[0:34]

[0:53] A mother and daughter were killed.

[0:55] Several daycare children may have witnessed

[0:56] some of what happened.

[0:58] And you know, as far by all accounts I mean,

[1:02] mental health crisis could have been part of that.

[1:05] I just want to mention that because this

[1:06] could happen in any community.

[1:07] North Branch has had its own share of mental health

[1:11] crisis You know, people that have been harmed,

[1:13] people that have died.

[1:16] And so I just want to acknowledge that because this

[1:18] touches every single community So if we could just take

[1:21] a moment of silence in honor of the victims,

[1:23] I would appreciate it All right.

[1:36] Thank you, everybody.

[1:37] And just One last plea for if anybody

[1:40] is in a mental health crisis we do have nine, eight, eight.

[1:43] You can call 911.

[1:44] There are lots of resources out there.

[1:46] Please do not hesitate to reach out.

[1:47] This could happen to any of us in we've all kind of gone

[1:52] through that stress, you know, whether it's anxiety, depression

[1:56] a combination of things.

[1:57] I think it's all hit us at one point or another.

[1:59] And as a community we need to come together and make sure

[2:02] that we can support each other.

[2:03] So just wanted to make sure that we get those resources.

[2:06] And I may work with you, Matthew and Chief,

[2:08] to maybe try to post a list of things I found today.

[2:12] Just kind of quick stuff, but nine, eight Eight

[2:14] sees you put in your phone.

[2:15] Easy to remember as well as 911.

[2:17] So just want to touch on that real quick Thank

[2:20] you for allowing me to do that So

[2:22] our agenda approval is in front of us before we jump in.

[2:27] Any consent agenda items that we'd

[2:29] like to be pulled Oh, okay And just

[2:34] as a reminder for the audience that they watch.

[2:37] And so consent agenda We're proven

[2:38] everything all at one time.

[2:40] Usually they're not controversial things

[2:43] There was one thing in there about the Leaf program

[2:45] And again, just because our public works director had kind

[2:49] of a serious personal matter to attend to,

[2:51] he couldn't be here tonight.

[2:52] So that's the only reason it got delayed until the next council

[2:55] meeting All right.

[2:57] So with that said, do you have a motion to approve the agenda

[3:00] as laid out in front of us?

[3:01] So moved OK.

[3:02] I have a first and second.

[3:04] Any questions?

[3:05] No.

[3:05] All right.

[3:06] All in favor Signify by saying I,

[3:08] I. That's unanimously All right.

[3:11] Just point out public comment I know.

[3:13] I saw one person.

[3:14] Look like they signed up or at least a couple

[3:23] All right Mr. Johnson Mr. Mayor, Council members, staff chief

[3:33] I'm standing here.

[3:34] Paul Johnson commander of the local American Legion here.

[3:38] And I just wanted to take some time out to thank the city

[3:43] of North Branch for all the support that you folks gave

[3:47] collectively to make our mid-summer the 100th anniversary

[3:52] that the Legion has been hosting at such

[3:55] a great success And honestly, I know we've been out.

[3:58] We've been doing it for 100 years,

[4:00] but I just wanted to publicly, for the record state that

[4:07] we as a community couldn't.

[4:08] And as a legion, couldn't do what

[4:10] we did without your approval with all your hard work,

[4:15] with your people on the streets public works,

[4:18] making sure that we have the barriers put up for safety.

[4:21] There's so many details to make such an event happen,

[4:26] and I just really felt the need to just

[4:29] give one big, giant public thank you from the American legion.

[4:33] And I know from the city of North Branch

[4:37] because all I saw over a four day period,

[4:39] with the exception of One little storm that rolled through, a lot

[4:42] of people having a great time.

[4:44] And that's what it was all about And then

[4:46] hanging out with with the folks at the street dance

[4:50] as you're getting to that, you know, 11,

[4:52] 12 close to one in the morning time frame with some

[4:55] of our officers who are on duty there just seeing

[4:58] them sacrificing time to make sure everyone

[5:00] else can be out having a good time Again,

[5:03] it just it warrants a public.

[5:05] Thank you on the American Legion's part And again,

[5:08] we will continue to work as we move into one on one for next

[5:13] year With that, our American Legion is is changing a little

[5:18] bit now of our focus from mid-summer to, again,

[5:21] our Veterans Memorial today I believe it was today,

[5:25] this morning, the American Legion donated another $30,000

[5:29] to the beautification committee to help get that regional

[5:32] veterans Memorial built. And in about the last year and a half

[5:36] or so, our little post across the street has raised over

[5:40] $150,000 out of the 300,000 that have been raised And as I look

[5:48] at the calendar it's hard to believe it's been

[5:49] 25 years since our 911 tragedy.

[5:53] And the ongoing global war on terror in this past mid-summer,

[5:57] we had two Gold Star families as our grand marshals.

[6:01] Those lives were lost as a result of actions after 911.

[6:04] And some of us, we've been to some of these great parts

[6:08] of the world, Afghanistan and Iraq and all

[6:11] these other wonderful places to hunt these people down,

[6:15] which we're hitting.

[6:16] The 25 anniversary for 911.

[6:18] To me, it's we've got to give our public this memorial.

[6:23] And we've got a whole bunch of irons in the fire to try

[6:26] and bring this thing home soon.

[6:29] We're expecting big things in the in the coming months

[6:31] to really get this thing to fruition getting the concrete

[6:34] laid, getting the stolen sport purchased

[6:36] and all of that and all our city is

[6:40] on board I know you guys are now kind of with the beautification

[6:43] committee in charge of that.

[6:45] We are still obviously going to be the biggest supporters

[6:48] as a veterans organization US.

[6:50] And I can speak for the VFW since I'm a member of that

[6:53] as well.

[6:54] And i just again, ask the city to again,

[6:57] help as much as you can especially in October,

[7:00] when those first 10% taxes roll in on the gaming things keep us

[7:04] in mind This is a reminder, again,

[7:07] we donated $30,000 to a beautification committee today

[7:10] We get this memorial wall built in a year That $30,000 can be

[7:15] going to anything else in this community and that'll be

[7:19] forever into the future.

[7:21] Help us get this thing built. The Legion

[7:23] will stand by this community as we've had for over 100 years.

[7:27] So just keep us in mind with that.

[7:29] But as we face 25 years since 911

[7:33] and we've lost people as a result of that conflict again,

[7:36] let's just get this thing built for them and do all that we can

[7:40] I love this town.

[7:42] I think most of you all know that And it's

[7:44] what we all this town, and I know that we have support

[7:48] with the council and our city just really appreciate all

[7:51] that you all do with all the irons and all the fires

[7:55] that you've got burning But as a reminder,

[7:58] just try to keep us in there somewhere as well

[8:02] With that, I will all colonels just

[8:04] get in front of a microphone.

[8:05] You don't want to leave I will leave.

[8:08] So that others can bring up other business with the council

[8:10] But again.

[8:11] And in the end, I just want to say thanks again

[8:14] So from the American Legion.

[8:15] Thank you.

[8:16] Thank you.

[8:17] Thank you. you for All right, Sam you're

[8:23] up to council members.

[8:30] Sheeba, Canada, and midterm.

[8:32] I'm here once again to encourage you to vote to cancel the flop

[8:36] contract Your constituents have done their homework carved out

[8:40] time to write emails that go unanswered and showed

[8:43] two meetings that did not even have

[8:44] all council members present.

