[0:15] All right, I want to thank everybody for being here. If we can do a roll call, I have the roll.

[0:25] And again, just want to thank, I know we've got several people who will be council members

[0:32] and someone from Abdo's here.

[0:36] And then just want to welcome anybody who might be calling in as a resident.

[0:41] We're happy to have you here tonight.

[0:43] If we could look at the agenda and if you're okay with it, could I get a motion to approve the agenda?

[0:53] I'll make a motion to approve the agenda as presented.

[0:58] Second.

[0:59] All in favor?

[1:02] Aye.

[1:03] Aye.

[1:03] And then I'm going to try to do a circle.

[1:06] I'll probably hit Greg and then Brian kind of sequentially to approve the agenda.

[1:13] right Brian? So moved. Doesn't look like we have anybody here tonight for open

[1:24] forum so we'll move to consent agenda. Before we do I just want to do a special

[1:35] call out. I was at the Pleasant Street neighborhood party last Sunday.

[1:44] The

[1:45] and the winners in the neighborhood got to go up 105 feet.

[1:50] It was quite the hit.

[1:53] And you know, I know that they were there.

[1:56] It was pure volunteer.

[1:58] The LAPD was there, wanted police officers.

[2:01] And they, you know, it's a Sunday afternoon.

[2:03] They give of their time.

[2:04] And it was nice because I do think

[2:07] that those neighborhood parties, it's just helpful for everybody

[2:11] to know your neighbors and kind of feel that connection

[2:14] and safety in the neighborhood.

[2:16] So thank you, they're not here tonight, but thank you.

[2:21] Consent agenda,

[2:25] Dave?

[2:26] Yeah, I got one comment about it.

[2:29] One of the things that the auditor has always said

[2:32] is that the bill should be presented to us

[2:35] in terms of check number.

[2:39] And if they're not presented to us

[2:40] in terms of check number,

[2:41] one of our responsibilities as a council member

[2:44] or is to go through and if we see a check missing,

[2:46] we're supposed to ask.

[2:48] And they're not presented in check number order.

[2:52] Dan, would you like to fill that?

[2:54] I would have to do a little bit more research

[2:57] in terms of, I can see there's check numbers on this.

[3:00] So it's saying check number order

[3:01] is when you prefer everything to be listed in.

[3:04] They need to be, in order for us to know

[3:07] if a check's missing is a council member,

[3:10] we can't tell if they're not in order.

[3:12] Okay.

[3:13] I will take a look.

[3:13] So I'm assuming it's just the formatting issue with this.

[3:16] A balcony from that with the audit team to make sure that that is the case.

[3:19] But as the case, we can adjust the reports to make sure that they are presented in check number order.

[3:24] Yeah, because we've got to get on this at the parks at the sewer commission about three years ago.

[3:33] So I don't know if they that's a responsibility and we'd be very well get given this year from our auditor.

[3:41] Otherwise, I'll make a motion to approve these consent agenda as presented.

[3:46] Do I hear a second?

[3:50] A second.

[3:51] Any discussion on the consent agenda?

[3:54] Otherwise, all in favor, Greg, I'm going to start with you.

[3:58] Hi.

[4:00] Brian.

[4:00] Hi.

[4:03] Dave.

[4:03] Hi.

[4:04] Mike.

[4:04] Hi.

[4:05] Judy.

[4:06] Hi.

[4:07] So moved.

[4:08] We have approved the consent agenda.

[4:11] Let's move right to the regular agenda.

[4:14] This is quite the tune that you gave us here, Dan.

[4:20] Yeah, may I have a second to be for you, Nate, is the city's 2027 preliminary levy.

[4:26] Before I get into it, I do want to give a quick thanks to both Jesse and the team from Abdo

[4:32] as well as Christa for the amount of work to get this prepared for you tonight.

[4:37] There's been a lot of work in terms of, not re-imagining, sort of, re-aligning how we

[4:44] do our budgets to provide some additional transparency.

[4:47] And I will say despite this being 150 pages, the format that we are proposing and you can

[4:53] be using moving forward will provide that additional transparency go to the council as well as the

[4:58] taxpayers at lunchroom.

[5:00] The format is fully adopted. From the top level position, this budget, what it does represent, is a 4.99% preliminary levied. As a reminder, council can always reduce from that amount between now and December, but it cannot increase from that 4.99%. This budget that we presented here tonight as well includes a general fund, but also a capital levied, so we split out the capital.

[5:29] amounts that we're putting, but dollars are putting away for future capital projects.

[5:34] This will, we want to turn and provide additional transparency to taxpayers in terms of what

[5:39] we're using for operations versus what we're using for future capital projects.

[5:43] As I mentioned, we're at that 4.99% and again, council can always reduce from that but can't

[5:50] increase once the preliminary budget is about tonight.

[5:53] With that, I'll kick it over to Jesse from Abdo, just to go over her presentation and look

[5:57] more detail on the 2027, Winston couldn't be preliminary budget.

[6:03] And great, go ahead.

[6:06] If we could, it's just Jesse, please understand.

[6:09] There's 150 pages here in a tremendous amount of detail.

[6:13] I don't think we can digest any more detail.

[6:17] I think we do need to keep it at a higher level because it was overwhelming.

[6:25] Yes.

[6:25] Yes, we're going to work on inactivate in a lot of those accounts that are at 0-2.

[6:31] So then as we progress through this, we'll start inactivating the accounts that have

[6:36] been zero for a number of years, so those banion reports will start to decrease as well.

[6:43] So we gave you the whole budget for now.

[6:47] Just know we're working through it.

[6:49] We're going to inactivate accounts inactivate some of that just to get that a little lower

[6:53] for you guys.

[6:54] so it won't be so overwhelming.

[6:56] But with that, thank you for having me tonight.

[6:59] Tonight, we're going to take a look at the preliminary budget.

[7:03] And once again, as Dan stated,

[7:05] that once a preliminary budget is set tonight,

[7:08] the levy cannot increase.

[7:10] So this is the do not exceed preliminary levy tonight.

[7:17] Tonight, I'm just going to cover some high-level tax levies.

[7:20] And then I'm going to hit high level

[7:23] the general fund revenues and expenditures.

[7:28] This slide, I believe it's page two of your council packet.

[7:32] This slide shows the tax levy for 2027.

[7:36] As you can see towards the middle of the slide there,

[7:39] the tax levy is going to increase $198,604,

[7:44] which is that 4.99% increase.

[7:48] The top line of the top is the Jeco fund levy.

[7:51] That is going down about $872,044.

[7:55] dollars and that's a negative 22.73% and that is advanced data is due to us

[8:02] removing those transfers to capital in prior years and adding them to the

[8:10] capital levies as you see down below in that capital. So that's why you'll see

[8:14] a decrease in the general fund and then a larger increase in the capital levy. So

[8:20] that's where that difference is for there. And then I also want to point out the

[8:24] EVA levied that is remained steady at 1001,000 for 2027 as well.

[8:30] At the bottom of my slide here

[8:32] and that's not in your packets, I don't believe.

[8:35] The tax capacity, I haven't received that

[8:37] from the county yet.

[8:39] So once I received that, I will update that number

[8:42] and then that will in turn hit the city tax rate as well.

[8:47] And then also the debt bond payment, the 2020 bond,

[8:52] And that is going to go down about 26,705,000.

[8:57] There's a number of different factors that are going into that bond payment.

[9:01] So we felt that it was sufficient to just levied that $13,295 for that.

[9:10] This slide shows the tax levied broken out according to the different types of levies.

[9:16] So the orange right there is the general fund levied and you see from 23 to 2026, it increased

[9:22] and then in 2027 it decreased and that is due to that capital levy there as well.

[9:29] The EDA levy is remained about the same throughout the five years.

[9:33] The green portion right there is that new capital levy.

[9:36] So since we took it out in previous years and added it, that's why you're going to see it for this year.

[9:42] And then at the very, very top there's that little then black piece that is the debt service levy.

[9:47] This

[9:51] estimated property taxes for properties, this is totally estimated based on the 4.9.

[10:00] 9.9% increase, and I do want to point out that this is not a zero-changered market value. We have not heard from the county what is an estimated market value yet for the year. So we're just presenting this as an estimated increase to the residents' property taxes. So with a $100,000 house, it's going to go up about $14, a $200,000 house is about increasing, about $40, a $300,000 house is going up about $60,000.

[10:29] $67, a $400,000 house is about $93, and then that half a million commercial property

[10:36] is going up about $219.

[10:39] And again, that is no market value has been assumed in it, and it is strictly estimated.

[10:47] Now I'll hit on the general fund revenues and expenditures just at a very, very high level.

