[0:02] All right, it's 6 o'clock. 6 o'clock
we'll call a meeting order. We'll start
[0:06] with the pledge
[0:10] algiance to the flag of the United
States of America and to the republic
[0:15] for which it stands. One nation under
God, indivisible, liberty and justice
[0:21] for all.
>> All right. Thank you everybody for
[0:25] coming out tonight. Um,
is there any additions or deletions or
[0:30] corrections to the agenda?
>> I do have one ad under uh my report
[0:33] would be uh I5 and it's uh related to
the election lecture we talked about.
[0:41] » Anybody else? Not take a motion to
approve.
[0:45] » Make the motion to approve.
>> Thank you, Ryan. Do we have a second?
[0:48] » I'll second.
>> Thank you, Sheldon. All in favor? I
[0:51] » oppos. Thank you.
>> Consent agenda. Is there any item on
[0:54] there you'd like to discuss? If not,
I'll take a motion to approve.
[1:00] » The motion to approve. Thank you, Ryan.
Do we have a second?
[1:03] » I'll second.
>> Thank you, Mel. All in favor?
[1:06] » I.
>> Okay.
[1:09] Up next is
visitors to the council. Right. We have
[1:17] no visitors. Um, we'll go to the mayor's
report. I just got one quick item on
[1:22] that. School's going to be starting
soon. Please be patient with the buses
[1:28] out there. Please be patient with the
students out there crossing. They're not
[1:31] always going to push crosswalk button.
Just watch out for them.
[1:36] You know, sometimes they get in a hurry
and forget. So, just be patient, work
[1:40] with them, know that traffic's going to
get a little slow. They're in front of
[1:43] the school before you start, before you
leave. Just just a little public service
[1:50] so you don't forget. Um that's it.
Public forum. We have one card. Shannon
[1:55] Peters. If you like come up to the
podium with name, address.
[2:06] » Hi, good evening everyone. Um my name is
Shannon Peters. I live at 603 Street
[2:12] Northwest.
I'm here today to voice my strong
[2:17] objection to the placement of the new
ground loaned solar array on the Cassen
[2:21] public lawn and library. This public
utility footprint is 125 ft away from my
[2:29] front door, completely destroying my
neighborhood view, impacting my property
[2:34] value, and threatening I don't know if
you've done a solar glare um reflective
[2:40] gr glare study.
What makes this situation even
[2:45] completely more accept unacceptable is
the double standard. If I, as a
[2:50] taxpaying person, wanted to put ground
mounted solar system in my yard, the
[2:55] city's zoning ordinance outright bans me
from doing so to protect the
[3:00] neighborhood character.
Yet, the library roof couldn't
[3:04] structurally support these panels. So,
the city gave itself a pass, deciding
[3:09] it's perfectly fine to dump an
industrial ugly footprint on the public
[3:14] lawn right in front of my living room.
I do support green energy, absolutely,
[3:19] but I do not support discriminatory
discriminatory zoning. This is an R1.
[3:26] The library is in residential one. And
the total lack of transparency that led
[3:31] to this layout, I don't know where it
came from.
[3:35] The city should hold its residents, The
city should not hold its residents to a
[3:39] standard of community harmony that it
refuses to practice itself. You've
[3:44] already laid the um concrete. You've put
the post in. You've got the stands
[3:48] there. Now, um it's ugly. Um you've left
25 ft from the curb to the first post or
[3:55] I'm sorry, you've left 16 ft from the
first post to the curb.
[4:01] Um
it's just ugly. Um I would like um you
[4:07] to make public for all three that you
have put up um that I'm that I'm aware
[4:13] of. I would like to make um see the
glint and glare assessment for all three
[4:17] of those in the neighborhood. I would
like the city to commit um commit to a
[4:24] binding cityf funed mitigated plan that
includes a highquality privacy fence or
[4:29] a dense row of mature trees on that
property so that I do not have to look
[4:34] at your ugly solar system.
My other concern is the safety of the
[4:39] community and children that play there.
The kids that do their cartwheels there,
[4:43] play hideand go seek there. If you're
not putting a fence up around there,
[4:46] shame on you.
Um, also
[4:52] this permit that was given to me by Ian
the other day, $10,000. Is that for the
[4:58] total project for that public library
project? That's the assessed value. That
[5:04] is fraud. I took this to three
electricians today. They said the
[5:08] electrical alone would cost probably 8
to10 grand. So what are you doing? You
[5:12] got $103,000
grant money, which by the way is my
[5:16] taxpayer money and everyone in this
room's taxpayer money. Ridiculous. What
[5:21] are you doing with the rest of it? Um,
you have failed your community.
[5:27] I'm just saying you have failed me. You
have failed the community with putting
[5:30] this in a neighborhood right in the
front of somebody's living room.
[5:35] If you want, I can show you pictures if
you'd like them, but I'm sure you're you
[5:40] know what you've done.
just disgusting. You should be ashamed
[5:44] of yourselves.
[5:47] I would like a written response to my
questions and how you're going to deal
[5:51] with this within 10 days. Thank you.
>> Thank you.
[5:58] » We'll put that under staff to
[6:03] » Okay. Um that's the only card I had for
public forum. There's no public hearing
[6:10] committee report
EDA.
[6:15] » All right. So, the first item that I
have for you this evening is the uh
[6:19] draft subordination agreement that was
presented to the EDA at our meeting
[6:25] earlier this month. Um so it has to do
with um Elite Marketing Investments and
[6:32] Joe Lonzo's business. Um so long time
ago, at least 10 years ago, the EDA did
[6:40] give a loan in the amount of $90,000 to
um that business um to aid in their to
[6:47] assist in their relocation here to
Cassen. Um fast forward to today, the
[6:52] balance on that loan is just over
55,000.
[6:56] Um but since then um
another lender MBT Bank has given Elite
[7:06] additional loans. Um but after all of
that, the EDA's mortgage on the property
[7:14] um just across the street here, the
EDA's position is in first place ahead
[7:20] of all the subsequent leans on the
property.
[7:23] Um, so the request here with a
subordination agreement would move the
[7:30] EDA from first position um down to third
position behind the the bank's existing
[7:39] um loan on the property and um the
proposed 475,000
[7:47] letter of credit that would go towards
Elite for the purpose of um operation
[7:52] operational expenses.
Uh I did have the city attorney review
[7:58] the subordination request
and she had recommended that the EDA not
[8:04] agree to the subordination agreement
um
[8:09] since it does place more risk on the EDA
by moving it from first down to third
[8:16] position. Um
however um Mr. Alonzo did come to the
[8:22] EDA meeting early this month and there
was a rather long uh discussion that we
[8:27] had. Um so we learned a bit more about
the situation from his perspective. Um
[8:33] he had also shared a a Mims report that
he had prepared um in advance of asking
[8:40] for um the additional letter of credit
from the bank um placing the value of
[8:45] his property closer to uh 1.2 just under
$1.2 $2 million.
[8:51] Um we discussed a few alternatives to
the subordination agreement. Um one of
[8:59] which was to uh instead of the third
position take a second position behind
[9:04] the bank's um existing lean but still
ahead of the proposed $475,000
[9:13] letter of credit. Um Mr. Mr. Lonzo said
that the bank wouldn't wouldn't agree to
[9:18] that um positioning. Um we also
discussed the option of wiping out Mr.
[9:25] Lonzo's existing loan but then um taking
that third position and lending him back
[9:31] the remaining balance but at a higher
interest rate considering the increased
[9:36] risk to the EDA. Um but Mr. Lonzo was
not in favor of that idea either. Um but
[9:43] at the end of all of that, the EDA um
did end up recommending approval of the
[9:49] subordination agreement as as was
drafted. Um so that is what is before
[9:55] consideration of you tonight.
As it's noted, it says we're third, but
[10:01] technically according to M MBT Bank,
they would roll both of their loans into
[10:06] one, and that would make us technically
second because they classified theirs.
[10:11] Yes, it's two loans, but they would
recover them as one.
[10:15] » Yes.
>> So, so that would put us back, that was
[10:18] where the EDA discussed it. That would
put us back in second where we were
[10:21] originally when we did the loan.
And then when he had to rebuild the
[10:27] building, we became the only loan on it
at the time. That's why we
[10:31] » that's why we're in first position.
>> That's why we moved to first. But so
[10:34] technically we're not third. We'd be
second
[10:38] even though it list cuz MBT would just
roll said that's they count that as one
[10:42] loan. Even though it shows as two paper
trails in the bank, they would they look
[10:47] at it as one. That was part of the
reasoning the EDA went back and said,
[10:52] "Well, then we're second." And he plus
he's never missed a payment from the
[10:56] beginning.
[11:01] » If that's what I recall from that
meeting.
[11:03] » Yeah. Yep. How long was the time frame
on that?
[11:05] » He's got 10 years left.
>> 10 years left.
[11:07] » Yeah. He's about halfway through.
>> No payments missed.
[11:11] » No pay. We did give them a year off when
the building went under fire and they
[11:16] had to rebuild.
So that's why it's a little over half
[11:21] left due on it because he he was allowed
a year grace period due to the rebuild.
[11:28] » Right.
>> Even at that he's the payments have been
[11:32] timely and
>> he's lived up to all the other all the
[11:36] other agreements in the contract.
He's held true on that. Okay.
[11:42] » And there's still value in that one
building that would cover everything.
[11:51] That was that was the logic of the EDA
at the time.
[11:59] » So, is any we got any questions for Ann
or
[12:02] for a motion? I
>> I had one more.
[12:04] » Yes.
>> So, the it's just MBTL that's listed in
[12:09] that. Is there a third party?
>> It would just be between MBT and and us.
[12:15] Okay. There's just those two parties and
that could move us to the second.
[12:19] » Yeah. I mean, yeah, they'll still have
the two loans, MBT, the
[12:23] » the line of credit and the loan,
>> but they they said
[12:27] » they're like packaged.
>> They package it, but they still leave it
[12:29] as two separate because it's two
separate interest rates for them, but
[12:33] they count that as one if they had to
foreclose
[12:37] be anything.
So that would put us second technically,
[12:41] but it in logistics, yes, it is third,
but the bank looks at it as more of a
[12:48] one two. So
>> the the amount that would still be left
[12:52] in there to be covered is enough for us
to recoup though, right?
[12:57] » Yes. Yeah. Yeah. Cuz he's at 750,000.
>> Yeah. Up to
[13:03] » Yeah. Up, you know, and that's up too on
their credit form, you know. So, and
[13:08] that building appraising according to
the report you have in here shows like a
[13:13] 1 almost 1.2 million.
[13:25] Oh, any other questions or concerns?