[8:46] We have worked hard to educate You

[8:48] regarding how helpers truly work and the dangerous possibilities

[8:52] of them.

[8:52] Despite feeling brushed off, we are still moving forward.

[8:56] So far we have gone over the following potential abuse

[8:59] by staff, hardware and security vulnerabilities for hacking

[9:03] the overwhelming failure rate of lpas to read plates correctly.

[9:07] Fourth Amendment concerns and the recent ruling by the Supreme

[9:10] Court on June 29th that pulling your phone's location data

[9:14] constitutes a search and requires

[9:16] a warrant cost to repair, vandalized or stolen equipment.

[9:20] Concerns that flock itself is lying about the capabilities

[9:23] vulnerabilities and upstream data

[9:25] sharing of lpas personal data being sold to third parties

[9:30] as made possible by the customer agreement signed by the Council.

[9:34] While I believe that stopping an act of abduction

[9:36] is a very, very good reason to have these cameras,

[9:39] I understand that there are currently too many unknowns, too

[9:43] many cases of abuse too much potential for them to be used

[9:46] against the public on a mass scale too many cases

[9:49] of misread plates leading to violent encounters with police,

[9:53] with innocent individuals And too many times

[9:56] the ALP failed to prove anything for us

[9:58] to go forward with a flock control act.

[10:01] Our city is made up of hardworking people who do not

[10:04] want any one playing with their tax money

[10:06] and this feels negligent Continuing to vote yes

[10:09] on a flat contract and knowing there are great risks

[10:13] and unknowns while you do so will absolutely be a stain

[10:16] on your personal legacies.

[10:17] Thank you.

[10:18] Thank you, Sam Sam.

[10:25] Not bad for someone who says that they

[10:26] don't like to be around people.

[10:27] So good job You made that comment once upon me.

[10:34] Here.

[10:35] I get it.

[10:36] All right, West.

[10:36] Mr. West i don't have a whole lot

[10:43] more to add Sam's been doing a great job

[10:45] of bringing everything up.

[10:47] The only thing I would like to add

[10:49] is not just canceling contract but putting either a ban

[10:53] or moratorium on any helpers going

[10:57] forward for a good foreseeable future would be great.

[11:02] And would go a long way to show that you guys are

[11:05] listening to us So thank you.

[11:08] Thank you Mark Mr. Mark ?

[11:16] Yeah, I just wanted to let you know that i like

[11:20] that, you're going forward with the thought of cancer

[11:22] and cancel it all.

[11:24] Not moving for something other companies product work.

[11:28] And I think this show our community

[11:32] will stand up if you don't advertise what's on the agenda.

[11:38] Enough.

[11:40] Because we didn't know about it until after the fact because we

[11:44] don't look at your web page every day.

[11:48] We're on social media every day or but we

[11:52] don't look at your web page every day

[11:54] to see what's on the agenda.

[11:57] So it and it it might have thought

[12:00] might not have seemed important at the time,

[12:04] but it's very important in this whole country's in a stage

[12:07] right now where everything's important.

[12:12] If you're on the right side OK.

[12:16] Thank you, Mark All right.

[12:22] As anybody else would like to provide public comment,

[12:24] that's all I have to i have signed up All right.

[12:31] We'll move forward then So move on to consent agenda.

[12:36] So this is our time to actually approve the consent agenda.

[12:40] So do we have a motion ?

[12:43] I'll make that motion.

[12:45] There to approve consent agendas.

[12:47] Items is and attempt to end as in no.

[12:52] Nora or November November?

[12:56] Yes, sir.

[12:56] Numeral numeral?

[12:57] Yes.

[12:57] All right.

[12:58] I can second that.

[12:59] I got a first and second.

[13:00] Second by council member.

[13:01] I bring her All right.

[13:03] Any questions ?

[13:05] No.

[13:05] All right.

[13:05] All in favor.

[13:06] Signify by saying I. I ask unanimously.

[13:09] Thank you All right.

[13:15] So under nine is considered a recommendation

[13:17] A positive for cancellation.

[13:19] Right forward from the August 5th 2026 work session.

[13:22] So our city administrator, Matthew Hill,

[13:24] is going to provide the summary to get

[13:25] this started Thank you, Mayor and council Yeah,

[13:28] a little background on this.

[13:29] We do have on May 13th, City council did approve a three year

[13:33] contract with Flock safety for the installation

[13:36] of Seven automated license plate reader cameras.

[13:39] The decision was passed with a32 vote funded and a one time

[13:43] allocation from 2023 state public safety aid following this

[13:47] approval, the city did receive significant community feedback

[13:51] and expressions of concern regarding privacy data

[13:54] and the deployment of this technology In response to these

[13:57] concerns the City Council set up a community work session

[14:02] and public information meeting which was held on August 5th,

[14:07] 26, to facilitate dialogue between the residents,

[14:10] city staff and the elected officials As of right now August

[14:15] 7 on this, this right up, but consistent to that, 2 2 2 today,

[14:20] three of the seven cameras have been physically installed,

[14:23] but they're not operational.

[14:24] They're currently bagged up and not on the locations are listed

[14:29] as Lincoln trail in through 60th Forest Boulevard and three 60th

[14:33] and Saint Croix Trail and 387.

[14:37] None of these cameras have been activated They're currently

[14:40] non-operational I mentioned the bagging

[14:43] the precautionary measures put into place

[14:45] for that the installation of the remaining four cameras

[14:49] has been paused pending further council direction.

[14:52] And that's why we're here this evening We do want to bring up

[14:56] some considerations for the Council in regards

[14:59] to this next step.

[15:01] The total contract value for the Three year agreement is $63,000,

[15:04] while the initial installation fees were waived any requests

[15:10] to remove the already installed cameras

[15:13] would likely fall outside of the scope of the project.

[15:16] So there might be additional costs for that.

[15:18] Chief Meyer has requested some information

[15:21] from Flock regarding the implications

[15:23] of canceling the contract.

[15:24] We have yet to receive any information on that from Flock

[15:27] directly.

[15:29] There may be updates as the days go forward,

[15:33] but we are looking at next steps.

[15:38] The city council is now being asked

[15:41] to determine the future of the a l e r program With flock.

[15:45] You've got a couple of different courses of action

[15:46] that you can take.

[15:47] He can continue to move forward with the original installation

[15:52] You can put this on indefinite pause

[15:55] maintain the current status and remove

[15:57] the three non operational cameras for precautions.

[16:01] And then the third operator or Third option

[16:04] is removal and termination of the contract At the community

[16:10] meeting on August Fifth, Mayor Schreiber did state that he was

[16:13] going to request that the city council place

[16:15] the project on an indefinite pause

[16:17] and there was consensus of the three council members that were

[16:20] present present at that meeting That request is now being

[16:24] brought forward to the city council for formal consideration

[16:28] the requested action.

[16:29] This evening is a motion in a second to pause the clock

[16:32] installation as brought forward from the August fifth, 2026,

[16:36] work session OK.

[16:37] Thank you, sir.

[16:39] All right.

[16:39] So obviously council members and Meachum

[16:42] you were not there last week.

[16:43] So before we kind of jump into other things,

[16:46] is there anything that you want to comment

[16:47] or or say you want to note right now?

[16:52] OK The only question I have is financially,

[16:56] if we do approve the termination do we think we think we're

[17:01] paying the original contract price plus removal

[17:03] or will we save some from the basically

[17:06] not installing the four?

[17:07] Originally we don't have the answer to that.