[10:53] So on this slide you can see the general fund revenues broken out by the different types

[10:58] of funds that it is.

[10:59] And I want to point out that top line is showing that negative $872,000.

[11:06] That is again due to us removing those capital levies.

[11:10] And as you'll see throughout the presentation as we go through the rest of the budget process,

[11:17] that number is always going to be changing because that number is reflecting any offsets

[11:23] to increases in expenditures or decreases in expenditures.

[11:27] And also if we increase or decrease a revenue, that top line item right there is always going to be changing.

[11:34] So every time we present, you're going to see that changing if we're making changes to the budget.

[11:40] So I just wanted to point that out to you guys, because that shows a significant decrease in that.

[11:47] The next slide, I apologize, it's a little small, but I crammed it all into one slide.

[11:52] but here is the general fund broken down by the departments within the general fund.

[11:58] In your memo on page 4 and 5, I have explained all of the increases and decreases over $15,000.

[12:09] So if you guys want to take a look at that, you certainly can.

[12:13] And then also in the back of your packet where the main bulk of the memo was from,

[12:19] That is a revenues and expenses off of the banning records and as I pointed out before there's a lot of zeroes

[12:26] We'll start making our way through that to start removing some of those zeros that have been active for quite some time

[12:33] And the last slide I hear half here is this is a chart showing the percentages of the general fund with each type of department

[12:41] So the top three areas is the great portion there. That's a lakes area of police and that's about

[12:47] 29.4% of the general fund budget. The streets is the second and that's the orange piece

[12:54] and that's about 28.4% of the general fund budget and then the city administrator is the darker

[13:01] green piece of it and that's about 10.5% of the general fund. And again I want to point out that

[13:08] the rest of the pages are banning mine items and with that I will stand for any questions you guys have

[13:16] for us. And I'm going to stop sharing my screen. So questions that we have for Jesse, Mike.

[13:29] Can I just on that, where says street department at 28.4, is that the whole salary, equipment,

[13:37] road, I mean, that's everything. That's everything.

[13:40] Okay. That is everything. Oh, the whole entire street budget.

[13:44] So all of these would be everything, you know,

[13:46] the cable, the statics, the administration,

[13:50] and the whole thing is all everything.

[13:52] There's nothing separate that comes out of this.

[13:55] Yep, that is correct.

[13:56] Thanks.

[13:58] Greg, did you have a question?

[14:00] I did, just in general.

[14:03] Jesse, I appreciate you putting this together.

[14:06] What, what do you see as our pie pieces of the pie

[14:11] I as compared to other comparable size cities question yours is about average the same as every other city

[14:21] I've been working with the police departments always the highest you got the city administrator administration budget which includes

[14:28] numerous things. It's not just the city administration. It's includes a number of line items. That's normally seconds and then you

[14:36] have sometimes the fire departments third the streets you know it just depends on how large the city is

[14:44] but yours is very average with all the other cities that I have

[14:48] okay and I should know this follow question too so in regards to the

[14:56] the increases per

[15:00] 1,000, 200,000, 300,000 for residential. I notice the portion of the residential is very similar, but then when you you jump to commercial, it seems a commercial is significantly as a percentage of increase is significantly higher. Is that normal, too, or is that what is it? Yeah, that is a different way we have to figure for the formulas, because commercial properties have stood a little bit different. It's just right.

[15:29] that the formatting more or less, it's not that we were exponentially raising it on commercial

[15:35] purposes. No, no. And I do want to point out to if you guys want to see some of my other cities,

[15:42] my larger or other cities, they don't start at $100,000 for the thing they start like at $200

[15:52] and go up to like six. So later on throughout the rest of the budget season, if you guys want me

[15:59] change that estimated property tax. Just let me know and I can adjust it to like a $200,000

[16:05] house to a $600,000 house, depending on what you guys want to see. So just keep that in mind for

[16:12] future. I don't think there's any $100,000 houses over here. Yep, yep, that's where yeah.

[16:19] So that's where if you guys wanted adjusted, just have let Dan know and he can let me know.

[16:24] So Mike, back to you on that contingent reserve, is that is that kind of average for cities of our size and stuff?

[16:36] Um,

[16:39] I don't do much with contingent reserves right now is basically a placeholder for us.

[16:46] That's placeholding for when the health insurance amounts come in and when we have to start juggling numbers a little bit.

[16:53] Okay.

[16:53] Dan, do you want to add more to any of that?

[16:55] Yeah, no, I think that's fair statement.

[16:56] I think that's you summarized that well.

[16:58] And the other side of the two is that as we've been going

[16:59] through some consolidation and trying to go through all

[17:03] the multitude of spreadsheets that we've had

[17:05] to do to kind of consolidate,

[17:06] we want to make sure that we need to make some other adjustments

[17:09] to what we have some ability to do that

[17:11] without the need to set the levy artificially high.

[17:15] So we feel within that 4.99% with that contingent reserve,

[17:18] we have the ability to make those adjustments,

[17:21] and as well as when those unknown numbers come back,

[17:24] we have the ability to reallocate

[17:26] some of that contingent reserve

[17:27] to those why items are needed.

[17:29] And I was just wondering if it should be higher

[17:32] in the contingency or we are okay with it.

[17:34] You know, I mean, when we've looked at it,

[17:36] I think we're okay when I've kind of gone through

[17:38] sort of what I see if we can always reach out

[17:41] for all some stuff around.

[17:41] So I feel that that's a sufficient reserve

[17:44] to get us between now and your end.

[17:46] Yep.

[17:47] I would agree with that.

[17:49] So I have a question about intergovernmental looks like we dropped about 200,000 between 25 and 27.

[17:59] So what's intergovernmental?

[18:03] Intergovernmental and I will, I can tell you the line items.

[18:06] So when I do the budget, I take the revenues and we put them in little buckets.

[18:11] And one of them is inter-governmental, and what that includes is the fire state aid includes LGA.

[18:25] There we go.

[18:26] It includes the market value credit that the city sometimes receives.

[18:32] It includes a number of different things.

[18:35] And I think the reason why yours is going down is because LGA is being allocated between different funds.

[18:41] Dana, am I correct on that statement?

[18:42] Yeah, that's exactly correct.

[18:44] So even though we have not had that much reduction in LGA, it's because some of our LGA is not going to general fund.

[18:50] It goes directly to capital funds.

[18:52] So we have a reduction in LGA.

[18:54] What I have to do is basically what I had to do this year was go through and try to figure out what was in general fund, which is reflected in the intergovernmental and what was being allocated directly to capital funds.

[19:04] So I could look at what capital funds could have pulled back LG on without having significant impact on future purchases

[19:10] So it's not a that's not just reflective of just LGA

[19:13] There's other LGA being allocated other capital

[19:16] Yeah, and then how about miscellaneous Dan you probably know the answer to that

[19:23] This land is revenues. Yeah, miss I can speak to that. I have it right up in front of me here

[19:30] Okay. Thank you. We have franchise fees included in that. We have interest

[19:38] earnings as a big driver.

[19:42] We have some rental income, some street lighting fees,

[19:49] donations are also included in that tower antennas. Okay. It's a number of

[19:59] different items that we have.

[20:00] I've included in that. Okay. Thank you. Yeah, we just had higher income in 25 than what we're budgeting in 27,

[20:13] significantly.

[20:29] Other questions for this portion of our agenda? Other questions?

[20:35] I'll make a motion to approve resolution 2026091601 on page 182 of our packet for a baby limit of $4,176,628.

[20:57] Do we have a second?

[21:06] Do we have a second?

[21:07] Brian, did you give a second?

[21:09] We have a second.

[21:10] Now, do we have discussion on this?

[21:15] If not, should we just take the vote?

[21:19] We'll start here, Dave.

[21:21] Aye.

[21:22] Aye.

[21:23] Aye.

[21:24] Greg?

[21:25] Aye.

[21:26] Ann Brine.

[21:28] Aye.

[21:29] So moved.

[21:31] You know, I want to ask a question, I just thought of.

[21:34] Now, in terms of the revenue sources,

[21:36] the missing units also include the transfers from the bars.

[21:41] That's what I was wondering.

[21:42] All right.

[21:42] I have to take it.

[21:45] Justin, you still have that off by chance is those.

[21:47] I do.

[21:48] Yep.

[21:49] It includes the transfers.

[21:51] Yep.

[21:51] The revenues do.

[21:52] Okay.

[21:53] Yep.

[21:54] Yeah.

[21:54] It includes all revenue sources.

[21:56] Okay.

[21:59] All right.

[22:00] So we have approved that.

[22:03] I'm just trying to get rid of about 150 pages here.

[22:08] That's right.

