they just completely outright do the whole transport, say we have a crash with five patients and one of their rigs shows up and takes one of those patients to direct themselves and we don't deal with that patient, That's them and their billing to that specific patient. We don't.

Okay, that's kind of where I was getting, I remember we did that. I thought that was the right thing to do at the time.

If we need that service on our rig for that patient and they jump on board to help us with that, that's where this fee is passed through to them on this portion.

but that fee gets done by the insurance company. However that bill is paid, if it's outright. That's my point. I thought we were getting billed instead of the insurance company for this. That's the way I understood this, but that makes more sense now when I hear it that way.

So it's what we've already agreed to, what we already discussed back in February, but it's a change in the fee structure by adding $100 to that cost.

So because of the fact that we don't have that level of sophistication that they do, then they have the ability to take care of things that we can't if we are paying them. When ours are not available. We have paramedics that can. That's what I thought. That's what I thought.

We just don't have enough to sustain a license.

I see, okay.

So we can't have our own license.

I see, okay.

If we blend with Vernon, then that makes enough people, enough paramedics to sustain the permit or the license.

So literally the only change is it's $100 more per patient on this fee. That's the only thing that's changing. Which again, we've already agreed to this document. Not to say that there couldn't be changes if necessary based on your questions, but that's the only thing that's before us tonight is to approve the increased fee.

I make a motion we approve the contract to amend the fee to an extra $100.

Okay, so the motion is to approve the agreement for ALS services between Vernon and the Village of Walkershaw.

I'll second it. As it's written.

As written, yep. And Bob's the second. Any other discussion or questions? All right, all those in favor of approving the amended agreement, say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? It carries. Up next, there's just a singular page that I copied and pasted some information into your packet for you. The village was approached about two months ago through Andy from the fire department with an offer to donate a new but old unit that had been, basically it's one of the display models sitting out for display purposes but had never been fired. It's new from that perspective. that is being offered to be donated to us. Using Greg and his staff, there were some questions on the capacity of this unit compared to what we're looking at doing on the campus. Through the discussions, while it says in the number two that this normally would be typically backing up a 7,000 square foot facility, our new public works building is more than that. However, because of the layout to the building and that there's not a lot of draw besides lights and a furnace and some overhead garage doors if necessary, if this were to kick in. It was determined that this is a sufficient capacity to be able to power what we would need to for backup purposes for the public works building, the new one that's being put in.

There's no chance that it would help. You could use it here for this building or the fire department, huh?

Let me finish. I'm sorry. You're good. That's fine. So I reached out to Stu with his background, and he put me in touch with somebody who looked over the specs and compared it to the bid specs that were given to the contractors by Greg for the public works building, and he confirmed the same, that this would be sufficient. to be able to power that building. To be able to say it's gonna do all of the above, I don't think so. Also in part because we voted to separate the services, so electrical service to that building is separate from the rest of this building. So we've built into, or we are building into the fire department project a generator that handles what we need to there. This is not sufficient, this is not big enough to do all of the above, to your question.

Because Andy and I talked about this years ago, getting this, and he turned us down and said it wasn't available any longer. I'm just surprised to see this.

Yep.

Come up again.

I did not put donation. Might not be the same one. No, it's probably not.

No, it's not. So I did not put donation information in here as far as who's donating this to us. They asked to be anonymous, so to speak, or confidential, just for business purposes. But this is a business that's donating this to us.

How much would it cost to take this donation and make it operable to what we want it to be?

Do we have any idea? Delivery is free. The unit, I was told, is estimated value is about $15,000 because it is an older unit. It's not exactly like showroom today. And then any cost related to hooking it up is part of the bid that we just approved for Ford. They had the spec information for this within the bid documents. So as part of that, we would accept delivery of this relatively soon because they want to get it off their property and get it to us as a donation. So it's going to likely have to sit here somewhere on campus out of the way for a period of time. but it's built into the contract with Ford that they will move it, put it onto a pad that's part of the design of the project, and then do all the service hookups and everything into the public works building. So it's already all built into that project to have this added to that.

So can I make a motion to accept the generator? Yeah, that's what I'm gonna do. It's a deal. That's fine.

You can make the motion and then the discussion afterwards. So Bob, go ahead.

I'll make a motion to accept the donation for Generac protector services, 36 kilowatts, liquid cool, standby generator. Okay. Second to that?

I'll second it.