[17:10] We have reached out to Flock to get that consideration I think

[17:14] there they may be waiting until the actual action by the Council

[17:17] to provide that data.

[17:19] But we do have that request at Flock,

[17:21] They've acknowledged that they've received the request We

[17:24] just have not received the information yet

[17:26] And we can revise But the action you could put in your options

[17:35] with it.

[17:35] Yeah, absolutely All right.

[17:39] Councilmember Binger or Canada you were there last week.

[17:43] So any many comments, questions Comments?

[17:45] No.

[17:45] Yeah.

[17:46] Yeah.

[17:46] For for me, it's you know, to then definitely While you said

[17:57] you know, pause indefinite pause because i think there's

[18:00] some questions that we have to get

[18:01] answered First to understand how we can move forward with this.

[18:06] And I've got some things that, you

[18:07] know some feedback and stuff.

[18:08] I want to provide Yes.

[18:10] Yeah.

[18:10] Because I you know, just, you know, take out the word pause

[18:15] and just, you know, take it off the table right away.

[18:18] I don't think we're able to cancel it today

[18:21] because your chief, you're trying

[18:23] to get the dollars involved and then also listening to the you

[18:30] know, the fine residents here, you know

[18:32] you know, like of only company.

[18:35] Right.

[18:35] So to reward three words and to say,

[18:38] hey indefinitely not install any block type cameras elsewhere x

[18:45] on or okay Sam you probably know the 47 that are available

[18:50] or whatever.

[18:51] I can't name them all, but you know,

[18:55] to reword that would be great.

[18:58] Yeah.

[18:59] Make a motion as I mentioned, you so well, I wonder.

[19:02] Excuse me, Regina That gap would be I

[19:05] mean, personally on the financial and i

[19:07] appreciate Councilmember Glaze comment or question there is it

[19:11] would it be that imprudent for us to cancel at this time

[19:15] going forward with the pause?

[19:17] But again, hearing the voice of the community say after a vote

[19:21] or during the converse days, we go,

[19:23] here's consensus to add the next agenda item.

[19:26] So that it.

[19:27] We're being publicly say and adding

[19:29] cancel to the next meeting.

[19:31] Sorry the next agenda item but to our next meeting

[19:33] later this month.

[19:34] So that it is on there and it's remained in public

[19:37] and there is some accountability as opposed to just pausing it.

[19:41] And then thinking, you know as a city resident,

[19:46] you can think, well, they're just pausing it

[19:47] and put it on the back burner to an up in attention.

[19:50] But if we put it on the next agenda item,

[19:52] it gives the chief time to hear back

[19:54] from about the contract and those financial implications

[19:57] that we may face.

[19:58] So that would be kind of the route

[19:59] that I would be looking OK.

[20:01] So you would say, though, we'd still have these three options.

[20:04] Yeah.

[20:04] Not get rid of the options that we would want.

[20:06] This item if we do the pause Okay, but then give the consent

[20:10] is the staff to put this on the council conversation

[20:13] on the next meeting.

[20:15] So that we give staff and the chief time

[20:18] to get those financial considerations in the contract

[20:20] language So, so last week, you know, my purpose on kind

[20:25] of choosing that type of language,

[20:26] we were missing to call the members.

[20:27] We didn't have answers from Flock, how

[20:30] we would go about doing that.

[20:32] I also made the statement that, you know,

[20:34] this is about what we want, right?

[20:35] I mean however, that works, the slack You know, I think if we

[20:40] feel like those three need to be taken down right away,

[20:42] that's what we should do I'm going to quick just provide

[20:46] a summary kind of not like last week,

[20:49] but it probably took me about five minutes or so.

[20:51] But Yeah, so I may misunderstood you,

[20:54] but you're saying about the three cameras

[20:56] remaining or the three options?

[20:57] No, these three, I don't know When

[21:01] you said that I didn't want it misconstrued

[21:03] Yeah, it was just three.

[21:04] Yeah You know, first of all, I want

[21:06] to say that I am probably the residents that came forward.

[21:10] It's not easy.

[21:10] It can be nerve wracking getting up.

[21:12] You know, some of you said that you didn't.

[21:14] You were nervous and stuff.

[21:15] You didn't show it, but it does take a lot.

[21:21] And I know that there was an attempt early on just

[21:24] to do this through Facebook, but i will tell you, for me,

[21:28] it made a big difference for our whole council for you

[21:30] to come in and interact with us.

[21:32] That made a big difference We can go back and forth,

[21:35] ask questions You guys made statements and that says a lot.

[21:38] That shows it shows that you do care.

[21:41] I hope that you do choose to stay involved.

[21:43] But the discussions coming up and, you know, for me,

[21:46] I've mentioned this before, this was a tool that our police

[21:51] chief had come to the council with trying to enhance,

[21:55] you know their abilities to catch the worst of the worst

[21:58] for the crimes missing missing persons

[22:00] was another one with his license plate readers.

[22:03] You know, as I've gotten feedback in my mind,

[22:07] it kind of formed from three different categories.

[22:09] We have the Facebook group and you guys strongly opposed.

[22:13] I had people who are not crazy about the cameras,

[22:15] but saw the benefits and seemed to be willing to see

[22:19] the offset on that.

[22:20] And then the third group was people who told me repeatedly,

[22:24] I have nothing to hide.

[22:25] Right.

[22:25] And they saw the potential benefits.

[22:28] There are three different categories.

[22:29] I did hear from a lot of people A lot of people

[22:32] chose and I'm just trying to be straight with what they told

[22:36] me and chose not to engage in the Facebook stuff

[22:38] because they just didn't feel like it was going to be a very

[22:40] productive That was some of the feedback

[22:42] I just want to share with some of you that were on that group.

[22:46] But I do see a common theme and that common theme was,

[22:49] you know did not understand completely

[22:53] the function of the Alpers.

[22:55] You guys had mentioned that too but also I

[22:58] didn't understand which guardrails were

[23:00] in place to protect the data.

[23:02] So from all three groups that I kind of saw this feedback coming

[23:07] from, that was a common theme You

[23:11] know I have had a couple of conversations with our county

[23:14] sheriff saying you know, I wanted to get local feedback

[23:18] to they did not see locally, what some of you

[23:21] have brought forward, but obviously

[23:22] we've seen a nationally.

[23:23] Right.

[23:24] There have been some issues They see it as a valuable tool.

[23:27] It's helped them solve some of the crimes.

[23:29] I've been following Sandy County Sheriff and Chief,

[23:33] what's i for that we say?

[23:37] Yeah I thought he did a great job of couple of times of trying

[23:39] to describe trying to provide data

[23:42] But again, if you don't trust the data if you don't trust

[23:46] the system and that information doesn't matter

[23:50] listen to a conversation.

[23:52] This morning.

[23:53] I happened to catch a radio interview with Mendota

[23:56] Heights Police Chief.

[23:57] And again, she talked about the guardrails and the mistrust.

[24:01] And but she also said that they don't have them there,

[24:04] but they have had to utilize that to adjacent cities

[24:07] and said that it has been a valuable tool to help them solve

[24:11] some of the crimes, catch some of the people

[24:13] But she acknowledged that she doesn't think

[24:15] the right guardrails are in place yet to be able to utilize

[24:18] that that type of a technology So I just

[24:20] want to share a little bit of that with you You know,

[24:23] reading from Wesley Paul, they chose to our city well,

[24:26] Saint Paul chose to cancel their contract as well

[24:30] And I think the city manager stated it

[24:33] better than I probably could.