[22:09] Yeah.

[22:10] Yeah.

[22:10] Probably good call.

[22:11] Right.

[22:13] All right, there we go. I'm just literally going to get this. All right. Well, thank

[22:23] you, Jesse. Nice job. We appreciate this. Thank you. It was nice to meet everybody

[22:28] and I look forward to working the rest of the way through with Dan on the rest of the

[22:31] budget. Thank you. You guys have a great night. You too. Okay. Thank you. And Mr.

[22:41] Mr. Bachmeier, is not here, are you still in here?

[22:43] So I am feeling in about Payton and Brian tonight.

[22:46] So the before and tonight, May event's council is the Pay application for payment number one for the Elendum Mill and overlay.

[22:54] Back around this, North Valley Incorporated started working on the Elendum improvements in August 10th.

[22:59] They substantially completed all improvements except for the striping and signing, which I believe as of today's engineering meeting.

[23:06] It was either going to be scheduled for completion today or scheduled soon.

[23:10] I didn't have a chance to go back and verify that, but that work is forthcoming.

[23:15] The contractor has submitted partial payment number one for review and payment.

[23:19] The value of the work completed to date is 122,922, 32, deducting the retained results

[23:26] in a partial payment of 1,16,776,020 cents.

[23:31] It's recommended that the City Council approve partial payment number one in the amount of $116,000, $776,000, and $20,000 for the work associated with North-Old end mill and overlay.

[23:46] Do we have questions?

[23:48] to make a motion to put a pay North Valley Incorporated $116,770,116,776 dollars and 20 cents

[24:04] for actual repayment number one.

[24:08] Do we have a second?

[24:11] A second.

[24:12] So, discussion on this, any discussion on this project?

[24:18] It looks nice.

[24:20] It does look good.

[24:21] All right. Well, we'll run through this one again. Let's just do this routine again. Dave. Hi. Hi, Greg. Hi. Brian. Hi. So moved. We proved it.

[24:38] I'm nice project. I've only heard good things. So that's awesome.

[24:42] And it was one of two projects where I didn't get any calls while I was in the construction, which means it was well managed.

[24:46] So from my perspective, even better is a very, very well-run project, so Kudos to the team that worked on it.

[24:53] Yeah, and if I can while we're on engineering, I'm watching the live action of

[25:03] There are like 40,000, I'm not kidding, 40,000 pound equipment right outside my front door. It is, boy, you can just tell, they're organized. They know what they're doing. It's going well. Everything's marked. So live action seems to be going well and on track down at lift station number two.

[25:25] And when is that supposed to be done?

[25:27] Remember?

[25:28] Mid-October?

[25:29] Mid-October?

[25:30] Mid-October?

[25:30] Yeah.

[25:31] I don't know exactly.

[25:33] They did provide an update.

[25:34] Yeah.

[25:34] Okay.

[25:35] I thought so.

[25:37] All righty.

[25:38] Next up.

[25:39] The Lake Lane Listing Agreement.

[25:42] Mr. And I'm.

[25:43] So members of council.

[25:45] After multiple council discussions on the EDA's property,

[25:47] located at one, two, one, five, Lake Lane.

[25:51] That was looking for promo direction by council.

[25:53] on whether or not to pursue a listing agreement for the property.

[25:58] Additionally, staff is also requesting formal direction from council.

[26:02] If the direction is given to list, this list of property is either residential or commercial.

[26:08] Sort of based on sort of the long conversations you've had in past meetings.

[26:12] I did not do a full staff report here because you've had sort of lengthy conversations on this in the past.

[26:18] the requested action tonight from Council is a motion to direct staff to

[26:23] pursue a listing agreement for the property located at 1-2-2-1-5 way plain and

[26:28] additionally as a part of that motion staff would be quest direction on whether to

[26:31] pursue a commercial or residential listing for the property. With that I'm

[26:36] happy to answer any question Council has regarding the property or kind of the

[26:40] process today. Dave? Yeah, part of the process. What will we be getting in a

[26:46] or are we just going to use the list of suggestion price?

[26:50] That could be a part of the motion if you want to request an appraisal, we could have an appraisal done.

[26:54] It sits directly and I've listed properties that they've usually gone with the market, you know, the agents price.

[27:00] They typically price them according to what they feel the market would bear on them.

[27:04] But if there is a request for council for an appraisal, one could be performed on the property priority listing.

[27:18] I think residential is a little bit easier than municipal building until last one I got for this municipal building was right around 5,000 but residential praise I think are significantly cheaper because there's more people doing them trying to find a municipal praise for here was a little bit challenging but I would say probably a couple of thousand we a safe estimate between two and five but I don't I haven't had

[27:42] residential appraisal done for a while.

[27:45] Okay, it's a good question, Brian.

[27:49] Yeah, I guess this group, our team knows how passionate I feel about

[27:56] this particular property in this entire area.

[28:01] You know, it's something that I'm super passionate about that we've got this in our

[28:06] plan for it to be a potential commercial space or multi-family residential have it be a major

[28:15] development that's probably the largest EDA economic development opportunity we've had in

[28:22] many many years so you know and I think it takes a while for things to percolate and I'm very

[28:29] strongly for you know if we are going to list it to list this as commercial I do want to share

[28:35] There are some new news as of recent that my mom, who can align their earliest who owns

[28:44] the property, two-and-a-half acres approximately next to the Elm State's property, would be

[28:51] willing for the best of the community to list the property with the commercial riller and

[28:59] put it on the market.

[29:01] and she would like to see if if we've got an opportunity now with some of that land available if if her

[29:13] initiation of working with a commercial broker on this would help spur some conversations and some

[29:22] movement on that entire seven and a half eight acres she would she would be engaged after the

[29:28] about our men of our community.

[29:29] So I think the long-term tax revenue opportunities,

[29:33] the long-term pluses that that could give our city

[29:38] and our community to do the right thing out there

[29:40] and develop that property correctly.

[29:43] I don't think residential fits into that area.

[29:47] So she's willing to listen within the next 30 days

[29:51] your list for property to kind of spearhead

[29:55] some movement out there considering

[29:57] that's been something that's been discussed as we've

[30:00] We'd like to, people have discussed that or pushed those kind of thoughts and she's willing

[30:08] to put it on the market to hopefully get something rolling.

[30:15] So has she identified a firm

[30:19] or talked to any firms or, you know, she kind of, that's far along in her commitment?

[30:24] We did, we did initiate some initial conversations with Dan Freiner and he was recommending I get to reach out to him, but I'm just going to give you the name of the I think Brady Thompson, he's got the property up on.

[30:53] and he's renting for Carvita's.

[30:58] Yeah, and he just said he's a great guy in the know.

[31:03] And it would be a great start.

[31:06] So I just want to put that out to the council.

[31:08] I think that's the direction that we need to be going.

[31:11] I think, you know, I know we've talked about

[31:15] when I'm in the rental business,

[31:16] but I think certainly we are in the city planning business

[31:19] and responsible for the city vision.

[31:22] I can go through a whole list of that two pages of things that we've bought in the past.

[31:28] We bought the Donald Peterson's farm to create the industrial park that we have and expand the cemetery.

[31:34] We've been involved in the Sacred Regional Medical Center project.

[31:41] We've secured state bank and ring.

[31:43] We've had our hands in that.

[31:45] the city owned the old train depot where

[31:48] Berga's chiropractic building was built as a hospital we owned that property

[31:53] and sold that forward you know the split pairs we removed NAPCO the NAPCO

[32:00] building that a lot a lot to do with that movement almost rot we bought half a

[32:06] bowl lake in the past to get that to happen we bought the Anderson's you know

[32:12] working with the public trust to get that purchased Lake's regional EM, the Lake's regional

[32:20] emergency group that we've got next to City Hall there. We gave them the property to do that.

[32:27] We bought the old wall plant that where the fire fall sits. You know, that was that was something

[32:35] that we purchased and gave to our fire. We needed a new place for our fire department.

[32:41] That is

[32:42] I just think this is a heck of an opportunity out there.

[32:49] There's no personal win for me.

[32:50] Yes, my mom owns that piece of property.

[32:53] They've taken care of that property because of my dad.

[32:59] And so, but our families, you know,

[33:03] convinced that the right development out there in that area

[33:06] would be a great thing for our community.

[33:09] So, um, so that's what we'd love to see that go for the right the right thing and we definitely would get will get engaged with can't try to move the needle here. So.

[33:21] So that's I guess my two cents.

[33:25] I have got a whole list of that. We bought the sports shack property.

[33:28] We had to buy the property for the the fire hall to expand should there.

[33:35] So that's part of the vision is part of the way cities typically end up doing, moving the needle on some things is actually having to buy some property and do that.