I guess I would take a motion to
[13:33] approve
the subordination agreement. Make the
[13:37] motion to approve the subboard and
agreement.
[13:39] » Ryan, do we have a second?
>> I'll second.
[13:42] » Sheldon. All in favor?
>> I
[13:44] » I post. Okay.
Next on your EDA ready.
[13:52] » Yep. So, next item in there is the
second half investment um going towards
[13:59] ready. Um the EDA has been an investor
and ready for a few years now. Um
[14:06] through that we've um been a participant
in the communities council and um you'll
[14:13] c recall last year the um the housing
roundt that was had over in Byron. Um,
[14:21] more recently we did have kind of a
group meeting with the other investor
[14:26] communities um, just to talk more about
the future of the group and strategic
[14:32] planning as far as regional economic
development goes. Um, and so at the EDA
[14:39] meeting earlier this month, um, there
was a motion to recommend investing for
[14:45] the second half of of this year. So that
would take us through the end of this
[14:50] year. Um you'll see the invoices
included in the packet. If there's any
[14:55] questions,
[15:01] we did did voice our opinion at the EDA
level that we want to see more out of
[15:07] them. So I mean they did send a little
packet, but it's almost like you got to
[15:12] force them to do it. So,
you know, so they are aware and there's
[15:16] other cities that voiced their same
opinions that yeah, you say you want to
[15:20] help, but where's, you know, in where's
more input for us?
[15:26] » So, what did we get out of the first
half?
[15:31] » Uh, well, they've been talking about the
that strategic planning and all of that.
[15:35] I think that's where u most of it has
gone. They tried applying for a few
[15:40] different grants to um actually like
develop an actual written plan. Don't
[15:46] think they were successful. Um but that
is a lot of where the time was was spent
[15:51] in this first half of the year.
>> Ian meets with them monthly.
[15:55] » Yeah.
>> To discuss issues in the region.
[15:58] » Um they do provide support on different
you know economic development
[16:01] initiatives. Um they've been talking a
lot about different things in in the
[16:04] that are coming to Rochester and the
Mayo area and the the different
[16:07] projects. I mean that's part of the
reason that we want to see more from
[16:10] them. I mean if we were pretty clear
like we want something tangible. You
[16:13] know economic development work can be
hard. It doesn't always generate what
[16:16] you want it to generate. But doing an
event like for example like that housing
[16:19] forum a couple years ago was beneficial.
I told him I said you know you need to
[16:22] do something like that regularly because
then I can see what tangibly you know
[16:26] even if it you know it's not forcing
someone to build here but at least it's
[16:29] it's bringing that tangible thing there.
And it was interesting, you know, I
[16:33] think everyone at the meeting was kind
of doing the Minnesota nice thing right
[16:36] until the last 15 minutes when I said
that. And then all the other cities kind
[16:39] of chimed up and said the exact same
thing. And some of them were even a
[16:41] little bit more demonstrative than than
than we were. But but it was it was good
[16:45] for them to know like put your money
where your mouth is, you know, kind of a
[16:49] thing. So
[16:54] » do you need a motion on that? Yes.
>> I would look at a motion to approve the
[16:59] second payment.
make the motion to approve that second
[17:03] payment.
>> Brian, do we have a second?
[17:06] » I will second.
>> Thank you.
[17:09] » With the provision that I would like to
see like at the end of the year, are we
[17:13] getting anything out of this?
>> Sure.
[17:16] » Sounds good to me.
>> Yeah, I agree. So, we have a motion to
[17:20] second. All in favor? I
>> oppose. Thank you.
[17:24] » Excuse me.
>> You guys use your microphone.
[17:27] » Oh, sorry, Dave. Thank you.
[17:31] All right. Um, next planning commission
public works preliminary and final plat.
[17:36] » Yes. So, at the planning commission
meeting just last Monday, we did have a
[17:43] public hearing to discuss the
preliminary plat of the public works
[17:49] subdivision. Um, I'll just show it up
here on the map. So, you're all familiar
[17:54] with the public works site. It's
actually uh right now it's just one
[17:57] parcel just shy of 80 acres out on 16th
Street Northeast.
[18:03] Um so it includes the actual public
works facility itself, the their garages
[18:10] and everything, the wastewater treatment
facility, um quite a lot of open space
[18:15] um in the middle areas and the far
extent to the north. Um and some wooded
[18:21] acreage on the um the east side of
Masten Creek up over here. Um so with
[18:29] this preliminary plat um it would divide
the entire parcel up into um five
[18:36] different parcels labeled 1 2 3 4 and
five um as you can see on the plaid up
[18:41] here. Um so a couple things with this
proposal.
[18:47] Um since
access is only provided via 16th Street
[18:53] Northeast and then a drive that comes
off of it. Um some of these lots are
[18:59] going to not have direct um frontage off
of the public street. Um so to remedy
[19:05] that situation um we do have an access
easement running through um the entirety
[19:13] of the lot, almost the entirety of the
parcel um which would provide access to
[19:19] um those lots that don't have the the
exact um access off of the public
[19:24] street. Um so you'll see in the
resolutions we've got a couple of
[19:30] things. Um one is just um making sure
that the declaration that's included in
[19:38] the packet as exhibit B. Um having the
city attorney review that and
[19:42] everything. Make sure it's all ship
shape before um we actually move to
[19:47] record the plat and the access agreement
to go the access easement to go with it.
[19:53] Um let's see. There were a few comments
that came up during the public hearing.
[19:59] Um,
some of them having to do with this
[20:03] proposed lot five um down in the
southeast corner. Um, right now it's
[20:09] it's just wooded acreage. Um, I did
share that one proposal by the city was
[20:15] to um develop it possibly as a single
family residential housing. Um, however,
[20:22] a lot of those present felt that it
would be better utilized as a public
[20:26] city park. Um, but I just want to
reiterate that, um, the single family
[20:32] housing was just a proposal. Um, and the
effect of approving these plat lock, um,
[20:39] that proposal in by any means. Um, so I
just want to share that with everyone.
[20:45] Um, and then there were some comments
about the land owners out here to the
[20:50] east. Um, they expressed wanting to have
some access to a portions of their
[20:57] property, although it also sounded like
they did have access already. um um
[21:03] little bit of a a situation there, but
um even with that
[21:09] I think I don't think there were any
issues that would have um there weren't
[21:15] any issues that the planning commission
felt um would have prevented them from
[21:20] recommending approval of these plat. So
um in your packets you do have the
[21:25] preliminary and final plat together um
separate resolutions for each um any
[21:31] questions.
[21:42] No questions.
So we need to prove the preliminary
[21:47] plant first,
right? That's right. So, I would guess
[21:52] I'd look for a motion to approve the
preliminary plan for the cast and public
[21:57] works subdivision.
>> Make that motion. Ryan, do we have a
[22:01] second?
>> I'll second.
[22:03] » Sheldon. All in favor?
>> I.
[22:08] » Next. Uh, the final plat.
We look for a resolution to or a motion
[22:16] to approve that resolution.
>> Make the motion. Brian, do we have a
[22:21] second?
>> A second.
[22:23] » Thank you, Sheldon. All in favor?
>> I
[22:26] » I
>> Thank you. Um
[22:31] the exhibit B the the access agreement,
you'll need Is there any questions or
[22:36] concerns in that from anybody?
>> Yeah, I mean, as far as access, we do a
[22:42] an easement back in there. Um, that is a
waste. That is our water treatment
[22:47] plant. You know, that's
who comes and goes driving right around
[22:54] there. It is off by itself. A little
concerning in my opinion. And granted,
[22:58] somebody could go back there, but
anyway, there's no gates, right?
[23:03] » Well, the the plant is gated off.
>> Okay, that is
[23:06] » the plant is. So, then this road would
kind of go along that just know. So, I
[23:10] don't know if you you can't really see
the fence on there, but it is fenced
[23:12] there. And they actually I think earlier
this year we reinstalled new gates
[23:15] there. So they're those are the ones
they they got approved in I think
[23:18] February. But yeah, so this does kind of
head up behind Berts but there kind of
[23:21] between where they store some of the the
soil borings and things like that. But
[23:25] » but yeah,
>> that was the only concern. Just little.
[23:30] » Mhm.
>> Well, and it's all property still owned
[23:33] by the city,
>> right? Correct.
[23:36] » And the far is the far lot. That's
farther north. Lot one. Is that where
[23:43] the
>> Yeah, on the west side of that. That's
[23:45] » is the solar, right?
>> That's right.
[23:48] » Brandon, mayor, if I could.
>> Yes.
[23:50] » Um, just to be clear, um, you mentioned
to access anybody going back there. So,
[23:53] if we have an access agreement, that's
only going to be dedicated to that
[23:56] property. So, it's not going to be
necessarily public access. It's going to
[23:59] be access just for that specific
property. So, if they were to put solar,
[24:02] whatever, up there, um, or farm it as it
is today, be accessed just for that
[24:06] property owner. So that'll be in the
access agreement. So it's not a public
[24:10] access.
>> I'm good.
[24:18] » Everybody's gone through and looked over
the specifics of the agreement.
[24:23] So
with that, I guess I would take a motion
[24:28] to approve.
>> Make the motion to approve.
[24:32] » Ryan, do we have a second?
>> I'd second.
[24:34] » Thank you. No. All in favor? I
>> I
[24:39] » thank you.
>> Next up, old business.
[24:47] » Colarium.
I'll just preface this and I'll let
[24:50] Linda and Ian take over because I mean
maybe Linda probably the one here. Um,
[24:54] so this is a project we talked a little
bit uh earlier this year about um
[24:58] possibly doing an improvement at the
cemetery site by adding Colar and we're
[25:02] seeing a lot more of the cremations and
um so this is a this is a kind of a want
[25:07] not a need but we do think it would
extend the life of um letting people
[25:11] obviously have burials here in Cassen.
Um so I think that Linda and Ian work
[25:16] together and Linda I'll let you take it
over there. She's included the one that
[25:20] she thinks might be the best choice to
start with I think. Is that kind of what
[25:23] you're looking at Linda? It is it is
that is um the one that Ian and I kind
[25:28] of agreed on. Uh the price is on there.
We are responsible for the concrete pad
[25:34] foundation that goes on and the crane
rental
[25:38] » microphone
>> using grab microphone.
[25:42] » Sorry. Sorry.
Um we are responsible for the concrete
[25:48] pad that the the uh columbarium will sit
on and the crane rental to lower it onto
[25:54] that. Um
each niche
[25:59] will hold two.
So if if there's a couple that want to
[26:04] be together in one, um the stones are
then etched by the company that we buy
[26:13] this for.