[24:34] He talked about the police department using the tool.

[24:37] The right way.

[24:38] But unless the public understands and trust a tool,

[24:40] it's not worth using The second statement

[24:43] that I really liked from the city manager

[24:44] there was carrying forward a system.

[24:47] The community does not yet.

[24:48] Trust cost the city more than it returns So at this point, that's

[24:53] kind of where I'm at as well I saw the benefits,

[24:56] but I also understand the loopholes, the concerns I also

[24:59] understand the government overreach stuff I've

[25:00] worked with three different federal agencies

[25:03] There's lots of things.

[25:04] I'm not happy with that.

[25:05] We have to deal with.

[25:06] So i do understand that the slippery slope mentality right?

[25:10] So I do understand that.

[25:11] And that was brought up several times My purpose,

[25:15] again on for me personally bringing this to the council

[25:18] to do a indefinite pause was because we

[25:20] just didn't have the right answers

[25:22] to know how we could cancel.

[25:24] This is not to say that we're not going to.

[25:26] I feel like that's the right path to go down.

[25:28] I just I think we need some more answers.

[25:30] And this is why I also said, if we do an indefinite pause you

[25:33] know, my request is to have public works go

[25:36] and take those three cameras down tomorrow

[25:37] just to secure them.

[25:39] So now we could charge for something.

[25:41] So somebody doesn't try to take matters into their own hands.

[25:44] If we're not activated And we want to make sure

[25:47] that community knew that we are trying to stop everything.

[25:51] So we could have these good conversations.

[25:52] OK So that's where I'm at on this

[25:54] and I just want to get some feedback.

[25:56] And so if there's anything from the council

[25:58] that you want to add to that, to just add one thing to that too,

[26:02] is.

[26:02] So for any helpers to be added back into the system,

[26:05] as I think they've stated, right?

[26:06] We just make sure it comes to a council vote whether we hear

[26:08] or not right?

[26:09] So we appreciate the approach that you've

[26:12] took this whole process.

[26:13] And I appreciate that.

[26:14] And I think we should just do it the same way again I agree.

[26:18] I concur Yeah.

[26:19] The intent to put a pause in this is not to, you know,

[26:22] somehow do a bait and switch and put another Brandon, that's not

[26:26] what this is about at all I've seen the word pressure used

[26:30] a couple of times.

[26:30] You don't have to pressure us Just talk to us.

[26:32] Right.

[26:33] And that's what you guys are doing

[26:34] And I can tell you, for me, I won't speak for that, for you.

[26:37] But I appreciate that that meant a lot

[26:40] more to just be able to have these back

[26:41] and forth conversation.

[26:42] So and as I'm looking at Thomas Jefferson in the back,

[26:45] I got to tell you guys there was a survey

[26:47] sent to me with a $2 bill and the president

[26:50] is Thomas Jefferson.

[26:51] So I think that was a sign right Exactly.

[26:55] Exactly Ashley, I don't think it was a president

[26:58] read I don't think he made it.

[27:00] But anyway so those are kind of my comments for council

[27:05] So any other otherwise.

[27:07] Jim I do like the idea about, you know,

[27:10] going a step further and saying that we don't you know,

[27:12] we will not install any type of license plate

[27:14] reader for the foreseeable future

[27:16] until we can get more information.

[27:17] That's the motion I'd like to make.

[27:18] Yeah You know, for the council.

[27:20] OK.

[27:20] Do you want to state it the however

[27:22] you want to state it them.

[27:23] Yeah.

[27:24] If I can't.

[27:26] Yeah.

[27:26] So the actual recommendation and so Yeah.

[27:30] So indefinitely i just had refrained

[27:35] from insulation of flock or any pertinent cameras.

[27:41] That's tied to, you know the Alpers installation

[27:46] and end up okay The word contracts not in here

[27:51] because we still have to get more

[27:52] information The word removal of the three are not in here.

[27:58] But I would like to say you know, remove the three.

[27:59] You know you should have that.

[28:01] Yeah, yeah, yeah.

[28:02] So remove the three either by the public works at you.

[28:06] Thank you.

[28:07] And council Mr. Or the removal This is contract and.

[28:13] Yeah.

[28:14] Right.

[28:14] So I want to be clear on this the cameras are not the cities.

[28:18] Yeah This is a service contract through for automated license

[28:23] plate reader through flock.

[28:26] They own the camera I guess I would caution this council is

[28:31] request to have us remove them as they use their own technology

[28:37] people to install them.

[28:38] We should request that directly from them

[28:40] and have that expedited as soon as we could

[28:42] We could table that until we get information from flock

[28:48] through, through chief Meyer correct.

[28:52] I wanted to give you the right.

[28:54] That's fine.

[28:54] You contractually you can't we would have

[28:57] to have to then to move it.

[28:59] Chief, did you communicate that to the flock in your email.

[29:02] So that, you know, we wanted the 3, 2 be taken down for now Yeah.

[29:07] Yep.

[29:07] That was one of the questions.

[29:09] OK.

[29:09] They could have responded.

[29:10] I'm at least out me and they chose not to.

[29:11] I would like to have the three cameras removed and number one,

[29:15] to secure them.

[29:16] Right to make sure they don't get damaged

[29:18] But number two, to show the other community that we're

[29:20] serious enough in what we're saying in our intent

[29:23] We're not damaging anything.

[29:24] We're just removing them and securing them for flock

[29:27] to take that understood Yeah.

[29:29] Yeah.

[29:30] You're on That's fine I just wanted

[29:38] to share the contract language if I can continue

[29:40] to add that that makes sense.

[29:42] Please.

[29:43] I would ask again.

[29:44] Yep.

[29:45] So yeah.

[29:46] And then remove the three cameras You know,

[29:50] immediately remove a secure public area.

[29:53] Yeah.

[29:54] Yeah.

[29:54] Remove secure I agree.

[29:56] That's my motion All right, have a second.

[30:00] I'll second.

[30:00] OK.

[30:01] All right.

[30:01] Any questions before we vote ?

[30:03] All right.

[30:04] All in favor.

[30:04] Signify by saying I, I any opposed ask unanimously.

[30:09] All right.

[30:10] Thank you, everybody Appreciate that.

[30:12] And we'll have more information coming

[30:14] hopefully by the next council meeting All right.

[30:20] So we can move on to the next item, which

[30:22] is Nine B, and that's to consider approval

[30:24] of a proposal from WSP for mitigation of trees affected

[30:27] by emerald ash borer So, Matthew, i think

[30:29] you're taking this one off.

[30:30] Yes, sir.

[30:31] Thank you very much, Mayor and council We are we

[30:34] have received a proposal to do a forestry count of ash trees

[30:39] in our community We are facing a significant public safety

[30:43] risk for all of the the dead and dying emerald ash trees

[30:48] due to the emerald ash borer We have had consultation with WSP

[30:53] is forestry program manager Emily Ball.

[30:55] It's been determined that the city should probably

[30:58] move forward with some sort of mitigation

[31:00] to help getting out in front of the removal of some

[31:02] of these trees, specifically those in the high traffic

[31:05] areas Minnesota DNR has a rapid assessment process that they do,

[31:11] which is essentially a drive by where they do counts of trees

[31:14] and front yards in public spaces, parks and such

[31:17] not in forested areas just in mowed areas They estimate

[31:21] that there are 2700 ash trees in our community

[31:24] and front and side yards of homes

[31:25] and in public right of ways.