[33:43] And the city, previous city councils have bought this property as well as part of their vision for that entire quadrant and put to that together a comprehensive plan that included that as a major redevelopment site and location.

[33:57] So I just would like to, you know, I'd like to move this forward in the proper way and we're willing to make the commitment there to help, you know, spur some conversations and some energy.

[34:15] So that's all I've got to share tonight on that subject. So thanks for listening.

[34:21] Okay. Thank you. For me, I'd like to speak up because I have said publicly if either

[34:32] me hands or nerilliases would get a commercial realtor who really knows the North suburned

[34:40] space and if they were willing to make that commitment, then I would be in favor of

[34:47] I want to list it, I don't think we should be in the real estate management rental business.

[34:55] I would be willing to vote in favor.

[35:02] So, I think the question before us is, you know, do you want to go forward? Or we could table this, give it 30 days, see if we get one of the two parties that looks like we'll get one of the parties to do a commercial listing.

[35:19] I

[35:29] thought it's on on it in that even if we sell it residential it can still it's still

[35:36] a zone for commercial so as far as the as far as people be able to use it but residential

[35:43] is probably the biggest value if we're going to sell it and since it's not really going

[35:49] to change it's it's availability. I mean people are going to buy into this commercial and

[35:54] and use it as residential, or they could literally just remodel the building that's there

[36:00] and end up with a commercial building that is used commercially, but not really expanding

[36:08] the whole project like what Brian is envisioning.

[36:14] So I mean, there's some, we're going to sell it, residential is the way to go because commercial

[36:19] is still available.

[36:23] Can I just make a comment response on that?

[36:27] The problem with that, Dave, is that somebody invests more money into, sure, it might bring

[36:34] a little bit higher price on the resale of that, I get it, which is really peanuts in

[36:38] the grand scheme of things for, I think, that's my own opinion, is that the grander look at

[36:44] this if we could have, I don't know, whatever, two, three hundred units of residential and

[36:49] in a split retail portion of it. The tax impact of that down the road is enormous compared to

[36:58] actually having this thing stay residential. If you sell it as residential, the problem with it

[37:03] is somebody could live there for the next 30, 40 years and you can't remove them. You can't move the

[37:09] needle on that. So I do think it's, I mean, if I was going to invest $3 million in building a new

[37:16] building on my mother's property and you got residential next door to it or

[37:21] somebody you invest in in front of the Elms Estates and you can't do anything

[37:27] with that house. I think it's a subpar development. I don't think it gives

[37:30] it's not the development that somebody potentially would want so I think at

[37:35] least I mean I even I mean I took to compromise on that I mean what if we say we

[37:42] listed commercially for a certain stretch of time and if it doesn't sell and not there's no movement

[37:48] then we go to go to residential. It's kind of a compromise with that. I just think somebody buys

[37:54] that they can buy it as their home for the next 40, 50 years like it's been and it's we can't do

[38:02] anything with it. So when I build around it with mostly commercial and there you go. So that's my

[38:10] I respond to it.

[38:11] So, my opinion.

[38:13] Being, being zoned is B1.

[38:18] It can stay, even though they buy it commercial,

[38:23] it can still stay residential for 40 or 50 years.

[38:28] If I could just add that,

[38:29] you could also, when I've had conversations with Swarlock,

[38:32] how do you guide an existing health as residential

[38:35] and B1 district, you know, could you get the control

[38:38] is the body who owns the property sort of have a more control where that that goes there are

[38:43] things that you can write in the purchase agreement to encourage you know set up where it is

[38:49] being used as a commercial not as a residential the trade-off with that is is that you put those

[38:53] caveats in there those agreements and the purchase agreement is the enforcement size you have to have

[38:58] the ability to want to go in there and be like hey you get what's that what's the what you know the

[39:02] kind of mechanisms to enforce that commercial side of it ultimately if you really want to ensure

[39:06] sure that it is going to be commercial long-term is to get rid of the house and you'd sell it to the dirt basically because it's the house that sort of wouldn't that there you could use the right because you can be used be one does a lot for single family dwellings to be there but there are some there are some things you can put into a potential purchase agreement of its contingent on a bigger development it's contingent on you know an approved site plan for this property there are some things that you can do that those sales then become contingent on

[39:36] and it being utilized in a commercial redevelopment standpoint to try to help ensure that it is commercial

[39:42] to avoid exactly what you say, somebody buying it a lower commercial price and then using it as a residential home.

[39:49] So we've got, we've discussed this for a long, long time, at least a year and a half.

[39:54] And I just want to make sure Greg or Mike, if there's something you want to say,

[39:58] you have an opportunity.

[40:00] Otherwise, we can entertain a motion.

[40:05] You know, Brian, bring up some really good, good points.

[40:10] My thought, and it's, it's, again, I'm not a real estate person, per se, but, you know,

[40:18] those, Elmer states have been sitting there for, I don't know how many years now. And I just

[40:25] I just want to get this off our rolls and let it fly where it is.

[40:31] If I was a person and I know that that helps us for sale or whatever, and other commercial, I don't know,

[40:37] I could see somebody buying the property that's those two and a half acres and then make an offer to buy that piece of property

[40:45] from the person that has it now or whatever to do what they want.

[40:49] I just don't know how long we want to wait for some commercial thing to come in there.

[40:53] You know, I look at, you know, expansion of highway 8, and, you know, they're very strict

[41:00] the men dot on adding more, and, you know, accident entries off of 8s and certain areas.

[41:07] I don't know, Brian, that's, you bring up some really great points, kind of, just having

[41:12] to think in a little bit, so.

[41:13] If I could, I just want to piece to that, you know, and again, when you look at lifting

[41:18] the property, you don't have to commit to a five-year term.

[41:23] You can take a look at where we'll list it for 12 months, commercial, see what the market

[41:26] brings back.

[41:27] If it's absolutely, there's zero interest in the property for 12 months, I will probably

[41:31] say based on where the market is, the residential sale is going to be easier to obtain than a commercial

[41:37] sale.

[41:38] But if you list it out there for 12 months, you can at least say, what is the market going

[41:41] to bring?

[41:42] And if it brings back nothing, you can re-evaluate your listing at that point kind of based on

[41:47] on this criteria.

[41:49] So I would say it's not something that you're marrying into this

[41:51] until if you list it commercially for a year,

[41:54] you're not committing to that forever.

[41:57] You can kind of test it out and see,

[41:58] hey, does this actually generate anything?

[42:01] But you could do the same thing the other way.

[42:02] Exactly.

[42:02] You could list it for six months,

[42:04] for residential and not get anything,

[42:06] and then go to court.

[42:08] So I mean, you could go either way.

[42:09] And I just think the sooner we get off our rolls,

[42:13] the better.

[42:15] Dave.

[42:15] Yeah, ask you, what's the, how is the EVA is recently discussed this, or haven't you?

[42:26] It was, we discussed it, sorry, Judy.

[42:30] Yeah, go ahead Greg, you're the chair.

[42:32] Go ahead.

[42:32] So we discussed this not in the last meeting because it was already discussed prior to that.

[42:39] Two meetings ago.

[42:40] and the direction was that really, it could go either way, but it doesn't really bother anybody at that point in time, didn't bother anybody to sell it for residential.

[42:58] And then last meeting we didn't even bring it up because it was brought up to console that after that.

[43:04] Yeah, and I think they were looking for our direction because there had been some confusion

[43:09] maybe a year ago, so I think the ball is in our court.

[43:17] One kind of brainstorming would be if we do give it a month because you asked about getting

[43:26] in an appraisal, if they go with a commercial realtor, this is not an appraisal, but we

[43:33] could get a solid professional estimate of the property's worth.

[43:38] And that would give us more information, so that would be one option.

[43:44] But you know a commercial, what that small spot is not going to be appraised as high as a

[43:50] host is going to.

[43:50] Would and then this is the honest question would a commercial real-ter be able to give a good?

[43:59] Residential analysis or would we need a

[44:02] residential real-ter I

[44:06] Mean if you're if you're gonna sell it commercial you're you're selling a lot. You're not selling the house

[44:11] You're just selling the land

[44:13] I remember the house does need some work to be fully executive about this point

[44:18] So I mean, there's a lot of, I mean, I'm happy to provide whatever information council needs to feel comfortable making the decision.

[44:25] I would say my experience in dealing with some of these brokers in the past, they are fairly specialized.

[44:30] They're going to, if it's a commercial broker, they're more specialized in the commercial market.

[44:34] I mean, they may be able to give an option or an estimate of what to be residential, but

[44:39] a lot of these guys are happily specialized in certain areas of the market and they don't necessarily have a lot of expertise in other areas.