Um they are very reasonable and that
[26:18] would be they would so that all the
printing and everything is uniform.
[26:24] It would all go up to that company. This
company is in
[26:29] shoot Krookton.
>> Yeah. Yeah. A Minnesota company.
[26:34] » A Minnesota company.
[26:42] Yep. So this is the 64 niche. So there's
room for 128 people.
[26:52] » So it averages out to about $1,000.
>> What
[26:56] » averages out was estimated cost is 64.
>> That's for the concrete pad and the
[27:03] crane rental.
>> Just the pad. Oh going down.
[27:06] » No, the 64,000. That's only for the
colarium. That's not the cement pad and
[27:11] the crane rental.
[27:18] » It is more expensive. Um, we would
charge more for this too cuz right now a
[27:24] cemetery lot is $775.
We were thinking if they bought a niche
[27:31] um to raise it up to $2,000
because then they could put two in there
[27:39] and it would be then like $1,000 per
person, but charge $2,000 for each
[27:44] niche.
[27:47] Um the cemetery is nothing that we ever
make money on.
[27:52] Uh we're lucky if we ever break even.
Um, but Tim found, where did you find
[27:57] the money?
>> I I think, you know, we're planning
[28:01] using some of the reserve funds there.
You know, it's one of those things
[28:05] where, you know, people come and they
still want to be buried here if they can
[28:07] be. And, you know, you're running out of
lots that are desirable lots and like I
[28:12] said, we're seeing the cremation. So,
like I said, at the end of the day, it's
[28:15] a want. It's not something that you have
to approve. I think isn't going to
[28:19] necessarily cost the taxpayers anything.
You know, we'll we'll use the reserve
[28:22] funds from the cemetery. Um but you know
if you you don't want to do it you know
[28:26] that's fine too. It's something we've
talked about for a couple years just
[28:28] sort of kicked around and you know the
question is do we want to pursue it or
[28:31] not? If we don't then you know I don't
you know I think staff has brought you
[28:35] what they found and
>> we've been we've been putting we've put
[28:38] new fencing in. We've tried to keep
making updates. This sounds like a good
[28:42] one if we can use
>> right. Our goal is to try and keep that
[28:44] as attractive as it can be you know and
and I think you know we've been able to
[28:47] do that over the last couple years for
sure.
[28:49] » How many
>> We're not out of lots. We we actually we
[28:52] have a lot left. Um there's a lot along
the trailer court side that are on that
[28:58] side. There's um some on the west road
down towards the front and there's some
[29:05] back in the souththeast corner. I mean
we must have
[29:12] three 400 lots left,
>> right?
[29:15] » How much
>> we have a lot.
[29:16] » How much space does this take up? I
mean, how many lots would we have to
[29:19] take out of lots and turn to this?
>> We would only take out one block, which
[29:24] is eight lots.
>> Eight lots. Okay.
[29:27] » We put it towards the front by the uh
storage
[29:31] » building there.
>> Why did you pick 64 versus the 96
[29:37] or
>> cost?
[29:38] » Cost. Okay.
[29:44] I'd like before we would go forward with
this, I would like a little bit of a
[29:48] number on a concrete pad and crane
rental. Just a rough estimate. You know,
[29:53] if we could bring that back to a next
meeting just so we have an idea of what
[29:57] we possibly
>> cost. Yeah,
[30:00] » I know it's an estimate. It won't be
exact, but I think that would
[30:04] » we should be able to come up with
something.
[30:05] » Yeah.
So, if we could have that by the next
[30:09] meeting, we could just table us until
then.
[30:11] » I can do that.
>> Well, I'm fine with that. We want to
[30:13] make sure you guys get all the
information you need.
[30:17] » All right. Thank you. Up next, old
business. We got the fireh hall rental.
[30:22] So, we've discussed this a few times.
Um,
[30:28] I guess
my opinion is we we said that let staff
[30:36] pick a rate for a nonprofit and bring it
back to us
[30:41] and then, you know, cuz they seem to
know exactly what goes into each thing.
[30:47] So that would be my recommendation is
we'd let staff set it right and bring it
[30:51] back and forward it on.
But any thoughts from everybody else?
[30:58] » That's fair. We want to find a good plan
for this and
[31:01] » sure we're helping people but also not
>> hurting anyone.
[31:05] » Yes, that's our goal. I mean we want to
make sure that it works for everybody.
[31:09] » Yep.
>> Am I allowed to ask a question?
[31:13] » Yeah. Are you talking fireman staff?
like the staff of the fire department.
[31:17] » We're we're looking at if a nonprofit
rate for when people want to use the
[31:23] fire room, right?
>> Where the truck bay is.
[31:25] » Yeah.
>> Yep.
[31:26] » So, who's going to make that decision?
>> We'll have staff direct staff.
[31:29] » Yeah. We will talk to the fire the fire
department as well, ministry of staff.
[31:33] Yep.
>> Yep. So, that way the whole fire
[31:36] department
>> So, basically, you're talking you want
[31:37] to create a nonprofit rate and you want
us to try and talk to them, see what
[31:41] kind of number we can come up with.
>> Yes. Okay. and make it work
[31:46] for everybody. No pressure. So, if you
could bring that back,
[31:50] » if anybody has any other questions, I
mean, I guess that, you know, we talked
[31:53] about it last time and I know,
>> you know, it's a question of do you want
[31:56] to do the nonprofit rate or not?
>> I think we do. I think we do. I think we
[31:59] have enough interest from folks for
that. So, I think that's probably fair.
[32:02] And then I know Linda has been looking
at it and she's talked with uh, you
[32:05] know, people about things, too. And so,
yeah, I think that should be something
[32:08] that we can come up with. them. Um,
you know, the biggest push back is going
[32:13] to be from folks who are from the
general public who are going to say,
[32:16] "Well, why do we have to pay which is
probably going to be more, you know, if
[32:20] they're using the same facility?" I
mean, that's that's just so you're
[32:22] aware, that's probably the biggest push
back would be is, well, if I'm doing X,
[32:25] Y, and Z, why do I have to pay more? And
I mean, I think, you know, the argument
[32:28] has to be, well, the nonprofits are
providing a service to the to the
[32:31] residents or to the community. Um, and
that's if somebody came in, that's what
[32:35] I would tell them. might say, "Well,
that's why the council decided to do a
[32:38] nonprofit rate as well as the regular
rates."
[32:40] » Yeah. Do we set that where do we draw
that line on the non where the nonprofit
[32:44] go? That would be an important thing to
me. Is it local
[32:47] » kind of a thing? That would be
>> Well, I mean that's the hard part like
[32:51] because if you set a nonprofit rate,
it's not going to matter whether it's,
[32:54] you know, the folks at Carisher or one
of the other, you know, local ones or if
[32:57] it's,
>> you know, the Eagles Teleathon or
[32:59] something like that, you know. I mean, I
think you probably have to just kind of
[33:02] have one. I mean, because you don't want
to do an out of town nonprofit or
[33:05] something. I just think you get to be
too,
[33:07] » but we were adding a caveat that they
have to have the firemen there. They're
[33:11] they're hiring the firemen. So, as long
as the firemen are there,
[33:15] » right?
>> That's the caveat that goes with these
[33:17] nonprofits
>> because it is all it is the fire
[33:19] department's equipment and they have to
maintain it, move it, bring it back in
[33:23] and be there to m to supervise it. That
was the whole
[33:26] » We want to make sure they're 100%
comfortable with what's going on
[33:28] » because I know the fire department has
said in the past that they've didn't
[33:34] want to rush we weren't able to support
the um you know function last year from
[33:38] post you know the post problem because
it
[33:41] » it didn't fit very well with what the
fire department wanted to have. So
[33:44] » yeah.
>> So
[33:46] » so is just so that I'm crystal clear on
this I mean both of these instances the
[33:51] the fire relief association is gaining a
benefit because of the sale of alcoholic
[33:55] beverages. What happens if we have a
group that wants a nonprofit that wants
[34:01] to come in and use the entire facility,
but they are not selling alcoholic
[34:06] beverages and therefore there's no
benefit to the fire relief association.
[34:11] » That's where the caveat comes in where
as long as the firemen
[34:16] » are there in some
as hired as some
[34:21] » okay
>> um it
[34:24] for some event. Okay.
>> Because both the the Blaine Halverson
[34:28] and the Karen share hire well not hire
but have the firemen there and the
[34:35] firemen get the profits from there but
the firemen are there and that's where
[34:39] any nonprofit that came in would have to
have the firemen there in some capacity.
[34:45] » Okay.
>> As long as the firemen agree, I would
[34:49] think that they're going to be there in
some capacity. I don't know. Maybe
[34:55] they'd have firemen, I don't know,
watching bounce houses or I I don't
[35:00] know, you know,
>> something that I mean, the fire
[35:03] department is going to have to talk to
us. They're going to they're going to
[35:05] have to communicate with us like saying,
"Okay, yes, we're going to be there."
[35:07] They're okay with it because in the long
run, I mean, I'm not moving the trucks
[35:10] in and out. I don't have the ability to
do it myself. They're going to have to
[35:13] be there. So, yeah.
>> Linda, how many nonprofits would you say
[35:16] we have renting that space now?
>> Oh, these are the only two.
[35:19] » Two. Okay.
[35:24] You guys came in last time. Is this are
we moving towards the direction you were
[35:26] hoping to or is this
>> I mean absolutely. I think so. I mean I
[35:31] think just taking the effect of like
thinking critically about the nonprofits
[35:35] and how we like we definitely all of
this funding goes right back to KM
[35:39] residents. So I think I love that idea
and it just gives us more money to be
[35:43] able to put back into the community. I
mean and we understand the fire the fire
[35:47] department is incredibly helpful. Um
they're wonderful men and women that are
[35:51] there every you know the last two years
for us and so um I mean if we can get it
[35:56] as low as possible that's the goal right
I mean I realistically I know it costs
[36:00] money for us to be there and I
understand that and I I definitely want
[36:04] the city and the fire department to
break even but if we can come to
[36:07] something of like not making a profit
off of it that would be I mean
[36:12] preferable you know because none of us
are trying to make a profit you know our
[36:15] caterer is donating 15 to 20% back to us
this where you know everybody is
[36:20] donating something. So that's I think
what we're looking for is just like a
[36:23] break even cost would be awesome
>> because we we do give a lot back to the
[36:27] community.
>> Yeah. No problem.
[36:32] » Yeah, I think I think we should be able
to have some for you on the 9th.
[36:34] » Perfect. Yeah.
>> Try and have this all finalized.
[36:39] » Thank you.
>> Up next, uh request for proposal for
[36:44] auditors. You'll see those in your
packet.