[31:27] And parks.

[31:30] Many of these trees are are either

[31:32] dying or are already dead.

[31:37] We are working with them.

[31:39] We receive a proposal from WSP to to provide the city

[31:44] with the data and the tools necessary to manage

[31:46] the emerald ash borer infestation effectively.

[31:50] Some of the things that this proposal is going to provide

[31:52] is give us based information.

[31:56] So what they'll be mapped, they'll

[31:58] be identified as the location.

[32:00] Those trees will then be rated in regards

[32:03] to how healthy they are.

[32:06] So we can prioritize the ones that need to come out first.

[32:09] All of this information would then be cumulative evilly placed

[32:13] in a removal package based on the information

[32:15] that we need to require going forward.

[32:18] This information is also very valuable for any grant

[32:21] writing that we might do Unfortunately,

[32:24] there aren't any DNR grant opportunities out there

[32:27] for this right now is we're outside of the metro area

[32:31] The Mac Council has quite a few in their region,

[32:34] but we're outside of that.

[32:36] A one did just open up.

[32:38] That's going to be opened in October

[32:40] of this year from the environment

[32:43] and natural resources trust fund that has the goal of reducing

[32:47] emerald ash borer impacts and it does include under their list

[32:51] of services removal.

[32:53] So that's an important aspect to that.

[32:55] One, Having this completed inventory in hand

[32:58] would give us a better chance of being considered as a candidate

[33:04] and receiving money for the removal of some of the more

[33:12] dangerous trees that we have in our community We also have we're

[33:24] having a budget discussion today.

[33:25] We don't have any funding in the budget for Emerald ash,

[33:29] for damaged trees in our budget right now.

[33:31] And that's something that we also

[33:33] need to consider going forward is as we look down even Elm

[33:37] Street right here, we've got 27 of them

[33:39] that are damaged or dying.

[33:40] And in our in our city approval of this proposal we'll provide

[33:46] the city with data driven roadmap for managing

[33:49] our urban forest identifying the priority one trees that need

[33:52] to come down and the funding of this proposed bill

[33:57] We can use there's a couple of different options.

[33:59] We can reallocate some funding from different areas

[34:01] within the Public Works department,

[34:03] or we can utilize as this is right away

[34:06] and green space question we can utilize some of the newly

[34:10] established gambling proceeds to cover the cost of this

[34:13] as well, which starts next quarter.

[34:14] So that's the background on it.

[34:17] I'm open to any questions The proposal is in your packet.

[34:21] The recommend is that the city approve

[34:23] the proposal from us to conduct an emerald ash borer

[34:27] tree inventory.

[34:28] Sorry, this initiative is essential for identifying high

[34:32] risk ash trees and public property and developing

[34:35] a structured mitigation and removal plan The total for this

[34:41] study, which would incur about two months work over four

[34:44] people, would be about $34,000.

[34:48] $34,245 to be exact I'm open to any questions if you have them.

[34:55] So just clarify.

[34:56] The recommendation is for the tree

[34:57] inventory plus the tree inventory

[34:59] analysis, mapping and bids.

[35:01] Yes sir.

[35:02] So that'll put everything together

[35:03] so we can do grant writing right away Mr. Hill,

[35:07] does this also include private property, which

[35:10] just does not This is simply public property,

[35:13] meaning right of ways.

[35:15] Boulevards trees within boulevards, along streets parks.

[35:19] Okay.

[35:20] And the last just I just want to make that clear Not

[35:22] private property.

[35:23] OK.

[35:23] And great question.

[35:24] Thank you.

[35:25] Do we know who will do the removal it

[35:28] once once this project's done with the inventory,

[35:31] we would then be able to do some fundraising

[35:33] and grant writing to get the funding

[35:35] required to do the removal.

[35:36] And once that removal funding is secured,

[35:38] we would then be able to go out to bid for that project OK.

[35:41] So I want to.

[35:42] Okay, Thank you.

[35:43] Thank you But the 34,000 is just right.

[35:47] Identify you.

[35:51] The county Where do the counts put it in us

[35:54] and have that priority level of the trees.

[35:56] So we know which ones are the worst

[35:58] and we can just pull it up on the on the chart

[36:00] and we'd be able to identify and put those level one trees.

[36:04] The priorities out of it as soon as possible Okay.

[36:09] So Matthew, that's just up to 1,500 trees, right Potential?

[36:14] That's correct Okay.

[36:15] But we don't know the actual number.

[36:17] But that the max is 1,500 for this agreement.

[36:20] OK.

[36:20] So i talked to you about this was the last week,

[36:24] you mentioned DNR to give some type of estimate

[36:26] that we think there's more than 2000.

[36:28] There are the DNR did a rapid assessment, which is their drive

[36:32] by of the streets in our community

[36:35] And they've identified 2700 and that's

[36:37] in people's front yards, private property side yards as well.

[36:41] So that's public and private We are estimating 1500,

[36:46] but we won't know until the surveys completed roughly 60%.

[36:50] Yes.

[36:52] And then we don't have any idea of how much is going to cost

[36:54] per tree to take them down There's

[36:57] different levels of removal, of course,

[36:59] depending upon how badly damaged or if they're

[37:01] really brittle and dry.

[37:03] You can't even sell them.

[37:04] You have to take them down them by limb,

[37:05] otherwise they'll just fall over and explode and cause damage

[37:08] to the surrounding property All the other aspect of it

[37:13] is, do we take the stumps up So that's an obviously

[37:17] an extra cost for that as well.

[37:19] If it's public safety that we're mostly in and want

[37:23] to enforce right away, if the tree is out,

[37:25] we'll address the stumps later.

[37:26] We can rent a stump grinder and have a wood public works do it

[37:30] over time when time allows OK So obviously,

[37:39] the recommendation is approve this.

[37:40] But then so I'm just trying to go back and determine,

[37:44] do we know where this money's coming from?

[37:45] The other.

[37:46] We're still trying to make that determination.

[37:48] It is You want to address that a little more closely?

[37:52] I did provide a couple of different options.

[37:54] We do have the established gambling ordinance

[37:57] proceeds as it starts.

[37:59] We'll have that over for the first batch.

[38:01] And we don't know what the amounts are yet.

[38:03] We've got the policies that we're working on right now

[38:06] and working with those those agencies, and that process.

[38:10] But and then there is in discussion with the finance

[38:15] director opportunities to reallocate some funding

[38:18] within the Public Works Department

[38:19] over the course of this I think I'd

[38:24] like better direction of where the money's coming from.

[38:26] Before we approve it and agree.

[38:29] If you need more time to think about it

[38:31] or whatever the next meeting or next couple of meetings.

[38:33] But you know, instead of just proving it, not knowing where

[38:36] the funds are coming from, I'd rather have some type of a plan

[38:39] Well, we were looking at if we can't come up with enough to do

[38:47] the work, I reorganize things.

[38:49] Some of the expenses prioritizing what needs to be

[38:55] done versus what can wait.

[38:56] Another year If that can't generate enough.

[39:01] We were looking at the possible gambling proceeds

[39:06] to help with that.

[39:08] And those should be coming in.

[39:14] I think our First payment October is October

[39:18] and then we'll have another in December.

[39:21] And so that revenue would be available and is at this point

[39:26] unencumbered So the any comments on where the money's coming

[39:33] from, I'm concerned about losing the opportunity

[39:36] for grant funding for travel.

[39:37] Well, okay.