[44:45] Because my concern would be we, if we choose to listen to commercial, it's just going to

[44:53] sit and nothing's going to happen to it and it's going to get worse in the inside of

[44:59] worse in the end.

[45:00] And the outside, and the outside, and it could sit for another year and a half or two years. And it could do the same thing residential, but, you know, so, you know, if they buy a commercial, they're probably not going to keep the house. They're going to tear it down. And so, you know, they're going to, you know, they're going to look at that price and say, well, we'll give you this lower price because we're going to want to tear it down. And, you know, and at a point two, three acre or whatever it is. To me, it's just not that.

[45:28] But I don't think it would put that big of strain on the other property that's for sale commercial.

[45:36] So we certainly-

[45:38] I'll say the last, you know, I'll be down on this because I don't think anybody thinks

[45:43] this is that big of a deal.

[45:45] I think this is a huge opportunity for the City of Lundstrom.

[45:49] I don't know why we have little interest in it, and I don't know why we're not getting

[45:54] excited about the opportunity that we've got presented to us out there.

[45:58] It's so so I just

[46:01] Brian are you suggesting that we buy all that two and a half acres plus that no, but it's but the majority of it is

[46:08] Available for sales is this is a time when we've got we can have some say we've got a little skin in the game

[46:16] Yes, it's a small postage stamp deal there, but to to not be have our us be a part of a bigger plan there and listed if my

[46:25] and a mother's willing to list it for commercial,

[46:27] and you list this lot for commercial,

[46:29] and we get Rosita possibly to want to list it

[46:33] as commercial with, you know, get this thing,

[46:37] give it some feet.

[46:40] We're part of a player there,

[46:41] and as I listed all these other things out before

[46:44] that we purchased it in the past,

[46:45] or have helped spur and make happen,

[46:49] we're talking pennies about making an extra $50,000,

[46:54] $1,000 or $100,000 in selling it commercially versus residential.

[47:00] When we could be having a beautiful, huge opportunity out there.

[47:05] So I'll be done.

[47:07] We can step away from this thing.

[47:10] We can keep our residential for years to come.

[47:13] It's not, but we're at a point where I think with four lanes coming to the area, things are

[47:18] picking up the land is available. Man, I think we're missing the mark, but I'll be done with this.

[47:25] This will be my last comment on it, so thank you.

[47:29] Yeah, yeah, because I think I don't want to keep rehashing what we've rehashed for 18 months. It's just not productive.

[47:36] I think the new information, at least for me, brand new, is, okay, we've got a commitment from one of the two big property owners

[47:43] to get it listed with somebody who can get this in the market and get it known

[47:48] because we haven't really tested the market yet.

[47:52] So I'll make a motion.

[47:54] Okay.

[47:56] I will see if we can interact with it.

[47:58] But I'll make a motion to table this for 30 days and come back to it

[48:02] at the next council meeting.

[48:06] Can we get a second on that, Dave?

[48:09] No, I want to get a discussion.

[48:11] Oh, okay.

[48:13] You're going back to discussion.

[48:14] let me go through and see if I can get a second. Can we get a second on that?

[48:22] I'll give it a second.

[48:24] I'll give it a second, so Dave, now let's go to discussion.

[48:28] Another

[48:31] 30 days. What's going to happen in that 30 days is going to make a difference?

[48:41] We will be speaking to a commercial realtor and we'll get some traction on that property.

[48:47] And I think we could loop in, I'll certainly be talking to them about the cable house property and the importance of that.

[48:55] If we see that it's not a clog in the wheel or a spoke in the wheel then I'll give that feedback to the group here.

[49:04] But I'd like to get some I'd like to get talked to Rosita tried calling her a couple times and see if we can

[49:12] Put something together here that would work. So if not, so eat, throw it in that way

[49:20] So now, so now I'm hearing that we want to be the

[49:28] We want to put bring the people together and say this is what we want to see happen to this property

[49:34] Is that what I'm hearing or for what I'm hearing is we've got one of the two big

[49:39] property owners this will end so say that lady decides not to listen or doesn't

[49:48] want to do that then we're right back to where we were before and you know you

[49:54] know I don't know I you know we could we could go on for the next six months yeah

[50:00] I just don't think there's a, I don't think there's a rush. I don't think there's, I don't think we're missing anything here, but not, uh, so what you're saying a lot of time. We could wait, so you're saying we could wait another five years, if we want. No, I'm not saying that I'm not saying that we need to do that. I wouldn't, I wouldn't do that, but I'm just saying, um, you know, things have changed on, you know, my family's willing to come under table on it.

[50:26] And if we can see if Rosita and if the city's part of one of the players at the table because they own part of that property and we can look at maybe one bigger listing or

[50:41] you know other opportunities to go back to some some developers and discuss what might want to be there.

[50:48] You know or the EDA discuss what they love to see out there.

[50:51] but they could be another six months or a year.

[50:55] Yeah, with the discussion, Brian, and I agree with you.

[50:58] You know, so there's a motion on the floor.

[51:03] To table for one month.

[51:07] And I would like to reframe table for one month.

[51:12] We would evaluate did the, and it's not the family, it is.

[51:17] Caroline Nurellius is the owner, did Caroline Nurellius sign up so that we know

[51:23] that there's commitment there, sign up with a commercial realtor we could see

[51:28] the listing. That would be very helpful. So not just talk about it but actually

[51:35] have a commitment. So if this other person chooses not to list it commercial,

[51:47] are we

[51:49] we then going to move forward.

[51:50] Do you mean Rosita?

[51:53] Rosita, it has been listed commercial.

[51:55] It has been listed, but she's going

[51:56] to be able to put it right.

[51:59] She is the problem has been, according to the market,

[52:04] I'm just repeating what I heard from the market,

[52:07] that the listing for the Mehan and Elms Estate property

[52:12] was it started out about four or five times market value.

[52:16] It has come down, but what I've heard more recently is it is still above the sale price

[52:23] of similar properties along Highway 8 between Lindstrom and Shasago.

[52:28] So her issue, she's been doing it commercially, her realtor has.

[52:34] I think the price has been probably the problem probably and I'm just sharing what I've heard

[52:44] from realtors in the space.

[52:50] But if, you know, I view this as if there's some movement there with other people, maybe

[52:58] we, you know, maybe somebody could help her look at market competitiveness.

[53:05] I will second that motion.

[53:07] Oh, we've got the motion in second.

[53:09] Are we ready?

[53:10] Are we ready?

[53:11] Do we get a second?

[53:11] We did get a second.

[53:12] I seconded it.

[53:13] So I could open discussion because they wanted to discuss.

[53:17] But are we, I think we're ready?

[53:20] Yes, I don't, this has been a big one, but I think we're ready to at least get a vote.

[53:25] 30 days, we said.

[53:26] 30 days.

[53:27] The, you were discussing about having to actually be listed in the 30 days.

[53:35] That one, yeah.

[53:36] Now is that going to be, change to the motion?

[53:40] If I could, that's a part of the, you're just table in the discussion, the decision point

[53:44] 30 days, you know, putting contingencies like a what drives a decision one way or the other.

[53:48] You don't want to reserve that until the discussion 30 days, you know, the October meeting.

[53:52] Till the October meeting.

[53:54] Let's clarify.

[53:54] I know it also clarifies that the third day, so we don't have to call a special meeting in

[53:57] 30 days.

[53:57] We just say move it to October 21st, the city council meeting, so we're not having to do

[54:02] a 30 day special meeting notice.

[54:04] But it would also sort of take away the caveats of take a look at this, flash with those

[54:08] news with a new way to land within the coming of the October 21st

[54:12] meeting versus the 30 days just someone at the call special.

[54:16] I love meeting every night but you know I don't want to have that.

[54:18] I don't agree with I do agree with you know there there has been a change

[54:24] for the good you know on some movement and I think

[54:30] 30 days is not going to make a big a big decision either way you know either way

[54:36] right now is not going to change a lot of things. I think that's a good thing to

[54:41] wait 30 days and see what happens and Brian's mom is willing to do some really

[54:48] good things there. So I would like to take a shot at it. So now when I call for a

[54:54] table, do I do I need to? I would just get a book. Yeah, it's

[55:13] Let's put some criteria on this. If we're going to table it, I don't want, I mean, Mike, I think you touched on this. I don't want it to be, well, Rozeet is not doing this or whatever it is. We've talked around this thing. So many, many times. And how long has it been on the market?

[55:29] the market and off the market and in front of the process of being dismantled from a trailer park and all the stuff.

[55:37] I would want to have exactly what's got to happen in order for us to go forward with this being a commercial property per sale.