[36:48] » Yeah, I'll let Sarah talk to that.
>> Yeah. So, we sent out an email to eight.
[36:52] We got three back and you can see the
the pricing in there.
[36:57] There's really no decision to make
because of the differential. So,
[37:02] resonate. It was significantly cheaper.
>> Yeah.
[37:09] They're
thousands of dollars cheaper.
[37:13] » 10 and $13,000. Yeah.
[37:20] » Anybody got any questions for Sarah?
>> Give me a motion.
[37:24] » So, if not, I guess I would look for a
motion to approve a three-year
[37:30] commitment with Conresnic for our annual
audit.
[37:34] » I'll make the motion.
>> I'll second.
[37:38] » Thank you, Ryan. All in favor?
>> I I
[37:42] » Thank you. Thank you for reaching out to
him and getting back. Appreciate it. And
[37:48] I don't think that was much different
than the past contracts.
[37:52] » Yeah, apparently the last time it was
similar.
[37:55] » Yeah.
All right.
[37:59] Uh up next, we got the 2012 joint powers
agreement with Dodge County on the ice
[38:05] arena.
[38:09] We're looking at I'd like a motion to
direct staff pursuant to the 2012 joint
[38:14] powers agreement that a city is exe
executing its right to end its current
[38:19] position as the operator of the Dodge
County Ice Arena. So in our contract we
[38:23] have to give them a fourmonth notice if
we would like to talk to and change the
[38:31] contract.
So
[38:35] that was just
I would look for a motion to have staff
[38:42] notify the county
>> that we would like to discuss
[38:46] » like to discuss the terms of the Yes.
>> I'll make that motion.
[38:50] » We have a motion. Do we have a second?
>> A second.
[38:54] » There any other questions? Not I would.
All in favor? I
[38:58] » I
>> reach out to stat county.
[39:02] » Thank you.
>> Thank you. All right. New business. We
[39:06] have the SRO agreement.
This is
[39:14] » so both the uh KM and the Z SRO
agreements are similar to the last
[39:18] agreements we had for the last two
years. Um only changes are some uh
[39:21] statutory changes that we had to add for
language for SRO duties. And about the
[39:26] financial changes too.
>> Uh ju just the the same percentages that
[39:30] we had before.
>> What are the differences in language
[39:34] that were statutory?
>> All the SRO duties
[39:41] » which we were already doing that stuff
was just reporting into the contract.
[39:49] Is this a two-year contract?
>> Two two years each. Yes.
[39:55] Just as a reminder, the cameras don't
turn on while they're in the building
[39:58] talking to kids. They when they wear
their cameras,
[40:00] » those aren't
>> that's up to them if they want to
[40:02] activate it for some reason. So, if they
think it's could be a criminal event,
[40:06] then they would. It's not be it's not
recording 24/7.
[40:08] » Yeah. Okay.
>> And the schools has gone through the
[40:13] contract.
>> Uh CAM has already agreed to it and said
[40:17] they have uh their next meeting.
>> Okay. Okay.
[40:22] meetings tomorrow.
>> Okay.
[40:24] » I work there.
>> Okay. Um, does anybody else got any
[40:30] questions for the chief on SRO?
[40:35] » Okay. Do we have to approve of both or
one?
[40:38] » Make one motion to approve both the Z
SRO agreement and the KM SRO agreement.
[40:42] » So, I'd look for a motion to approve
both SRO agreements. One with Cass and
[40:46] Manavville School and one with the Zed.
>> Do I have to abstain since I work for
[40:51] the district? Hope so.
>> I was gonna say
[40:55] I have no position as far as I know.
>> No, I don't.
[40:59] » The bone and get him a camera over
there. He'll be all set. You know,
[41:02] » I never thought to ask that after 5
years. I probably thought I should have.
[41:05] Okay. Doesn't hurt to ask, but no, you
should be good.
[41:08] » Get in trouble. I'll make the motion to
approve.
[41:12] » We have a motion. Do we have a second?
>> I'll second.
[41:14] » Thank you, Sheldon. All in favor? I
>> oppos. Thank you.
[41:22] budget presentation.
So, so earlier tonight, obviously, we
[41:27] had our long range uh planning meeting
with Mr. Rubani. Um we did uh meet with
[41:33] department heads, spent a lot of time
and Sarah spent a lot of time meeting
[41:36] with them in data entry. So, I
appreciate her work on that. Um think
[41:40] we've uh this is kind of our first look
at the budget. And included in your
[41:43] packet, you have a couple of items. Um
one is kind of what I call the budget in
[41:47] brief. It's just the top sheet. It shows
you the the numbers from the library,
[41:51] the general fund, economic development,
um the debt service, capital levies, as
[41:55] well as the tax abatement levies. Um and
you can see there the numbers um biggest
[42:00] changes in the budget for um 2027 or
healthcare that continues to be an area
[42:07] of uh increased cost. I think right now
what was the projection, Linda? Uh I
[42:13] think we put in the budget 20% but um
Bill was talking 12 to 15.
[42:19] » So we're hoping that that can drop down
but I know as council's kind of guide in
[42:22] the past to be conservative with that.
Um so you know and last year we did have
[42:27] a really large deductible increase too
which has mitigated some of that but um
[42:31] so anyway that's a big increase. Uh the
other is the uh police department with
[42:35] that position as you're you're aware um
that was added. So there's a little bit
[42:39] larger than standard jump in their
budget too. Um otherwise, you know,
[42:43] overall debt levies are flat. Um you
could see there that that's not changing
[42:48] much. Um the library fund does have a
little increase too and part of that is
[42:53] their health care as well. Um you know,
and and the tough part about for them is
[42:57] so much of their budget is staff. You
know, probably I don't know 85% of their
[43:01] budget actually comes down to healthcare
and wages for their staff. And so the
[43:05] truth is even when somebody just
switches from single coverage to family
[43:08] coverage, you know, that's 12 to $20,000
a year depending on what option they
[43:12] pick. So I mean, you know, the they do
the department heads to do the best job
[43:16] they can going off of previous years, as
you're aware. You know, libraries had
[43:20] some changes in staffing over the last
three years, too. So, and they're going
[43:23] to continue to have some changes in
staffing. I don't know. I think we'll
[43:25] get that probably in our next packet. We
do have a library staff person who's,
[43:28] you know, taking a different position.
So, you know, they, you know, they do
[43:32] the best they can, but that is why they
see a little bit larger jump than
[43:34] normal. Um, most of it's related to
wages and benefits there. Um, so, you
[43:40] know, I I think, you know, we're at, you
know, a number that's it's well under
[43:44] where a lot of cities are coming in. I'm
happy about that. We expect to get it
[43:46] lower. You know, as those healthcare
numbers come in, they firm up. That'll
[43:50] be something that we'll be gladly glad
to cut. Um, otherwise, um, we do have
[43:54] the clear doc document in there and
Sarah can bring it up maybe or do you
[43:57] have access to bring it up, Ian? I do.
>> Um, and Sarah can talk to any points
[44:02] that she wants to highlight there, too.
I think it's um, you know, you've got
[44:05] the PDF in your packet, but also the
link is available online and I think
[44:09] send
>> everybody the link.
[44:10] » Yeah, I think she emailed it out to
everybody. We will have that on the
[44:12] city's web page and we also will put
that on Facebook. So, if members of the
[44:15] public want to take a look at the budget
and it's got the um, audited financials
[44:19] from 25. It's got this year's budget
number and then it has the budget number
[44:23] for 27. So, people will be able to see
kind of that that bar chart and the
[44:26] graphs. they can kind of see where the
trend is. Uh we don't have a lot of
[44:30] capital items next year. Um in fact um
you know there are a number of areas
[44:35] where they're they reduce their capital
cost to a certain extent. Um and you
[44:39] know we're hoping that interest rates
come down a little bit as well as fuel
[44:42] cost. Fuel cost is something that was
kind of an unplanned force spike this
[44:46] year. Um and that's on a federal level.
There's not a lot of control we have
[44:50] over that. Um so some departments see a
lot more use of that. Obviously the
[44:54] police department sees a lot more use
there. They also have some more capital
[44:57] items. I know that. Um and and the good
news is Josh is going to present that in
[45:01] September. He'll be here. I think we're
planning on uh the police department and
[45:05] also public works parks. So, some of the
biggest general fund line items will be
[45:10] here to talk about their their needs
because there's a lot of technological,
[45:14] you know, changes coming for Josh and
for the body warn cameras that kind of
[45:17] that data stuff is still um I don't want
to say it's it's exploding in cost, but
[45:22] you know, it's going up pretty fast and
we're hoping that if we lock in some
[45:27] longer term agreements, maybe it'll kind
of mitigate some of those costs, but it
[45:30] seems like every year there's another
thing the state requires or something
[45:33] like that. So um yeah, otherwise we
consider the staff to be fully staffed
[45:37] at this time. There is um if you look at
the admin budget, um we do have some
[45:42] additional money for training there um
for additional staffing. We we have been
[45:47] notified that one of our staff uh will
be retiring, two of them actually in the
[45:51] next year or so. But um we want to be
able to possibly bring some people on a
[45:55] little early to do some training in
house because um last time on the
[45:59] finance department it was difficult um
hiring outsource. Thankfully, we have
[46:03] some good um you know, clerk um kind of
employees possibly may be able to fill
[46:08] Linda's job internally. Um but you never
know. And we just felt like it would be
[46:13] it would be beneficial to have that
budgeted um ahead of time just so
[46:16] because we know that those those
vacancies are coming in the next 18
[46:19] months. So,
I don't know, Sarah, if you have
[46:22] anything else you want to highlight on
there. No,
[46:25] » if you want.
>> But yeah, take a look at it. You know,
[46:27] we'll have those department head
presentations in September. Um, as I
[46:31] said, hopefully did we would we know
when healthcare is coming in? Did we get
[46:34] that earlier date?
>> Coming till October.
[46:36] » October. Okay. I know in the past we've
we haven't gotten till next year. We're
[46:39] going to change it so we get our numbers
in July. We're going to change it to a
[46:43] December 1st start date.
>> Like to see some highlight.
[46:47] » The insurance would go through the end
of the year, but the rates would change
[46:51] December 1st, but that means we get our
new rates July 1st.
[46:56] » It's okay. So, your HSA plan, your
insurance runs calendar year, but um the
[47:04] the um rate change would start December
1st
[47:10] where next year when we do this,
we can actually stay in the 27 rate. So,
[47:16] whatever we get for next year, we would
renew at that same rate.
[47:23] » Okay.
the way Bill was explaining it to me.
[47:28] » So,
>> because we wouldn't change plans, we'd
[47:32] just keep going.