[39:40] Is there an estimation on what that car.

[39:42] I mean, again, we're dealing with hypotheticals

[39:44] based on how many trees in the state is of those trees.

[39:47] I mean, is there an estimation on what removal of the they

[39:50] estimated $1,000 per tree and that did include the removal

[39:54] of the stumps Oh, such.

[39:57] And that's if it's 1.5 million.

[39:59] Yeah.

[40:01] If it's all that volume got to go So you're saying 33,000

[40:07] and finding that is a lot different than 1.5 so that

[40:10] we can get some grant money.

[40:12] That's a big part of solving that problem.

[40:15] But the DNR did say that there's no current grant,

[40:18] but that doesn't mean that or is that what is on the DNR does

[40:21] not have any current grants.

[40:23] The only grant opportunity is opens on October 20 to 2026

[40:27] from the environmental and natural

[40:28] Resources Trust Fund, which they're specifically

[40:32] put in place for the year.

[40:33] OK So there is opportunities for US Council Movability or point

[40:37] if we're on this.

[40:38] And I think the timeline at a prior October right?

[40:41] That's correct October it does line up really well

[40:45] with that grant deadline or timeline

[40:49] Are you saying like to reappropriate

[40:50] money from 2026 to do this through this work study.

[40:54] Now?

[40:55] Yeah And then see what that how many there are what

[41:00] the potential costs would be correct and get those things

[41:03] you know get something out for bid this year

[41:07] and then parallel see what.

[41:10] So we say it's been spent 32,000 in hopes of getting a grant.

[41:15] Well, if they need to we need the data either way.

[41:18] Correct we do.

[41:19] This helps us be prepared for the grant

[41:22] and have a better opportunity of writing a better grant,

[41:25] coming back so that we're serious.

[41:28] I would be, yes.

[41:29] And I think i'd be embarrassed to see if direct city

[41:33] staff to write a grant application based

[41:35] on drive by estimations from the DIA I agree.

[41:38] Yeah.

[41:39] This is so that is private property.

[41:41] I think, if sharon's recommendation is or are

[41:47] recommending to Sharon, based on what she said,

[41:49] is to say ask public works to, you know,

[41:51] identify projects that potentially could get pushed

[41:53] to 27 and then utilize the unencumbered

[41:57] funds from the gambling proceeds that start in October to put

[42:02] towards this 32.

[42:04] I'm okay with that There is a few things listed in here

[42:09] for grant writing projects.

[42:11] 4 or 5 and 6 is just saying the WSP

[42:13] has helped get these awarded.

[42:16] Is that the way I'm understanding this?

[42:18] There's a $500,000 grant and Brooklyn Park amount of media

[42:23] and then right county Yeah.

[42:25] What that means okay if you look on page six.

[42:31] Yes it's relevant project experience is how that's titled.

[42:35] So there are different projects that they

[42:37] have worked on and grant writing and inventories All right.

[42:44] And we don't know about this pot of money,

[42:47] but a few cities or counties have gotten half $1 million.

[42:52] I got 125.

[42:53] Do we have any idea of what the maximum amount is for the grant

[42:57] through this agency that the grant

[43:01] opportunity opens in October?

[43:03] We don't know the specific Okay.

[43:05] And we wouldn't really know how much we need either

[43:07] based on the health trees.

[43:08] You wouldn't take them all out for no reason, right?

[43:10] They'd have to be right Yeah.

[43:13] This is safety hazard I think of.

[43:17] They need to identify what trees and how many

[43:21] that that needs to start around quickly.

[43:24] Yeah right.

[43:24] So Heidi from me.

[43:26] Yeah Mr. Mayor and council members,

[43:27] I just wanted to note that I spoke with our forestry program

[43:30] manager, and she did mention there

[43:31] are some particular criteria that North Branch

[43:34] that raises North branch's eligibility

[43:37] for some of these grants.

[43:38] I don't recall this specific but there is some pieces of data

[43:43] that have to do with North Branch that would put you

[43:45] in a better position for getting some of this grant money

[43:48] through this particular program or provides leverage.

[43:52] You're saying is it providing leverage because

[43:55] of this additional information that we have that that North

[43:59] Branch is specifically involved in what it sounds

[44:03] like a priority Yeah, it just there's

[44:06] in this particular money, there's criteria for which north

[44:09] Branch would rank highly compared to others that would be

[44:12] in okay, having this additional information will improve

[44:17] your likelihood of being more competitive

[44:19] and getting that grant funding.

[44:20] Okay.

[44:20] Thank you.

[44:21] Thanks.

[44:22] For the clarification All right.

[44:27] I mean, I'm good at moving forward I would like a better

[44:30] direction on how we're funded this next meeting

[44:34] should so make a motion to approve

[44:39] second, third or the second.

[44:41] Any questions Do we want do you want any more formal direction

[44:45] on the funding or are you comfortable with what

[44:48] we've talked about and going forward that way we can share?

[44:53] Yeah I apologize.

[44:56] I think we can I can work with the department

[44:59] and find some opportunities that we can postpone or work through

[45:09] to get the priorities reestablished That's not

[45:13] an uncommon thing And we can report back to the Council

[45:17] with that information.

[45:17] I and I'm okay with that.

[45:19] I feel confident.

[45:20] You always seem to find the cash in the couch cushion somehow

[45:23] But it would be nice to know where it's coming from.

[45:26] Sure.

[45:26] OK.

[45:27] Rob's here.

[45:27] All right.

[45:28] So have a first and second.

[45:29] Any of other questions?

[45:30] No.

[45:30] All right.

[45:31] All in favor Signify by saying I. I any opposed.

[45:35] That's unanimously All right.

[45:40] Northwest Old Town project Revised scope cost estimates.

[45:43] So Heidi from WB I think you're kicking this off.

[45:46] Yes good evening mayor and council members

[45:48] yes we're here to talk again about northwest old town.

[45:51] At the last meeting you had asked for a revised cost

[45:54] estimate looking at what we call that we termed out

[45:56] bare bones project We recognize that there seems to be

[45:59] common agreement that there is a need to improve the water mains.

[46:02] And so we did put together that cost

[46:04] estimate as you can see in the report, it's about 2.2 million.

[46:07] I'd like to walk through some of the specifics of what was what

[46:10] we based that on and why we made that recommendation Currently

[46:15] in cedar Street, there is three blocks of 4 inch water main

[46:21] and so this water main replacement would upgrade

[46:23] that four inch water main from a four inch main

[46:26] to a ten inch main.

[46:29] Then in 11th Avenue.

[46:30] And 10th Avenue, we currently have a dead end, six inch water

[46:35] main in each of those roads.

[46:37] And so this project would replace those that

[46:40] ends with 8 inch water means that connect between Cedar

[46:43] and Elm Street and then lastly, currently in Elm Street,

[46:48] we have half of the half of the length between eighth Avenue.

[46:52] And 12th Avenue is a four inch main,

[46:54] and half of it is a six inch main and that would all be

[46:57] replaced with an 8 inch main.

[46:59] And just to give you a sense, there

[47:02] was some questions last time about low flow

[47:04] in the in the water mains.

[47:06] So typical fire or maximum flow out of a four inch pipe

[47:09] is about 500 gallons per minute.

[47:12] If you bump up to a six inch pipe, it's 800 to 1,000 GPM.

[47:16] Eight inch pipe is about 2000 and a ten inches, about 3,000.