[55:47] Otherwise, you're still talking around in circles.

[55:51] I was just going to ask a question.

[55:54] and I mean, I'll take back my motion.

[55:59] I don't know that this council is ready to make the commitment

[56:02] that it's gonna take to actually be a player

[56:06] in trying to redevelop this seven, eight acres.

[56:09] I don't hear it in anybody's voices.

[56:12] I don't hear any interest in it.

[56:13] It's not just a 30-day deal, it's not.

[56:16] It's gonna take, we're gonna go through a comp plan.

[56:20] We're gonna talk about what needs to be there.

[56:22] this is this is putting together a major a major project for the community. So what

[56:35] I'm hearing is that nobody's really interested and I'll take that. No, that's not at all. That is not at all. No. I'm not and no drama here. I'm just saying. I don't know that because it's not if it's not going to just take. It takes a commitment from the city to

[56:52] get behind something. You're conflating. Brian, you're conflating two different things. One is we're just

[56:58] trying to get a commitment from one of the two big property owners to kind of jump in. And we want to

[57:04] know if that's going to happen. We never said, Hey, we have to have a comp plan and a, you know,

[57:09] everything done. No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, I'm just talking

[57:12] about are we interested in? Are we interested in if something is going to happen? Does or whatever is,

[57:19] are we interested in putting the work in for it?

[57:22] I don't know.

[57:24] So that I don't think we want to get it.

[57:26] We do not want to entertain that tonight.

[57:29] So either you have a shot at going through

[57:31] and we can vote on this and table it

[57:33] and evaluate if, indeed,

[57:36] one of the major property owners listed

[57:39] or does he even have the right to pull his motion back?

[57:43] Yeah, he means the most.

[57:44] Okay, so, or you can just pull your motion back

[57:46] and we'll proceed and maybe come up with a different motion.

[57:53] So what's your preference?

[57:55] Well, I guess we'll take the vote on it.

[57:56] Okay.

[57:57] Okay.

[57:58] So anything else, and I do want to make sure everybody's had their discussion points.

[58:03] I'm kind of looking at non-verbals, but Greg, how about you?

[58:07] Yeah.

[58:08] Again, I just want to get clarification on what will happen over the next 30 days in order

[58:15] for us to change the direction of what, like Brian had said, everybody is leaning.

[58:22] I'd rather, again, we've talked around circles about this, what it has,

[58:27] what is going to happen, if we're going to table this in 30 days, what is going to happen?

[58:33] And if I could just add a point of clarification on the table, is that you're going to want to see,

[58:37] you're just basically delaying a decision on this for 30 days, I would say at this point,

[58:42] the legal land comes out and say the property gets listed, not our property, but the adjacent property gets listed.

[58:48] That changes the parameters so we can have that conversation in 30 days from,

[58:53] not 30 days on a October 21st meeting, based on the current condition saying,

[58:58] hey, we have an adjacent property and that's not listed.

[59:00] Does that change council's perspective on how to list this?

[59:04] I think to put parameters on it right now, it's sort of given assurance that, hey,

[59:06] if all this happens, we're going to go a certain way, I would reserve that conversation until October 21st.

[59:12] or make a decision tonight to list it based on the current conditions.

[59:17] Okay, that's here.

[59:18] Yeah.

[59:19] Okay.

[59:21] So we are, and we've got the date here of the 21st, yeah.

[59:27] All right, so is everybody gotten their questions, concerns, discussion points out?

[59:35] Okay, can you clarify the motion again, please?

[59:37] So, the motion is to table this decision until October 21st.

[59:49] In order for what?

[59:53] So you're basically taking this conversation right now, it might up the new because you heard that there's new development, so there's more.

[1:00:02] So, you're taking it with the new state of play in 30 days from now. If that actually listing has occurred, you make your Congress, you make your decision based on the fact that the adjacent property owner has listed at that point. I would call it against putting parameters on. We're only going to do it if these things happen or not, because you can't control it. You're basically looking at this 30 days from now in, excuse me, not 30 days.

[1:00:25] to be back in the same conversation.

[1:00:27] Well, that's why I was just trying to conflate anything.

[1:00:31] I was just trying to say, is this group going to change?

[1:00:35] This isn't the right time, Brian.

[1:00:36] This isn't the right time to get over.

[1:00:39] Yeah, I'm just trying to help you here.

[1:00:40] I am.

[1:00:40] So I would say if I could help, I can't provide some context.

[1:00:43] So when you have this conversation,

[1:00:44] if it is table in October 21st, you're

[1:00:46] having a conversation of, hey, the adjacent property

[1:00:49] owner is not listed with a broker.

[1:00:51] That's a commercial broker.

[1:00:52] Does that change anybody's opinion?

[1:00:54] It's not a, and if nothing changes in the next, from now until October 21st, that's information.

[1:01:02] So in essence, it's basically, it's kind of holding this decision back until the 21st.

[1:01:06] So really, all it's going to change is either we sell it as residential or we sell it as commercial.

[1:01:11] Basically, the only thing that's going to change is still, as far as I'm seeing right now, there is still

[1:01:15] agreement to list the property. But the change would be, are the adjacent property owners more engaged

[1:01:21] and they told you to wait another 30 days to make that decision.

[1:01:24] I'll be there doing a commercial work with that.

[1:01:26] Because you may have an adjacent property who's down the market

[1:01:28] that may impact decisions from the council.

[1:01:33] So that's the motion, and you can either, you know, say,

[1:01:36] I agree or I don't, right?

[1:01:39] But we've got a clear motion.

[1:01:44] So let's, I'm going to call the vote.

[1:01:46] I'm going to start up Greg.

[1:01:49] Hi.

[1:01:50] Brian.

[1:01:50] Again, Mike and

[1:01:58] I'm an I.

[1:01:59] So we've got until October 21st to reevaluate.

[1:02:07] And I think without putting specifications, I think we're pretty clear that we're going

[1:02:13] to be looking for new information that will help us make a decision on October 21st.

[1:02:20] Ryan, thanks for bringing that up, so that kind of changed the perspective on some things.

[1:02:27] Thanks.

[1:02:27] Thanks, Mike.

[1:02:28] I think, yeah.

[1:02:29] Thank you.

[1:02:30] Definitely.

[1:02:32] So, good, good discussion there.

[1:02:35] A little bit of a surprise, but good discussion there.

[1:02:40] Hey, let's go to speed limit reduction.

[1:02:44] There was a council that's a little bit lighter topic for tonight.

[1:02:49] Back in April, beginning of this year, we talked about reducing the speed limits of the possibility of reducing the speed limits across the entire area of the city of the eastern from 30 to 25 miles per hour.

[1:03:00] We never took any formal action on it, other than Brian, Black Bear presented sort of a process to make kind of a procedural idea of what it would look like to go from 30 to 25.

[1:03:10] And one of the takeaways from that meeting was to have staff as part of the Carl Oscar day's booth was to do an informal polling of residents and attendees to see whether or not they favored a reduction in speed limit.

[1:03:25] I will say this is not a scientific or statistically valid study.

[1:03:29] We had people basically just drop a stone in a jar saying yes, reduce the speed limit or no, don't reduce the speed limit.

[1:03:35] But what's presented tonight are the results of that survey.

[1:03:41] So during the event, we had a total of 121 votes cast.

[1:03:45] Of those votes, the majority, 64% or 77, were in favor of reducing the speed limit.

[1:03:52] And 44 or 36% were voted to keep the existing speed limit of 30 miles an hour.

[1:04:00] A couple of key takeaways and then from a polling was that it does show that there's community

[1:04:04] support for reducing the speed limit in the city of London some 25 miles per hour, I will note,

[1:04:11] though, as a part of that, many of the people that staff spoke with were supporting

[1:04:16] of reducing the speed limit on highway 8. And they found out that that was not included.

[1:04:21] They either locked away or kind of held back their vote as a result because their main focus was

[1:04:26] the speed limit on highway 8. And other ones had said that some of the ones that did vote know

[1:04:33] had said they would have voted yes had highway but included. So again I would say the majority of

[1:04:37] people who voted were primarily concerned with highway 8 versus residential streets once we said no

[1:04:42] it's just residential streets they kind of had less interest in voting. Additionally there was

[1:04:48] additional concerns expressed about the speed limit on a winded trail. Again many attendees

[1:04:54] indicating they thought the speed limit on that road was too high as well. So when they came to the booth

[1:04:58] What's the light? Does this include highway?

[1:05:00] No, there were quite a few people who did walk away at that point. But this is just, again, provided for council information, just trying to close the loop on that request that was presented earlier in April. If council decides they do want to move forward with a speed limit reduction. I did talk to Bachmeier this afternoon at a regular scheduled meeting. There is a process we can follow to do so, but we would need to order a number of additional speed limit signs, and there was a cost associated with that in the city.