>> Okay.
[47:36] » So, that's our plan for next year.
>> Yeah.
[47:39] » Because that would make budgeting a lot
easier.
[47:41] » Yeah.
>> Right. To to know earlier would give us
[47:43] that shity. Absolutely.
>> So, yeah, if you have any questions,
[47:46] feel free to contact me or contact
Sarah, reach out to her. Um, glad to run
[47:50] through it with you. If you want to go
line by line, we can do that. you know,
[47:53] it's easier when we do it one-on-one or
two-on-one or whatever, but you know, uh
[47:57] the budget's all going to be available
online and uh you know, we're certainly
[48:01] looking for feedback on it, hoping that
uh we can get that number whittleled
[48:04] down. Absolutely. So,
[48:10] » all right. Thank you for all that work
on that.
[48:13] Uh next, administrators report.
>> Sure. And I'll just uh highlight a few
[48:18] things here kind of um LGA announced uh
the new amounts there. Uh our numbers
[48:23] are pretty flat. You know, it's they
didn't do any increase at the state
[48:26] level. Um so it's it's pretty flat, but
thankfully that's been certified. So
[48:30] we'll receive that funding for next
year. That still is a good chunk of
[48:33] change there. Uh state revenue tops the
forecast by about 400 million in July.
[48:37] So Minnesota Management and Budget
released their report. So, you know, it
[48:41] sounds like their numbers are
stabilizing. So that's a that's a
[48:44] positive. Obviously, they'll have their
their late November, early December
[48:48] report, and they'll use that for their
next two-year budget. So, the state's
[48:51] kind of in the middle of their benium
budget. Um the 27 street and utility
[48:56] projects. Um thankfully, we're coming to
a close. Uh hopefully, right, give
[49:01] Brandon some thanks there for pushing
and proddding people along. But, um
[49:04] Southwest Reconstruct that it's been all
paved. The the bottom coat is anyways.
[49:08] They haven't got the top coat on as far
as I know yet. A lot of the sod's been
[49:11] laid out there. Um, Main Street, uh,
seal coating and striping, as far as I
[49:15] know, it went very well. You know, we
had some folks who say, "Oh, you know, a
[49:19] lot of the work got done before
businesses even opened up in the
[49:21] morning." So, that was great. I think it
looks really sharp. Um, they did widen
[49:24] the parking lane, so we're really happy
about that. Um, so that's done. Um,
[49:28] water tower project, to be honest with
you, the water tower itself has made a
[49:31] lot of progress. We're still kind of
waiting on the booster station, and
[49:33] that's a matter of when that shows up,
they can hook it up and we can actually
[49:37] get things going. that that's, you know,
something that Brandon can probably
[49:40] answer before me and maybe he can't even
because it's kind of a that's the tough
[49:43] part of the of the uh the market is
supposed to be coming. So,
[49:46] » yeah. So, hopefully that um otherwise uh
the Reagan edition, if you've been up
[49:50] that way, they've made a ton of progress
up there, too. The retaining walls
[49:54] almost finished. A lot of units have
been built. Um so that you know, and you
[49:58] know, I haven't been in. I'd like to I'd
like to get in see what one of those
[50:01] units look like because it's it's good
to be able to talk about it. Same thing
[50:03] for the fourth lane flats apartment
building that has some occupants. I
[50:07] don't know how many yet, but it's it's
up and operational. Um, we'll watch how
[50:11] that goes. Um, Brandon's going to talk
about street feasibility. Let's see
[50:15] here. 27 budget. We we kind of talked
about that already. I did include some
[50:19] numbers in the packet um from Dodge
Cent's audit. So, their ambulance fund
[50:25] performed well last year, so that's a
plus. Um, you know, I've got a note in
[50:29] here. You know, in the past, we
contributed 5,000 for training
[50:31] equipment. Last year, we contributed
12,000. Um if the city council would
[50:35] like to continue to contribute at that
higher level um certainly you can direct
[50:39] direct me to you know we we can
certainly see if we can find some
[50:42] funding for them um you know planning
and zoning talked about that and then uh
[50:46] the farmers market which we'll talk
about during the round table at the end.
[50:49] So that's my report. Then I've got a
couple other things in here. As I said I
[50:54] mentioned the Dodge County
>> Yep. My Dodge County ambulance audit uh
[50:58] numbers there. Um we've got our
conservation report from the electrical
[51:01] system. uh the report from the state
revenue projects and then one of the
[51:05] items we talked about with Mr. Bubani
tonight would be that I5 the electrical
[51:08] borrowing and basically what I'm looking
for from council is direction if you'd
[51:12] like to proceed with that this year or
not. Um otherwise I need to let folks
[51:16] know that we're not going to be
proceeding with the electrical
[51:18] borrowing. We kind of will change change
gears. Included in your package you do
[51:21] have I5 you have that staff report. Um,
basically what this funding would be
[51:26] going for would be the um, substation on
the north side. Last month is a good
[51:31] example where we had that during the
fair, you know, Excel had a a
[51:36] transmission line fail and I think uh,
Kassen was dark pretty much for 2 hours
[51:42] thereabouts from about 6:00 until 8. You
know, there are a couple points of
[51:46] failure in that system and that was a
big one. Obviously, you know, we run off
[51:49] of um, Excel's transmission system. In
the case of this substation, we'd be
[51:53] looking at it going off of Simpa's
transmission. Um, Simpa's southern
[51:57] Minnesota power. They're based out of
Rochester. So, um, we think it might
[52:00] give us an option, you know, opportunity
to have a little bit more diversity in
[52:03] the in the power supply for the city.
Um, still can't guarantee there's never
[52:07] going to be a failure obviously u when
they have a major transmission line goes
[52:10] down like that. But, um, that's what
that project that's what the money's
[52:13] for. That's what it's going toward is is
that substation project. So, I know for
[52:17] us, we're looking at direction is as the
council, you know, if if we can get a
[52:21] motion to move forward with that, that's
what we're looking for. Um, Mr. Bonnie's
[52:24] kind of run some of the numbers and he's
got it here for you. We won't be
[52:27] increasing rates for it. It's a matter
of um we have prepared for that funding
[52:31] wise. So, we think it's a good project
to provide more reliability for the
[52:34] electric grid.
>> And where is it going again?
[52:38] » Um, well, that's one of the reasons we
approved that plat there for the the
[52:42] public works. It would actually be going
north of the north of the public works
[52:47] building. And so there's the the public
works building that fronts off of 16th
[52:50] Street and then there's a building
behind that that's kind of long and it's
[52:53] got like the salt sand storage. That's
the electrical building right now where
[52:56] they got most of their stuff stored. So
it would be going north of that.
[52:59] » So what we'd end up doing is right now
we tap off of the on 16th Street we tap
[53:04] off of the Excel sub there. So what we
would do is we would run a high trans
[53:07] high voltage transmission from that
substation, the new one, down onto
[53:11] Simpa's line, which also runs along 16th
Street, and then that would run over to
[53:14] the Byron sub where their line goes, and
then their line proceeds into um
[53:19] Rochester. They also have a 161. So
that's a 69 KV. I know we're using
[53:24] terminology here. 69 KV is it's the
lowest level of high voltage
[53:27] transmission. The next level would be
161. So they also have a 161 line that
[53:31] runs along the railroad tracks. So if
you kind of if you go out you know if
[53:35] you can kind of almost you can see it
from 14 when you so the idea would be in
[53:39] the future eventually you know he talked
about second barring potentially the
[53:43] idea would be to create a ring around
castm so you'd have two substations you
[53:47] have one off of the 161 line and one off
of the 69 so that if you did have
[53:51] something happen for example a tornado
or something like that where it knocks
[53:55] out one of those substations what you
can do is you can shunt the whole city
[53:58] onto the other one and then you would
have that reliability so you wouldn't
[54:01] see a failure with the
So obviously that's in the future, but
[54:06] we do think that it would be beneficial
long term for for the community. So
[54:10] because even with all the efficiencies,
the power demand is is not going down
[54:13] and we're still seeing quite a bit of
growth. So
[54:23] » how big would the substation be?
>> What's that?
[54:26] » How big? Um, well, I think it would be
smaller than what Excel's just for
[54:30] comparison purposes. You know, if you go
past Excel sub, we would it would
[54:34] probably be smaller than that. What we
would probably do is we would we would
[54:37] fence off an area similar to what Excel
has fenced off
[54:41] » and we would have two spots for two
tubs. So, you'd have one 20 megawatt tub
[54:46] and then you'd have space for another
just because you want to have that once
[54:49] again the duplicate, you know, and if
you're putting it in then you want to
[54:52] make sure you size it right because
after the fact
[54:54] » once you, you know, you can't really go
back, you know. So Excel like when they
[54:57] upgraded their sub three or four years
ago, they had to basically go in and cut
[55:01] down and tear out and put more gravel
and stuff. We think it would be better
[55:03] just to have that prepared kind of
already ahead. Even if it's just the
[55:06] fencing, we could put a concrete slab in
there later. That's not a big issue. But
[55:10] um so I mean I would I would guess
that's a 5 acre parcel. So I'm guessing
[55:14] we'd probably look at about uh 3/4 of an
acre to an acre we'd want to maybe have
[55:18] fenced off.
>> I mean I know it's something we need.
[55:22] It's something we've been talking about
for a while. Yeah.
[55:25] » So, you're looking at lot three.
[55:31] » Yeah, that's right. Exactly. Yep. That'd
be that lot. That's, you know, behind
[55:33] there
>> because that's the public.
[55:35] » That's Flood Works and then there's the
electric building and then Yep. That's
[55:37] 4.6. It would be part of that. Yep.
Okay.
[55:41] » And that'd be the other, you know,
consideration is we'd have our battery
[55:44] storage in that area too potentially.
So, it would work in tandem. Yeah.
[55:54] What are you you looking for something
tonight?
[55:56] » So yeah, if I can get a motion to
proceed with uh preparing a borrowing,
[55:59] you know, you're still going to you
know, as you know in the past, Mr. Ruban
[56:02] will bring the documents in. You'll have
an opportunity if something doesn't look
[56:05] right, then at that time we wouldn't
proceed with it, but we want to get that
[56:08] so I can kind of task him to get moving
on that. Do a rating call um with Sarah
[56:12] and with with Mike and then we'd, you
know, be able to set that up. So
[56:16] probably early this fall, maybe October,
we would try and commit that borrowing
[56:19] so that it gets on the calendar before
the end of the year.
[56:22] » So just to be super clear, this having
this substation would diversify a little
[56:27] bit more our power coming into town. It
would provide backups for emergencies
[56:33] like we had with that.