[47:21] So you can see that this would make a substantial difference

[47:25] in the amount of water flow that would be of vailable

[47:27] in this network of blocks So we focused

[47:30] on that nine blocks of water mean, we would replace that.

[47:34] And then since the water main replacement disrupts so much

[47:38] of the pavement, we went ahead and priced

[47:40] out a full pavement replacement that we would mill off.

[47:43] We would, you know dig out the water main mill off all

[47:45] of the pavement do a full replacement because it's

[47:48] a utility driven project It doesn't trigger the stormwater

[47:51] requirements that the bigger project required

[47:53] And so we would just replace pavement exact lee in,

[47:56] you know in the width that it is today.

[47:58] There would be no storm water improvements.

[48:00] We would not put any storm sewer in And then additionally

[48:04] actually, I know that's that the 130,900 that's the full sanitary

[48:08] sewer rehab spot lining.

[48:10] And things.

[48:11] If we just focus on repairing the pieces that need to be dug

[48:15] up, there's only a few spots that

[48:16] had some broken pipes someplace that drops down to about 45,000.

[48:21] So that total project cost, if we really just focus on the nine

[48:25] blocks where the water main is substandard

[48:28] and it gets down to around 2.1 million for that.

[48:31] And could easily be funded or get out of the water fund

[48:35] and various other funds that we could put a funding

[48:38] plan together and return should the council want

[48:41] to go that route So I'm happy to answer

[48:44] any questions about that proposal

[48:46] or the original proposal.

[48:47] I think as.

[48:48] Matthew.

[48:48] Go ahead, Matthew Mayor Mayor, if I may,

[48:52] I do want to talk about some financial implications

[48:55] of reducing that scope.

[48:57] We have a couple of parts of money

[48:59] that were dedicated towards this project that could be real

[49:02] out reallocated to different projects One of them

[49:05] is the MSI funding the Minnesota State Aid by removing

[49:11] and reducing the scope of the project

[49:13] to that 2.2 approximate number 2.2 million.

[49:17] We would not need to utilize the MSA funding.

[49:19] So that $1.4 million of dedicated MSA funding

[49:23] for this project would be able to be reallocate it

[49:25] into different parts of our community that has on our needs

[49:29] basis where we could address that sooner than expected.

[49:32] The other one was the, the restore related funds that we

[49:36] had from the sale of the generation that 1.8,

[49:39] approximately million dollars that was set aside specifically

[49:43] for this project we would use approximately $1 million towards

[49:53] this project from that releasing $800,000 that

[49:56] the city and the city council could reallocate

[50:00] that additional money.

[50:01] Currently designed for this project,

[50:05] specifically if we do reduce the scope,

[50:07] that funding could be reallocated

[50:09] to different projects as well.

[50:11] A couple of those things just off the top of my head and we've

[50:15] been up my head, we've been discussing this for weeks,

[50:17] but let's be realistic here.

[50:19] Matthew Flank Avenue trail, we did get some bids back for that.

[50:24] Bids are a little bit higher.

[50:25] We we wouldn't we need a little bit more

[50:27] funding to cover the costs and complete that trail connection.

[50:30] That's a priority for us.

[50:32] The other thing is the 400th and flank

[50:34] roundabout turn up on northbound on flank at 400th Street.

[50:40] We've got the new developments up there.

[50:41] And we have a roundabout all planned

[50:43] in a couple of years for that.

[50:44] So the funding could be used for that as well.

[50:46] So there are some financial implications that the council

[50:50] needs to know about as they're making the discussion

[50:52] with the reduced scope of this project There are

[50:57] any concerns about surface water runoff All one resident has

[51:01] stated several times that there's a pond that fills up

[51:05] or pools up around their house or on the street.

[51:07] I the owner of posthaste reached out to me when we're

[51:10] at the threshing show and mentioned that that's

[51:12] street in front of his house.

[51:14] He's worried about it being too narrow.

[51:15] That could be a different project,

[51:16] but I don't know if you mentioned you know, surface

[51:19] water runoff and some kind of pond in, but are there any areas

[51:23] where we have to worry about that about not, you know,

[51:27] recreating to make sure that we've addressed some

[51:30] of that mean amir and council certainly

[51:33] that was one of the drivers originally of this project.

[51:36] And I think back in 1996 when I first

[51:38] came before the council, one of the goals of the project

[51:41] was certainly to address substandard infrastructure

[51:44] of the water main, but also some of the drainage complaints

[51:47] in the community and hence that is why the original project went

[51:51] forward with Curb and gutter and stormwater ponds,

[51:54] channeling the runoff from the streets

[51:57] into storms who are so that it wouldn't draining to folks yard.

[52:01] So so I think yes, there is some concern that a project

[52:05] would move forward.

[52:06] And it would not address some of the drainage issues

[52:08] that have been communicated if we went with this.

[52:12] This project that's focused on water main problem you brought

[52:18] up again for another 31 years.

[52:21] Yeah So we had a resident a former council

[52:25] member sent an email to Councilmember

[52:28] Golay He shared it with us.

[52:29] The administrator got shared with the rest of the council.

[52:31] I've also had at least one, if not a couple

[52:33] of conversations with her over the past month.

[52:36] She is talking about Shield's plaza and the potential

[52:40] for additional water runoff from that

[52:43] drive Have we looked at that?

[52:45] Do we think that there's going to be any type of added pressure

[52:48] for the water going to the street

[52:50] or do we not know the elevations of that property

[52:53] and where the water would be going regardless of what they

[52:56] did It is my understanding that the driveway is a resurface

[53:02] and they are adding curb and gutter to the driveway

[53:06] to collect and channel that stormwater.

[53:10] They are adding.

[53:11] I believe that the number is five parking stalls

[53:15] and they are adding their own stormwater retention and pond,

[53:19] which would be on the west side of their parking lot

[53:23] So they have made it improvements

[53:25] to their own drainage system.

[53:27] But, but yes, that if water does come flowing within the curb

[53:31] and gutter of the driveway and there is no collection

[53:34] basins for stormwater there is potential of that coming out

[53:36] into the street Okay The other thing I had talked

[53:43] to near Sandra about this, maybe a week or two ago

[53:45] but so one of the concerns is we haven't heard from all is it 60?

[53:50] Exactly.

[53:50] 60 properties or somewhere in that area Correct.

[53:53] We've heard from approximately ten

[53:57] I suggested that we did do some type of signature

[53:59] return or certified letter, just so they

[54:01] can't say they didn't know.

[54:03] We're not hearing from everybody I know there's concern by a few

[54:07] that they think we should do more.

[54:08] Obviously we've heard from a few.

[54:09] They think we should do less So I'm trying to figure

[54:13] out how do we determine that?

[54:15] We're hearing from enough of those 60 property owners

[54:21] American solar typically, you know they've

[54:24] received several mailers.

[54:26] We've had a couple of discussions

[54:28] We've had multiple community meetings on their behalf

[54:31] here at City Hall.

[54:32] They've held their own neighborhood meetings

[54:34] as well if they had a problem or had a question about it,

[54:38] they've been given ample time to respond We can't make people

[54:43] open their mail if something gets mailed in

[54:47] and they see it's from the city.

[54:48] And they throw it away, you know they've received several mailers

[54:52] from the city in regards to this project We can't make them do

[54:55] that If they receive another one where it's certified,

[54:58] they might assign their name.

[54:59] And again, throw away There's we can't make them read their mail

[55:03] So if there are people out there who are concerned

[55:06] or they've been given ample opportunity to receive

[55:10] the information, learn about the information they've been invited

[55:13] to multiple meetings to participate

[55:15] and gather information on their own behalf.