[1:05:29] So, but is I think the purpose here was to get information. I don't know that we're in an action

[1:05:37] mode here. I certainly, you know, pushed for let's get some information. I don't think I'd

[1:05:45] base it on a Carl Oscar day, you know, put it in this one or that one. However, I do think you're

[1:05:52] getting a little bit of a sense that people like slower. I also think that it's very possible that

[1:05:58] that we ourselves will be facing the highway 18 or the mendad team in a few years and saying,

[1:06:05] hey, would you consider dropping highway 8 down to 25?

[1:06:09] And that conversation, Judy, may I?

[1:06:11] Yeah.

[1:06:13] When Dan and I were with those people, we brought that conversation up.

[1:06:17] And of course, their first thing is they'll do the study, you know, they'll have them

[1:06:23] I mean that always has these studies for everything which, you know, but they said they would

[1:06:27] look at that, you know, with going to four lanes and, and, you know, going back and forth,

[1:06:32] how much is that going to change?

[1:06:33] How much is going to change when they finish the road going down from, from, uh, Lindstrom

[1:06:38] all the way to Taylor Falls and how it's going to make the traffic flow.

[1:06:41] But they weren't negative about reducing that speed.

[1:06:46] They just said, you know, we would, we would do a study to see how that affects the flow

[1:06:51] of going through there, and I got into it saying narrowing down the lanes and doing some other things, but the

[1:06:57] positive of that was that they were willing to work with us to see if that would be something we could do on

[1:07:03] highway 8. And I believe that it would look pretty odd if we voted and said no, no, no, we have to keep ours at 30, but

[1:07:12] we want you to put it at 25 through the middle of the town. So Dave.

[1:07:18] I am looking at this from a different perspective.

[1:07:23] If we're the only one literally in the forest that is different,

[1:07:27] everybody's used to 30 miles an hour in every other city.

[1:07:31] Even if we got it fully signed, and 30 is going to be the speed

[1:07:37] that they're, I mean, everybody knows what 30 miles feels like

[1:07:42] with your car, and they're used to driving 30,

[1:07:45] And they're not going to be used to coming down to 25 in one city when every other city is 30 in the state of Minnesota.

[1:07:52] I think that unless we can get the whole damn county to go to 25 that it's really really a moody issue could be.

[1:08:03] Okay, other discussion pointed tonight. It's just information.

[1:08:08] I was just going to mention, um, is it maybe a call for doing some, um, policing of speeds on some back streets, side streets, some more random streets than we typically are hitting highway eight up, but I don't, I don't usually see a police officer catching speed on plus and happening or some of the other streets that maybe some of these people are saying, hey, it's not that it's the speed posted 30.

[1:08:37] It's these people that come racing through a 40, 45 miles an hour on a 30, you know, post.

[1:08:43] And I think there's some, there could be some truth to that too.

[1:08:46] Yeah. Yeah.

[1:08:48] And I think there's some places in town that absolutely cannot handle 30 miles an hour.

[1:08:53] And those are the ones that I do think we should, you know,

[1:08:57] hard jobs should be to represent the people in the neighborhood of express complaints about that.

[1:09:02] And we need to, we don't necessarily do something every time.

[1:09:06] but I think we need to be respectful of that.

[1:09:10] I'll let them know with the schools, with all those kids walking in school,

[1:09:13] riding their bikes, crossing the street.

[1:09:16] There's got to be a way to reduce that somehow.

[1:09:20] Through the county and health that way.

[1:09:23] Through the county, so other, and this is just, it's information.

[1:09:30] We can do more, we can certainly kind of be on board,

[1:09:34] paid attention to what the highway 8DL is. You know, I drive through St.

[1:09:42] Cry, I drive through Oceola, and quite frankly I like 25. I have to

[1:09:47] mentally adjust, but it helps you to, they have similar to us, they have kind of

[1:09:52] nice downtowns, and it feels good to drive a little bit slower through those

[1:09:59] down town.

[1:10:00] They also have really hilly backstreet in St. Croix, and it makes sense to me that you go a little bit slower. So, is there any particular at next step action? This was meant for discussion?

[1:10:21] Okay.

[1:10:23] Can we maybe just revisit this in 27? And also keep tabs on Highway 8.

[1:10:32] eight. Yep.

[1:10:36] We good with that? This will be added to the speed limit file that we have on

[1:10:42] yeah with the engine air. I'd love to get the county. Let them know that hey we're like a

[1:10:50] look at reducing on Holanda maybe even through time on 20 and you know get the county involved a

[1:10:59] a little bit to hate, you know, you're not, you're not, those are your roads, or there's

[1:11:04] the area roads in a sense that, you know, but they're going through our city, and we are

[1:11:07] concerned about traffic flow and accidents and everything else, and they get them a little

[1:11:12] more involved, that we're really looking at that, especially, I guess, through the residential

[1:11:17] parts of, at least from us all the way through, through a little bit of all the way past Kaishai

[1:11:24] and going from 20 all the way past all the residential places until you hit, you know,

[1:11:31] go past Whiskey Road there and stuff, then you can get 50 and go and everything else should

[1:11:35] be slowing down through town.

[1:11:39] Okay, so we're good with that.

[1:11:41] Now we're moving to staff updates, Dan, LAPD building update.

[1:11:46] So this is the latest in grants that got this about four hours ago from Bill before you left.

[1:11:51] So, Chicago is meeting next Tuesday to discuss the cross-annison report, the first draft of it.

[1:12:00] So, they're meeting in a special session next week.

[1:12:03] To talk about it, once they meet, we'll know more information whether they accepted it,

[1:12:08] have an offer, you know, kind of what their proposed, you know, what their preferences for a new building.

[1:12:14] But they did meet cross-annison, it's going to be sending over the report and they're going to

[1:12:19] next Tuesday and special session to discuss the results and then once we get kind of the

[1:12:24] results of that meeting, we'll kind of know next steps, but some good positive movement

[1:12:28] there at dates on the calendar for the start of the meeting and we'll get next to Tuesday

[1:12:32] what Bill told me.

[1:12:34] Thank you.

[1:12:35] That's exciting news.

[1:12:39] Any comments on that?

[1:12:43] Otherwise, I had put a note here.

[1:12:45] Could you just give us a little update on what's coming on the work session, the next work

[1:12:49] session?

[1:12:50] Yeah, so the interim's council, the big topic for the next council work session is going to be going over the

[1:12:56] Capital accounts for the city

[1:12:58] We got the preliminary budget done now

[1:13:01] I've been working through and reorganizing or not and sort of read as Jesse put it putting different buckets for our capital accounts

[1:13:09] I'm kind of consolidating our capital accounts

[1:13:11] Staff are we meeting internally prior to that meeting to sort of set up we've kind of already set up from a capital planning

[1:13:18] project perspective and bring that forward to council.

[1:13:21] But between now and October as you sort of have ideas for projects that you'd like to

[1:13:26] see included in there, I'm not intending October's recession to really kind of, we're not

[1:13:30] going to rank them.

[1:13:30] I just need to know kind of what we're kind of looking at wanting to include, because what

[1:13:35] we're doing right now is that we've had about 14 or 15 different capital accounts.

[1:13:40] It's been hard to track, we're trying to provide more transparency of if we do project A.

[1:13:45] How does that impact other projects?

[1:13:46] So, we'll start looking at the high-level structure of it in October, but also bring

[1:13:52] if you have projects that you know you'd like to see, include it in the future capital

[1:13:56] plan, bring ideas for that to October's meeting, and we'll start looking at getting those

[1:14:00] included in the correct bucket for October.

[1:14:03] No, you would know there are enterprise funds, will this also include capital for the enterprise

[1:14:08] funds?

[1:14:10] My goal is I'm hoping to bring at least an idea for capital because sewer and water do

[1:14:14] We have had roads in terms of how we're doing that.

[1:14:17] There's capital projects in there as well.

[1:14:19] Bear in mind, this is not going to be a final list.

[1:14:21] I have, you know, I mean, I have gone through hours

[1:14:26] and hours, hours of spreadsheet trying to consolidate

[1:14:28] how all this functions.

[1:14:30] But we'll bring at least a high level analysis

[1:14:32] of the sewer water funds as well for the meeting.

[1:14:36] It won't be, these are not going to be final lists.

[1:14:38] I'm just trying to memorialize what was,

[1:14:41] what we have been saving for, kind of having patent

[1:14:43] and top look at those lists as well to say,

[1:14:44] are these still the priority products

[1:14:46] from a staff perspective?