>> Absolutely. I mean that that's probably
[56:36] the biggest the biggest plus to it is,
you know, in an emergency if Simpline
[56:40] Line failed, you could still run off of
Excel if you if you needed to. Right.
[56:44] » Right. And that's you know threequarters
of the year we don't have a lot of
[56:47] issues you know fall winter spring cast
is a very heavy loaded summer it's air
[56:52] conditioning users and so we go all the
way from 2 and a half megawatts of load
[56:57] on a on a kind of a quiet day in the
winter all the way up to 14 megawatts
[57:02] potentially of load in the summer. So I
mean it's a you know big big difference
[57:06] but but yeah I mean that that's where we
want to just provide that option for the
[57:09] residents. So, and
all this borrowing this comes out of the
[57:14] electric fund.
>> That's right. Yeah. And it's been it's
[57:17] something we do do the rate study every
5 years for. We prepared for it for a
[57:20] project of this nature. Kind of that
handout he's giving you, you know, kind
[57:23] of breaks down where we anticipate it
would be around $630,000 a year in
[57:28] borrowing, you know, payments. But
that's easily covered by our free cash
[57:31] flow in the electric system right now.
So,
[57:34] » because I just wanted to make sure that
people know if we were looking at it's
[57:37] not coming out of the levy. It's coming
up.
[57:39] » No, absolutely not. No. Sep. Totally
separate. And that's not why we run the
[57:43] utilities the way we do. So,
[57:48] » anybody else got any questions for Tim?
Concerns?
[57:53] » I just think it might be a good idea.
Um, this town isn't getting any smaller
[57:59] and that's one of the things that
creates a big problem in the near
[58:04] future, I see, without having an
upgrade.
[58:10] With that, I would look to for a motion
for staff to move forward with
[58:17] the electric system borrowing.
>> Electric system borrowing.
[58:21] » I'll make that motion.
>> Thank you, Mel. Do we have a second?
[58:24] » I'll second.
>> Thank you, Sheldon. All in favor?
[58:27] » I thank you, everybody.
>> And that's all I've got. I think that
[58:31] was enough.
>> Okay. Up next we have the engineers
[58:37] report.
>> All right, more big items. So uh before
[58:40] we jump into the two items on the
agenda, just wanted to note uh water
[58:43] tower painting. Um the painting
contractor is looking at it um city
[58:46] staff um citing the location of the
casting logo. So I think I sent uh
[58:50] council location one on the south face,
northeast and northwest corner of the
[58:53] tower. Three logos similar to the way
the other three other two are painted.
[58:57] Um, so unless council provides other
direction myself and I think I'll have
[59:01] Ian come out tomorrow morning after our
staff meeting, we'll cite those with the
[59:04] tower contract unless you guys have
other directions or thoughts. So
[59:07] » I just have a question.
>> Yeah, Ryan. Ryan, he's school's out. So
[59:10] Ian, you're off the hook, but
>> yeah. No, I have we have you worked with
[59:14] other cities that have looked at
um
[59:19] selling space on their water towers. Uh
we do sell space in our water towers for
[59:23] uh communications
>> logos.
[59:25] » Um no, I'll be quite honest. Like a
personal level, I'm surprised we haven't
[59:29] put uh banners and electrical um LED um
sponsorships on our water tower to be
[59:34] quite honest with you, but that's just
kind of my thing.
[59:36] » That's it's a thing now and I was just
wondering if that's
[59:39] » I haven't seen any towers that have had
it. Okay. I'm surprised that we haven't
[59:42] to be honest with you.
>> Yeah, I know we we rent space on them,
[59:45] but I more marketing based. Yeah. I
didn't know if that was something that
[59:48] was coming down or if you've heard of
other cities that have looked into it.
[59:51] » It's not or even just you know logos for
you know what
[59:53] » businesses. Yeah. Mhm.
>> Not that we want to but if it brings in
[59:57] revenue. I didn't know if it was
something that's becoming the norm
[1:00:00] business. It is
>> yeah
[1:00:05] question.
>> Um just lighting them is the only thing
[1:00:07] that we've seen from the from the ground
up. Rosemont St. Clouds um got a nice
[1:00:11] one that's lit and then we light one
from St. Charles too there. So, so we
[1:00:16] can talk about if you know if looks nice
during the day if we want to light that
[1:00:19] more, we can have that conversation.
>> Yeah, I was just curious area. So,
[1:00:23] » yeah. No, that they would like that.
>> St. Charles over by the interstate. St.
[1:00:26] Cloud on the interstate.
>> I understand that. No, I was just
[1:00:28] curious.
>> I'm I'm surprised it hasn't been a
[1:00:31] bigger discussion on our history to be
honest with you. So
[1:00:34] » So, okay. Unless you got any other
comments, we'll plan on doing that
[1:00:37] tomorrow.
>> All right. So, I'll jump into the agenda
[1:00:39] tonight. Um, first item is First and
Second Avenue Northwest Reconstruction.
[1:00:44] Um this is something that was discussed
at the council workshop um and also
[1:00:48] discussed tonight with Mike Bubani in
your financial kind of forecast and
[1:00:52] foreshadowing. Um so in your council
packet is three items. Number one, the
[1:00:55] feasibility report. Number two, we're
going to ask for resolution calling
[1:00:58] public hearing on the improvements. And
then finally, a professional service
[1:01:00] agreement with WHKS to to start uh doing
some engineering. So um to kind of close
[1:01:06] on that, um ultimately um that's what
we're going to be asked tonight to start
[1:01:09] incurring some significant costs for
this project. So, if there's anything
[1:01:12] that we need to discuss or delay, um,
now is the time, um, because we're going
[1:01:16] to start some significant work on the
project if we move forward, I think
[1:01:18] tonight. Um, so that's where we're at on
the highest level. Um, to talk about the
[1:01:23] assessment process. I think we may have
may one counselor that may not be real
[1:01:26] familiar with it. Um, the other ones
have been part of the process directly.
[1:01:30] So, um, it's been been uh, so they're
well aware of it. Um, so tonight is step
[1:01:34] number one of the special assessment
process. We're going to um discuss the
[1:01:38] report, potentially have the resolution
to approve the report and call the first
[1:01:41] hearing on the improvements. Um and that
will be a hearing about a month from now
[1:01:45] at your council meeting to thumbs up or
thumbs down the project. After a hearing
[1:01:49] with the property owners, I'll do a
presentation going over this report. Um
[1:01:53] you'll hear comments um and then you'll
have a decision to continue on at that
[1:01:57] point. Um assuming we are moving on. Um
we will work through the winner. We'll
[1:02:01] have a polar meeting with the property
owners. We will bid the project. we'll
[1:02:03] get some better cost and then you'll
have the final hearing on the
[1:02:06] assessments which is the drop dead we
have to decide the assessments we're
[1:02:10] going to talk about some numbers tonight
um but we're not setting those if
[1:02:13] there's questions comments that we want
to bring to the first hearing more than
[1:02:16] happy to do that um so we're not you
know the more clear that we can be
[1:02:19] throughout the process the better
because we are proposing special
[1:02:22] assessments and that can be politically
unpopular um or it takes political
[1:02:26] capital to do that uh we all know why we
we do do that um so that's that's where
[1:02:30] we're at on the highest level um so if
there's no questions I'll jump into the
[1:02:33] report um and then obviously have
questions at the end um as needed. Okay.
[1:02:38] Um so again this is First and Second
Avenue Northwest reconstruction um is
[1:02:42] what we're calling it. Um this is
ultimately and there's a figure um one
[1:02:45] in the report but uh is bounded by Third
Avenue um to the west which has been
[1:02:50] recently reconstructed in 2017. Uh Main
Street to the south that was recently
[1:02:55] reconstructed in the early 2000s. It's
not so recent anymore but generally a
[1:02:59] newer street and we've been providing
some maintenance on that to maintain
[1:03:02] that street here. here as we talked
about tonight. Um and then on the east
[1:03:04] of Highway 57, which obviously has been
reconstructed in the last couple years,
[1:03:08] um full reconstruction up to Third
Street. Um so kind of three blocks north
[1:03:12] there. Um and then the two alleys behind
the businesses on Main Street from 57 to
[1:03:16] 2nd Avenue. Um we are not planning from
Second Avenue over to Third because
[1:03:19] that's recently been repaved and there's
a small amount of infrastructure. Um so
[1:03:23] we don't think the bang for the buck is
quite there yet. So staff is comfortable
[1:03:26] to not um include that alleyway. Um, so
that's what's included uh in the project
[1:03:31] for footprint. Um, existing conditions.
Um, when I go to public works and say,
[1:03:35] "Where's your worst area in town? Where
are we going next?" After we did third,
[1:03:39] fourth, and fifth, and southwest 57,
it's this area here. Um, if you go down
[1:03:43] the alleyway now, it's blocked off
because we had another catch basin
[1:03:46] collapse um by CAM Telecom. Um, if we
fixed one last year, we had a sewer
[1:03:51] collapse or partially collapse. Um,
every time they jut that, they get a lot
[1:03:54] of sand. So, um, it's in a state of dis
disrepair. Um it's had it useful life.
[1:03:59] Um some of the streets on the uh first
street going into um HY there is in
[1:04:05] really rough shape. Um so ultimately
that pavement is in um rough shape. So
[1:04:09] we're looking at uh replacing that. Um
that's existing condition. Proposed
[1:04:13] construction very typical of the
previous reconstruction we did in third,
[1:04:16] fourth, and fifth or southwest. Full
reconstruction rebuilding the roadway.
[1:04:21] Um drain tile behind the back of the
curb. Sub drain services. We don't have
[1:04:24] some pump pumping to the street. New
curb and gutter driveways. um new sewer,
[1:04:28] water, um increased storm sewer system
to prevent flooding and reduce the
[1:04:32] frequency of flooding um like we've done
in um typically all of our
[1:04:35] reconstructions. Um there is some notes
here. Um we ultimately stubbed out some
[1:04:40] utilities from third, fourth, and fifth
and 57 um to accommodate that, including
[1:04:45] some larger storm sewers. We're kind of
setting this project all up ready to go.
[1:04:48] Um and then we also have some long
services that kind of go down the
[1:04:51] boulevard. We'll extend some mains out.
did that a lot of that on third, fourth,
[1:04:54] and fifth um to ultimately so property
owners don't own services all the way um
[1:04:59] to a side street to kind of square them
up and have them with traditional
[1:05:02] service. Um there's a couple blocks that
are um don't have um sidewalk. There's
[1:05:07] some gaps there specifically on First
Street that we're looking at filling. Um
[1:05:11] and if you look jumping ahead to the
schedule, we do have a public meeting
[1:05:14] coming up. So that's some of the things
we'll talk about. um if you um continue
[1:05:18] with the first hearing, uh we want to
ultimately sit down with those property
[1:05:21] owners and and have some conversations
on what they feel about sidewalks. We
[1:05:24] feel pretty strong it's in the downtown
district. There's heavy pedestrian uses
[1:05:27] there directly to our um local H high.