Stu, go ahead. The building that this is going in is going to have three-phase service, is it not? No.

for compressors and stuff? No, there was an error in the documents that your friend pointed out and helped us fix. That was one of the amendments that was made to the bid documents. And I confirmed that back with him, and he said, then we're good to go. So there is an oversight on the electrical part that was gone.

So the new building will not have three phase?

No, it's what would be called single phase. The 220 or the 4 a.m. service, I believe, is the correct way to describe it.

Okay.

Yeah, the three phases, as was discussed, was overpowering the building for things that we don't have on the industrial side. So, like... welders and things that we have all fit in the proper service that would be under this machine but realistically this is for emergency backup purposes so um right this is to get the doors open and the lights on you know get the vehicles out of the garage it's really the intended purpose not to say that you know this happens in a winter storm and power gets knocked out and they have to do some quick repairs to the truck or something that it should be sufficient to handle all that

No, I was just looking at it. It said it was for a single phase. It's not going to do us any good if there's three phases in the building. No, no, no.

That was correct in the documents. That was one of the addendums that Greg's firm corrected with the contractors for the bin.

Okay.

Any other discussion?

Yeah, I would like to know exactly how do these things work? Are they powered by? Gasoline and that kind of thing? Natural gas or propane, usually. Okay, I did not know.

Some are diesel. Diesel, yeah.

Okay, so you've got a reservoir of fuel there, and it draws from that, and that's how it operates. Correct?

Very seldom you see diesel and gas. Most of them are natural gas.

I think it says on number four here it's natural gas. This one would be it. Oh, I see.

Yeah, there is a means to switch it to propane if necessary.

Any other discussion? Questions?

All right. All those in favor of approving the donation as discussed, say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? Very well. The last thing I'll say on that, there was questions about what Bob raised before. I did talk to Andy from the fire department since this went through him initially and did relay back to our donor of this that our intended purpose at this point is for the public works building, not for fire work. This conversation originally started. So they are aware of that and it's not like we're doing a bait and switch type of a thing. They were just happy to make the donation. Up next is the 2026-27 snow removal and waste control contract with Workman. Comparing them from last year's to this year's, Workman is, as you can see in the packet, provided us an extension of another year. It's word for word the same minus dates that have changed to update that part. And then, excuse me, as custom with this, or custom area with this agreement with them, there is, what is it, one date? There's like a weekend or something like that where they, I think they have company parties or something where they're not available. So Rob and his crew are aware that they would not be available on that date and time that's listed in the packet or the contract. Otherwise, everything's identical from last year's. Just a renewal of the contract. Any questions or motion?

I'll make a motion to... hire a group of guys to do their snowplow removal contract again for this year again. I think they do a great job. They helped us out a lot.

I'll second it. So motion on the floor is to approve renewing the snow removal and ice control contract with Workman for the 2026-27 winter season discussion.

I'm having a little trouble locating the cost on this.

$195,000, if I recall correctly. That's the base amount, and so we'd have to have a pretty heavy year to go above that where they would charge the additional cost. $195,000.

Oh, yes, I see that. Okay. Thank you. We're going to answer.

Okay. Anything else? All right. Hearing none, all those in favor of approving the contract as discussed and it's in your packet, say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? carries accounts payable for the amount of $114,910.26.

I will move to approve the bill's payments in the amount of $114,910.26. Okay, is there a second?

I'll second it. Any questions or discussion?

I have a question on the Rupert Mielke bill. That's coming off. That's going to be added on to the building. That's all the documents, of course, that they did.

Yeah, that dollar amount's not entirely that. It's the way that it's listed in the list is that's not all that. Roughly 10,000 of it is specific to DDW as if you look at your list of expenses on the packet. This is also including the usual stuff that they're doing for the different projects that go before the plan commission and stuff. So some of that's built back to those specific projects that the petitioners pay or apply for and such. So there's also some stuff in here for Tansdale with the road culvert replacement and other things like that, and the MS4 thing. So it's not, that 28,000 number is not just public works. It's their usual monthly bill. Just like for John's bill, for the attorney's fees, you see a big, large amount, but that's not all billage expense. That's all expense back to the different projects that they're part of for the legal reviews that he has to do for their things. Any other questions? All right. All those in favor of approving the bill as of the month stated, say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? The hearing is adjourned.

Make motion to adjourn.

All in favor? Anyone opposed? I didn't get to say aye. Well, you didn't. Nobody said no. Try that again. You all vote yes? Yes. Yes.

Anyone vote no? I don't think anybody wants to stay.