[1:14:47] So if something that, you know,

[1:14:49] with Adam, like a piece of equipment, for example,

[1:14:52] that paint no longer needs what we've taken off,

[1:14:54] I really want to focus on it.

[1:14:55] Is there something that council wants us to start pricing out?

[1:14:59] What are those?

[1:15:00] I want to see those bigger projects that council wants us to at least acknowledge it in a certain point. We'll have to go through a shrink choice and see when we sequence them in. But from now until then, bring those ideas of what you want to see included in a future capital list. And don't focus on, I want to see this vehicle or this. This is more bigger. I want to see parks. I want to see downtown areas. I want to see some other areas of the time. I want to, you know, build a major, whatever it is. Just bring the ideas in. Talk to us. We can start taking a look at what we want to have included in.

[1:15:29] future capital plans.

[1:15:33] So Dan, you also gave us homework.

[1:15:35] I don't know exactly when.

[1:15:38] But we were asking about, what about Park Street?

[1:15:42] What about this or that?

[1:15:42] And you gave us homework to send you a list.

[1:15:46] Did we do that?

[1:15:47] Not everyone did, but again, it sort of

[1:15:49] bring those lists to October.

[1:15:52] I mean, this has capital plans evolve.

[1:15:56] I'm looking at a starting point to start

[1:15:57] to be like, what else do I want to,

[1:15:59] You know, what are we messing with as you guys sit in kind of dreams?

[1:16:02] Capri Wattlandstrom to be get those ideas, it's not the intent where I'm going to say this project.

[1:16:07] Yeah, I won't be able to say this is a 65,000 project we're going to do in five years,

[1:16:10] at least to get an idea, price out what a X project would look like and what bucket does it come in.

[1:16:17] And the police kind of puts the, you know, I mean, because there are some things I would like to see done,

[1:16:24] but I don't want to bring it up until we know what's going to happen.

[1:16:27] And nice, I have those building projects right now in a capital improvement bucket that

[1:16:35] are noted that depending upon what we do with the police may have to advance or may not advance,

[1:16:40] which that's why I'm saying after we're not going to be able to like fully adopt this is

[1:16:45] sort of the first step in getting a capital plan together. Because we have two buildings that are

[1:16:50] said, now you're right, now that we can be doing some things with some of that.

[1:16:55] So Judy, I just have a question on your comment about homework.

[1:17:01] Yeah.

[1:17:01] So when we had our prioritization meeting, where we brought that company in and we all

[1:17:08] sat around and did our priorities for the overall project and that, I thought was fairly clear

[1:17:15] of what about what all our direction was.

[1:17:18] Are you talking about additional priorities above and beyond that?

[1:17:22] No, we got into in the meeting and we were saying like, hey, what about, you know, is

[1:17:28] there money in the Park Street parking lot budget?

[1:17:30] What are we going to do?

[1:17:32] Are we going to finish that off?

[1:17:33] There were some questions about, I'm summarizing Dave Phil or Dan, but, you know, have we finished

[1:17:41] some of the projects that we were going to do?

[1:17:43] have we finished some of the things we're going to be working on and you know

[1:17:48] and certainly I brought to park board stuff around like coffee kind of park I

[1:17:52] mean go up there and look it needs some work but that's no longer in the

[1:17:55] park that's in a different area so I put a list together and I sent it to you

[1:18:02] and I thought you had told us all to get it back to you and what I would say so

[1:18:09] So this is sort of maybe how to put some clarity on this.

[1:18:11] So we have, like, take the downtown sign and fit in finishing

[1:18:16] as a guy that first developed.

[1:18:17] So we picked parts of that off as part of what we use the excess funds

[1:18:21] relate to the parts you're part cannot do.

[1:18:23] But there have been some conversation in the past that, like,

[1:18:26] what does it take for us to fully do everything in that list?

[1:18:30] The question before council, is that still a priority?

[1:18:32] You want to put those in capital plans and certain the sequence

[1:18:34] that out so we can start saving for that because that impacts

[1:18:37] the capital levy or are we looking at other projects as a priority you know

[1:18:42] because again full disclosure we have limited funds to do where sort of those

[1:18:47] priorities I'm not saying actually we're going to sit down and say we're going

[1:18:50] to weigh out electric monument sign that Bruce and Vision is that more important

[1:18:54] than building upgrade that's at a future conversation I need to know sort of

[1:18:58] what are those projects that we want to at least acknowledge to make sure that

[1:19:03] But these capital plans reflect the council's vision for they want the city to go, and I'm also coming into this meeting where there's going to be specific parameters for what qualifies as the capital project historically that has not been there, so $5,000 minimum price in a five-year lifespan.

[1:19:20] if it doesn't meet that criteria,

[1:19:22] it's maintenance that comes out of the drive-off line.

[1:19:24] So Greg, yeah, I didn't do good summary

[1:19:27] because some of what that homework was,

[1:19:29] like we talked about,

[1:19:30] are we gonna move the dock down at Beach Park?

[1:19:34] That's not a capital discussion, but, yeah.

[1:19:38] So this is a capital discussion.

[1:19:41] Yeah, and I do recall the conversation,

[1:19:44] and I know Brian, you had asked some very good questions

[1:19:48] about okay, what happened downtown?

[1:19:49] Judy, I think you have made some comments about, you know, the fencing and then the chairs

[1:19:55] that may or may not have been ordered that we're supposed to be in that.

[1:20:00] Court heard by the bakery, that kind of stuff. That's not cap relieving, right? No, two different

[1:20:06] really, you, you kind of directed two different homework, really? Okay.

[1:20:12] Yeah, Dan could just email out what you've got, maybe on the list, and then just your

[1:20:17] couple questions will respond with what I didn't send anything over to you, Dan. So yeah,

[1:20:23] if you could just send us what you got, the master list, and then we'll add to it. And

[1:20:28] And my master list right now is being

[1:20:31] furiously worked on by myself and staff.

[1:20:33] So I'll get it out before the work session.

[1:20:35] So you have time with it.

[1:20:37] You probably will get it out.

[1:20:39] I'll give you as much runway time as possible,

[1:20:41] but you probably get the weekend,

[1:20:43] and maybe a week to take a look at it.

[1:20:45] Because it'll show at least a starting point

[1:20:47] from a project standpoint.

[1:20:48] But you've gotten assistant damage.

[1:20:50] You can just tell them to do that too.

[1:20:52] Oh, I told everybody we're sitting down

[1:20:54] for about four hours and hashing this out.

[1:20:56] So it's not, I'm built in the back end to make sure the other end process for it.

[1:21:01] Thanks, he's here.

[1:21:02] So thank you.

[1:21:03] Any other staff updates?

[1:21:07] That's what I have done for me today.

[1:21:09] Anything for any of the commissions, any major?

[1:21:16] I don't know if you've heard, but Nancy Hoffman is retiring.

[1:21:21] She's been the county's head of HRA EDA.

[1:21:24] And she has announced a retirement, it's effective November and I do think she has some vacation

[1:21:31] timed lined up, so if you do want to make sure you say goodbye, do that.

[1:21:38] Anything else from anybody, if not?

[1:21:42] I could, I mean, I could just give a quick update, I mean, planning, we had some discussions

[1:21:46] about water runoff, papers, things like that, so a pretty robust conversation about, you

[1:21:54] what the future of our building looks like around the lakes in the future and

[1:22:02] discussions about Minnetonco where you maximize all the space on the land as

[1:22:07] possible as long as you've got water runoff taking care of is that okay. We're going to run

[1:22:13] into more of these cabins being torn down and new houses put on and what are the limitations limits

[1:22:18] that we want to put on? What do we want our community to look like? So it's part of the landscaping

[1:22:24] project that's going on over it, probably in my two neighbors, I talked to the DNR representative

[1:22:32] and he is willing to, I asked him if he would come in and present to the council and planning

[1:22:39] and talk about what they see around these lakes and stuff and what they record their recommendations

[1:22:45] and kind of, you know, what do we want, we can kind of control a little bit of how we want our

[1:22:53] of lakes then property to look around the community and it is an interesting conversation.

[1:23:00] So we may want to invite him in some time to talk about that.

[1:23:05] Thank you.

[1:23:08] Okay.

[1:23:09] Otherwise, can we entertain a motion to adjourn?

[1:23:13] So moved.

[1:23:15] Second.

[1:23:17] All in favor?

[1:23:18] All right.

[1:23:19] All right.

[1:23:19] So moved.

[1:23:20] We are adjourned.

[1:23:21] Brian, I have a question for you.

[1:23:23] Yes, sir.

[1:23:23] how much

City Council

Transcript