So um we have included that um in our
[1:05:32] cost estimates, but again tonight we're
considering report. We'll work on final
[1:05:36] design back as we proceed. Um street
rightway and easements. Um nothing
[1:05:41] really of the discuss there of
importance. Uh plenty of cost. You can
[1:05:45] see we're at about $4.7 million project
that includes everything. Um, as we said
[1:05:49] today of again an engineer looking at
something in a short amount of time just
[1:05:52] come up with general cost there. Um, and
then recommend recommendations and
[1:05:56] schedule. We do have a city assessment
policy of 30% total roadway. That's what
[1:06:01] we applied on third, fourth, and fifth
southwest. 57 was a little muddled with
[1:06:05] the state project, but ultimately we
kind of made it right um of that same
[1:06:09] amount of a traditional street. Um, so
you can see the total amount to be
[1:06:13] assessor is just under 800,000 based on
that policy. Um, it's a little bit
[1:06:17] unique. Um, it's not as residential as
Southwest or third, fourth, and fifth
[1:06:21] was. Um, but we ultimately apply the RE
unit. Uh, we have 159 which is higher
[1:06:28] than what we generally see. So again, we
don't need to work on that number yet
[1:06:30] tonight. Um, as we move forward, that
number comes down and it's a non-issue.
[1:06:34] Um, but I'll hold on the conversation of
talking about RUS to maybe the end. Um
[1:06:39] but ultimately we are proposing our use.
Um we can consider that because we are
[1:06:43] ultimately assessing um some of the
alleyways. So maybe we want to do that a
[1:06:47] little differently. It's going to be a
discussion um later on tonight or um in
[1:06:51] the future. Um so moving forward to
schedule again um this is the first um
[1:06:56] consideration of the feasibility report
and then a resolution to call the public
[1:07:00] hearing um on the hearing on the
improvements. We get to work, talk to
[1:07:04] neighbors, do the design, come back this
winter, um present the plans, go off for
[1:07:09] bids. We have bids we know hard to
mount. Therefore, we can talk about the
[1:07:12] final assessment mounts with the
property owners at that time. That'll be
[1:07:14] this winter. Um and then assuming
everything moves forward, we finalize
[1:07:19] the assessments at that hearing. We
award contract we're constructing in 27
[1:07:22] and finishing things up. And as Tim
mentioned earlier in the meeting, uh we
[1:07:25] kind of pair this project down not only
for financing, but what's a realistic
[1:07:28] project size that a contractor can get
done. Um, so that's what we have before
[1:07:32] you tonight. Um, construction cost. I
won't go in detail there, but you can
[1:07:36] see we broke it up into street,
sidewalk, sanitary sewer, storm sewer.
[1:07:41] Um, and then water mane um to show the
grand total there. Um, with the idea
[1:07:45] that the enterprise funds are going to
be participating in paying for the
[1:07:48] project, the portions that are not
assessed. Um, so we break that up to
[1:07:51] help um Sarah and staff work on that.
Um, and then I'll go to the figure
[1:07:56] number one with all the pretty colors on
it. Um, should look familiar. We've um
[1:07:59] seen these before on 57 and Southwest
and we assess those projects. But uh um
[1:08:04] in blue is a one RU. Um a house is a
house is a house. We're rebuilding
[1:08:08] neighborhoods. Everybody in that
neighborhood if they own a traditional
[1:08:11] size house gets one RU um for their
portion. You can see on the westand side
[1:08:15] there we have some residential houses in
purple that are a half. Um those were
[1:08:19] assessed a half with the Third Avenue
project. So we're only going to assess
[1:08:22] them half to make a hole with the
overriding concept that one RU one
[1:08:26] residential equivalent is what they
would be assessed in modern time
[1:08:30] assessments. Similarly on 57 there in
red we don't have any assessments there
[1:08:34] because they were assessed a full one
with the 57 project. So um again with
[1:08:38] the spirit that they're one RU um they
would be zero. Um you can see some other
[1:08:42] ones in yellow there. Um those are
currently four RUS. You can see HY um
[1:08:46] there would be four. they did get
assessed four on the third avenue in the
[1:08:50] back side of their project. So that'd be
eight. Um and that is all broken down um
[1:08:54] in the notes in the role that I have on
the next sheet. Um and then similarly
[1:08:58] cam telecom there about four houses for
RUS is kind of our thinking there. Um in
[1:09:04] green there one and a half for those
properties there. They're larger
[1:09:07] commercial properties so you know maybe
they have larger needs wer water and
[1:09:12] sewer services etc. more frontage um
incurring more cost there is one and a
[1:09:16] half reu um similar there for u Denmark
um that property there couple properties
[1:09:22] they did get one on the 57 project but
they also have an alley access so there
[1:09:27] could be potentially some more benefit
there and then all the properties along
[1:09:31] but budding the alley at a half RU um
they were assessed with Main Street all
[1:09:35] their sewer and water services come off
of Main Street but they do have an alley
[1:09:38] access so the thought there is there's
some benefit to having a new alley and
[1:09:42] storm sewer through So I've assigned
that to half. We struggled internally on
[1:09:46] kind of what we'd recommend. So I think
that could be a point of discussion. Um
[1:09:50] but I think it should be something it
shouldn't should not be zero is going to
[1:09:54] be our recommendation. So if it's a half
0.25 a full one that's unfortunately as
[1:09:58] a council you guys get to make those
hard decisions. I can only recommend. So
[1:10:02] um that's where I that's where I fell on
as a half. I thought that was a good
[1:10:04] starting point. Um and ultimately where
where we were at um and we came up with
[1:10:10] the the RUS we came up with. Um so again
we'll have soon we move forward in that
[1:10:16] hearing we can start talking about these
REU concept with property owners. This
[1:10:20] is above and beyond what technically we
have to share with them but myself as an
[1:10:23] engineer to get the numbers I have to do
it. So let's share it and get it out
[1:10:25] there early. We've done that on other
projects and then we can start kicking
[1:10:29] things around on where things land um
after the fact. So, um, that's the
[1:10:33] pretty picture of the RUS. Um, breaking
that down again to RUS, you take the 30%
[1:10:38] of the street cost, calculate your RUS,
um, and then come up with the
[1:10:42] assessment. And I do have some notes in
there because it is important. Um, we're
[1:10:45] even going to send notices of the ones
that were zeros because, um, they're
[1:10:48] part of the project. So, I want to be
crystal clear. Um, we owe that to
[1:10:51] taxpayers and these property owners why
they'd get zero or why somebody'd be off
[1:10:55] the hook, if you will, will not off the
hook. They got it when we did 57. Um, so
[1:10:59] that's why the notes are on there. um to
be transparent. So then you could start
[1:11:03] sizing up why, you know, why is HY only
four? Well, they got four on third,
[1:11:07] fourth, and fifth. So they're
technically eight. So if eight's the
[1:11:09] number, well then let's roll with it. Um
if the council directs otherwise, we can
[1:11:13] we can we can adjust and then obviously
when we have the final assessment
[1:11:16] hearing, they can object to that in
person and then we can even we can even
[1:11:20] adjust it at that point if needed. So um
that's the the gist of what we got.
[1:11:24] Again, the assessment, I won't go into
that unless you like to go into more
[1:11:27] depth. Um but that's the feasibility
report. Um, and I'll pause there, mayor,
[1:11:31] if anybody has any questions. Happy to
answer them.
[1:11:34] » So, anybody got any questions for
Brandon?
[1:11:39] Okay,
we're good.
[1:11:41] » All right. Easy off. Well, then like I
said, there is a resolution um to call
[1:11:44] on the public hearing on the
improvements um ultimately a resolution
[1:11:48] laying out um that you've considered it
um deemed it necessary um to ultimately
[1:11:52] move forward with this hearing. Um, and
then attached to the resolution is the
[1:11:58] notice of public hearing. That is the
notice that will be sent to the property
[1:12:02] owners. Um, so Linda and I got some work
to get some mailings out to these
[1:12:04] property owners. Um, and then the
hearing will be held on September 23rd,
[1:12:08] um, 2026. Um, and the impact assessment
will also go in the newspaper. So, the
[1:12:13] special assessment process is pretty
rigorous. Um, and we will send notices
[1:12:17] to property owners in the newspaper um,
based on the assessment role that you
[1:12:20] guys has considered. So, I'd ask for
your consideration of that resolution.
[1:12:25] Okay.
I would look for a motion
[1:12:29] for the resolution calling a public
hearing on improvements on First and
[1:12:32] Second Avenue Northwest reconstruction.
>> I'll make the motion.
[1:12:35] » Ryan, do we have a second?
>> I'll second.
[1:12:38] » Mel, all in favor?
>> I.
[1:12:41] » All right. Thank you.
>> All right. And then last related to this
[1:12:44] item, um, is our engineering contract to
ultimately um, do the engineering from
[1:12:49] start to finish? um meaning survey all
the way through construction including
[1:12:52] the work that we just did here tonight.
Um so you can see that professional
[1:12:56] service agreement in your council packet
um includes project management meetings
[1:13:00] um topographic survey feasibility report
we just presented preliminary final
[1:13:04] design assessment assistance we'll work
with staff on getting those assessments
[1:13:08] um processed calling the hearing get in
the newspaper etc. um construction
[1:13:12] administration, so having weekly
construction meetings, um getting
[1:13:16] construction staking, etc., and then
observation, um to observe the
[1:13:20] contractor and report quantities back so
we make payments like we did today on
[1:13:23] some other projects, um is all included
in that engineering agreement. So, I'll
[1:13:26] pause there and answer any questions you
may have, mayor and councel.
[1:13:29] » Does anybody get any questions for
Brandon? No.
[1:13:33] » So, we'll look for a motion to approve
the professional service agreements with
[1:13:37] the engineering department.
>> I'll make the motion to approve the
[1:13:40] professional service agreement. Brian,
do we have a second?
[1:13:43] » A second.
>> Thank you, Sheldon. All in favor?
[1:13:45] » I
>> I.
[1:13:48] » That concludes that item, I think,
mayor.
[1:13:50] » So, move on to the second item. Uh, the
2026 lead service line replacement. So,
[1:13:54] I think lead service line, I think, we
all should be experts in that now. So,
[1:13:57] it's been a it's been a it's been a
process, but uh past actions for the
[1:14:01] council's been um ultimately the the
federal government through the Minnesota
[1:14:05] PFAS um had some funding available for
us to go find services. So we went door
[1:14:09] to door um through our sump pump
inspection program. We had some
[1:14:12] self-reporting um activities. Um we did
some work on the back end looking at
[1:14:16] newer houses. Um so we ultimately found
some services that have um in our case
[1:14:20] is galvanized. We don't have any lead
but galvanized is the same as lead in
[1:14:23] their eyes. Um to be ultimately
replaced. You approved us to move
[1:14:26] forward with engaging the PFA to
ultimately secure some funding to get
[1:14:30] the replacement. So tonight asking for
your consideration of a resolution to
[1:14:34] award the bid uh for the 2026 lead
service line replacement project. Um as
[1:14:39] you can see there the low bid is CAM
excavation at 195,841
[1:14:44] and I'm sad to report CAM excavation has
nothing to do with KM. It actually is a
[1:14:48] contractor out of Mano. So I know we're
getting a local local person but we are
[1:14:51] not. Um and you can see I had nine bids
there um as we bid the project on
[1:14:56] Tuesday. Um, so we surprisingly have
seen a fair amount of these contractors
[1:15:00] bidding the work, which is good. Um, Kim
Excavation also got Manville's um,
[1:15:03] project, so we're going to be working
with them. Um, but they're relatively
[1:15:06] newer. Um, some of the recent references
I've checked out. Um, so we're prepared
[1:15:11] to recommend them um, to award tonight.
Uh, with that said, I will note on the
[1:15:16] bottom paragraph of the resolution, it
does say conditional approval for the
[1:15:20] Minnesota PFA, which is ultimately
paying for this project. Um, and is
[1:15:24] ultimately you are, um, resolving
tonight that the proper city official
[1:15:27] authorized execute that agreement with
the PFA, which we don't have in our
[1:15:31] hands yet. So unless you're
uncomfortable with that, um I think
[1:15:33] myself and staff um are ultimately
looking for you guys to approve this
[1:15:37] with that condition that we um will
assign that agreement or are authorized
[1:15:41] to sign that agreement with the PFA to
ultimately get reimbursed for this work.
[1:15:45] Um there's a small chance there be some
cost associated with this project, but I
[1:15:49] don't think we're there yet. Um if
things don't go well, which we're a
[1:15:52] little uneasy about, but it is what it
is. We think most of it will be in re
[1:15:55] reimbured, but if we don't find some
refined some other things, um we'll have
[1:15:59] that conversation. But um not too
concerned about that yet. So I'll pause
[1:16:03] there answering any questions there. So
there's if you're there there's a cap on
[1:16:08] the amount that you can do per service.
So depending on what we find and we have
[1:16:12] some con construction consistency, we
may exceed that which is $25,000 a
[1:16:16] service. We're like 18 right now. So
there could be some fluctuation on how
[1:16:20] the bids ultimately are paid out. So if
we exceed that cap, but we're not
[1:16:24] expecting it, but there is a cap on how
things work out. So, um, we have an 10
[1:16:29] in there and you can see it's, you know,
it's less than that. So,
[1:16:35] and I presumably the city's interested
in the agreement with the PFA to recover
[1:16:38] the costly for our property owners. And
we've got a fair amount of
[1:16:42] participation, too. We've sent notices
in the agreement that the council
[1:16:44] approved to the property owners to
ultimately sign off on us doing the work
[1:16:48] before uh we go do the work to limit
some liability in the city side. So,
[1:16:52] we're getting those received and some of
our staff have met with those property
[1:16:55] owners too already. So, um, we're off
and running and it's a good service.
[1:16:59] Somebody has it. Um, reach out to that
number that's on there, learn about the
[1:17:02] service or call city hall to, um, learn
more, have them verify your service cuz,
[1:17:06] um, it's not going to go away if it's if
it's there. So, here's a chance to get
[1:17:09] it done for free. So,
okay. Does anybody got any questions for
[1:17:15] Brandon on this?
I would take a motion to approve the
[1:17:19] resolution awarding
the bid for the 20 26 lead service line
[1:17:25] replacement.
[1:17:28] » Thank you, M.
>> We have a second.
[1:17:31] » Second.
>> Thank you, Ryan. All in favor?
[1:17:33] » I opposed. Motion carried. Thank you.
>> It's all I had tonight. 16th Street
[1:17:38] should be other than I guess not all I
had tonight. All other than 16th Street
[1:17:42] should be open here I think next week.
So I think they just got some signage.
[1:17:45] They striped it. So people are still
going down it. I seen they put the road
[1:17:48] close sign back up.
>> Yeah. So,
[1:17:51] » got around that pretty.
>> Are we putting no parking signs
[1:17:54] » on the 8th?
>> Yes.
[1:17:55] » Yeah. They're they're going to be in I
think tomorrow or early next week.
[1:17:59] » Yeah. In the bike lane.
>> The countyy's putting them in. They
[1:18:01] weren't in. So,
>> y
[1:18:06] » Okay. Thank you.
>> Uh nothing under personnel
[1:18:12] attorney. Do we want to just hold on to
that one for a second? Just do
[1:18:16] correspondence. All right, we'll finish.
We could finish our regular schedule and
[1:18:19] then go into that.
>> You want to do the round table and then
[1:18:21] » Yeah, let's talk about the round table.
Um, so everyone got an email from a
[1:18:27] couple of folks in town here about this
farmers market. At least I think
[1:18:31] everybody got there. Did everybody take
a look at that? Um, so they asked uh in
[1:18:35] that email to to talk about it and I had
correspond with and I think I CCD you on
[1:18:39] that um
>> told the lady that you know we could
[1:18:41] talk about it and we put on an agenda if
they wanted to come and talk more to us
[1:18:45] about it. But I guess I'm just trying to
get your feedback, you know, initially
[1:18:48] what your thoughts are. I mean, I think
the idea of a farmers market sounds
[1:18:51] great. I don't know that the city owning
it or operating is feasible really. You
[1:18:56] know, she kind of alludes to that in the
email, but um we certainly just like any
[1:19:00] other event in town. You know, we
provide barricades or we help with
[1:19:03] parking, that kind of thing. I think
that uh we certainly would do what we
[1:19:07] felt was legal to support it if people
wanted to give it a try because I mean,
[1:19:10] I think that it would be it would be
really nice to see something like that.
[1:19:13] I these folks are willing to put their
effort into it. So I don't have any
[1:19:17] objections to it initially. I need more
details obviously. Um and to let them
[1:19:20] know that like just legally speaking us
owning and operating it seems unlikely.
[1:19:24] You know it's it's not dissimilar to
like the the festival in the park where
[1:19:27] we have a private group that runs that
which by the way want to thank all those
[1:19:30] volunteers. Um a lot of compliments.
Obviously the weather always contributes
[1:19:33] when it's really nice out. It helps but
they did a great job this year and I
[1:19:37] think it went really smoothly. similar
in the way where I could see where if
[1:19:40] they want to do a farmers market, maybe
even at Veterans Park or something like
[1:19:43] that could make it into a little bit
bigger event. Um, obviously there's
[1:19:46] different towns where it works better in
some places it doesn't work as well, but
[1:19:50] um, you know, I I didn't have any
objections to their actual proposal.
[1:19:52] Just want to know more about it.
Anything you've got there, Sheldon?
[1:19:56] » No. No.
>> Be nice to see something like that come
[1:19:59] to town.
>> Okay. So, if they want to come present
[1:20:02] some information to
>> Yeah. So, I I think I invited her to
[1:20:04] come. I'll let her know maybe September,
either the 9th or 23rd would work. I
[1:20:08] mean, it's probably not real feasible to
do a lot the rest of this year. I mean,
[1:20:11] kind of at the tail end of the produce
season anyways, but um try and get
[1:20:15] something maybe they can get something
ready for next year then.
[1:20:17] » Okay. Well, that's what I'll do. I'll
see what our calendar schedule looks
[1:20:20] like and if we have some available time,
then we could slot them in.
[1:20:23] » And that's all I have really for that.
It's just wanted to see where you guys
[1:20:26] were at with that. So,
>> round table. Can I ask about the
[1:20:33] Reagan? Is it Reagan? Rean
>> Rean edition. Yep.
[1:20:36] » Yep. Are they They've got the path in.
Are they almost finished with their
[1:20:40] phase one?
>> Yeah. Yeah.
[1:20:43] » Okay. I know we had made some
contingencies on phase two. We had a lot
[1:20:47] of concerns from citizens about phase
two and when that gets started with
[1:20:51] their connections to 57 or 16th, where
are we at with are they contacted you at
[1:20:55] all about phase two?
>> Answer.
[1:20:57] » Well, yeah, go ahead.
>> Yeah, I would say they've not only
[1:21:00] talked us about phase two, they've
talked to us about phase three
[1:21:02] potentially going to the east. they
they're well aware of that that
[1:21:05] requirement of phase 2 is needs to be
punched out to 57 um as part of the
[1:21:10] approval of phase 2. So they acquired
that property so they're aware of it. So
[1:21:14] » does the road have to be put in while
they're doing phase 2 before after
[1:21:18] that's my
>> the discussion we had. I maybe
[1:21:20] » yeah we need to figure that out.
>> Have to probably go back and look at
[1:21:23] that because to your point you have what
is what's phase two? Is it the start of
[1:21:28] utility construction phase two or is it
the start of home building construction
[1:21:30] in phase two or is it opening of phase
two? I don't know if that's been
[1:21:34] addressed or was addressed in the
council approval.
[1:21:36] » We can we can rehash that.
>> Review the meeting minutes for that.
[1:21:40] » Yeah, I think that might be important.
So, I've had some people reach out and
[1:21:43] ask they're concerned about I certainly
think before
[1:21:46] » I would certainly say before there are
people living and occupying those um if
[1:21:50] they're building new town homes or
whatever. I think before the traffic
[1:21:53] increase would come, we would definitely
want to have that road punched through
[1:21:56] if possible. Yeah.
>> Um that would make sense to me. That was
[1:21:58] a big concern from from citizens was
traffic and flow and
[1:22:03] » yes we can talk about that tomorrow our
staff meeting.
[1:22:04] » Sounds good. Okay.
>> All right. That's it then. Uh I'll thank
[1:22:12] everybody for coming. We will be doing a
close session. You're more than welcome
[1:22:15] to stay in another room while we're
having our close session discussion and
[1:22:20] come back. If not, thank you for coming
tonight.
[1:22:25] Tim, you know,
hang.
[1:22:34] » Yeah, we can be sure to come to the