[55:18] The city has done everything that well, well beyond what

[55:21] our actual obligations are as a city for a project like this

[55:26] Considering the assessments we went through

[55:28] and an extra step of the process just

[55:30] to make sure that we had ample community information out there

[55:36] we've actually added a whole page to our website on it.

[55:40] We've had it on our Facebook page We've done absolutely

[55:44] everything that I feel is necessary and more

[55:47] from the city's perspective on a project like this.

[55:50] And you have not received any phone calls this year

[55:54] The only correspondence that I have had

[55:56] in regards to this project are from former council

[55:59] member Cathy Blomquist.

[56:01] OK.

[56:02] Thank you Barebones approach.

[56:06] I assume that we're replacing the street like we would

[56:09] any other neighborhood that then there's

[56:11] no there's no cost passed along to the property owners.

[56:15] If we go with the bare bones approach

[56:16] there is no assessments to the property owners That is correct.

[56:19] Yeah Did we talk about x widening the road while we do

[56:25] that overlay In one of our last meetings

[56:29] I thought that was brought up for part of that.

[56:34] If i think it was brought up as part of the original project.

[56:37] But not as part of just the overlay itself.

[56:39] Overlay.

[56:40] OK Yeah.

[56:40] Yeah.

[56:41] So we were I think it came up in one of the prior meetings

[56:43] about different residents measuring different areas

[56:47] of the road and asking for it to be wider and more consistent

[56:50] Yeah, Yeah.

[56:51] Yep, yep.

[56:53] Yeah, but i think the current ask was just

[56:55] for basically the overlay overlay the exact with the we

[56:59] are today.

[57:00] Yeah Leave the footprint.

[57:02] Yep.

[57:02] So change.

[57:03] OK.

[57:04] One question I have too is One of Miss Moon Quest requests

[57:08] would be sidewalk on Elm if we were to do that,

[57:11] though that would require a curb and gutter.

[57:13] Correct.

[57:13] And then that affects the stormwater.

[57:14] You wouldn't just put the sidewalk in with no drainage

[57:20] there and councilmember Golay, We'd have to look at that.

[57:23] I mean, we may be able to put in something

[57:27] or without a curb and gutter.

[57:28] We would have to look at that in more detail

[57:30] to see how that might work And before we

[57:33] pursue that though, I'd really like to reassess our stance on.

[57:37] I think the proposal was to have the city plow that sidewalk

[57:41] I disagree with that stance.

[57:43] It's for consistency through the road to the city.

[57:45] I think it would be better to either establish

[57:48] that the property owner has to take care of the snow

[57:51] or don't put the sidewalk in We have other sidewalks.

[57:57] We take care of And why did we do that and not leave it up

[58:01] to the homeowners We we know the majority of the community

[58:05] the property owners themselves are

[58:07] responsible for the sidewalks and the

[58:10] in their front yards or side yards.

[58:13] The city has over time created an ordinance

[58:16] for the public works department to provide snow removal

[58:20] assistance for particular corridors

[58:22] within our community This would not

[58:24] be included in that in our current policy

[58:30] So I see elm as a thoroughfare.

[58:32] You know, for drive in, for walk.

[58:33] It's not just the people that live there That's why

[58:36] I would hesitate to make them.

[58:38] So you think they'd come off 95 and go up to Elm

[58:42] or whether they're driving?

[58:43] There's lot of people drive through that don't live there.

[58:45] I mean, I want to I don't have a reason for 95, but yeah,

[58:48] and I understand the driving on elm,

[58:50] but the sidewalk itself it seems like most of the city

[58:53] would stay on 95 unless they're in that community or office,

[58:58] either any of the side streets.

[59:00] I don't think it's just going to be the people using

[59:03] or that live on elm that are going to be using that sidewalk,

[59:05] I think is going to be I agree.

[59:07] But more in the neighborhood, I would say,

[59:08] is that where those people coming from whether they're

[59:11] walking around cedar down to Elm and make a loop or not,

[59:14] but i wonder if we could make that just a different project

[59:17] at some point.

[59:18] The sidewalk Yeah, but I'd be open I mean, I could do that.

[59:22] We were pushing for the sidewalks

[59:24] and parking there basically to support the downtown park.

[59:28] Right, Exactly.

[59:29] We could make that as a priority for potential,

[59:33] say for school grants and future that's been brought up.

[59:36] But we've never gotten an answer out of anybody on that.

[59:39] So I think it's i think it's that meets the criteria.

[59:43] But I'm saying that correctly as Ben included, that.

[59:46] No, no, no, no I'm saying in the future, the

[59:48] potential future project goal.

[59:50] This is a goal.

[59:51] The council's directing staff to make

[59:53] that a priority are included in the next round of safe school.

[59:56] Yeah.

[59:57] Yeah.

[59:58] So that area is not currently included on our safe right

[1:00:00] to school plan.

[1:00:01] And so that's why.

[1:00:02] And so we talked about earlier about

[1:00:04] for when we apply for funding if it's not in the plan.

[1:00:09] That's why it's so important to have items

[1:00:10] identified in the plans to help support

[1:00:12] those grant applications.

[1:00:14] Our our city code does talking about having sidewalks

[1:00:18] along collectors on at least a minimum of one

[1:00:21] side of the roadway which so our subdivision code does already

[1:00:23] talk about that or say for the school plan

[1:00:26] does not have that particular route in there.

[1:00:29] So and you're currently revising that, right?

[1:00:32] You've been meeting a goal if you haven't seen a need to put

[1:00:35] it on Elm in that part of Elm.

[1:00:37] And then what are we asking for?

[1:00:39] Because there already going through that,

[1:00:41] that review process.

[1:00:42] And then it hasn't qualified or hasn't

[1:00:44] been brought up as a need.

[1:00:46] It wasn't in the original plan.

[1:00:47] So the original.

[1:00:48] So the plan.

[1:00:48] So the safe, what the school plan really

[1:00:50] looks at a mile from existing schools and i mean,

[1:00:53] there's always going to be variables where there's areas

[1:00:56] that could be two miles where we have a lot of walkers

[1:00:59] or bikers and so those areas.

[1:01:01] And that's where I'm i'm like the Lux crossing development.

[1:01:03] We've had a lot of inquiries about that.

[1:01:05] That's portions of that are a little bit further out

[1:01:08] But we've had a lot of input And so things

[1:01:10] like that, as we get that feedback, that's why it's

[1:01:12] important get the feedback from the community

[1:01:14] and that would get implemented into that plan

[1:01:16] and help us as we prioritize for safe roads, corridors.

[1:01:20] So that's what I'm asking you, though.

[1:01:22] It hasn't been identified through this process,

[1:01:23] this summer as it has.

[1:01:25] It has not.

[1:01:25] But it's also going to included as part of this project.

[1:01:28] So we it's not been discussed because it was originally

[1:01:31] part of this project.

[1:01:32] Why don't you take care.

[1:01:34] I struggled with that a little bit

[1:01:35] because I feel like if it's important for,

[1:01:37] say, for the school, there should

[1:01:39] have been a dual approach Yeah.

[1:01:42] So the plan is still in process I mean, the updated

[1:01:44] plan, like the current plan.

[1:01:46] I'm talking about, does not currently have that in there

[1:01:48] there in the city received a grant to update its plan

[1:01:51] or current plan is from 2011.

[1:01:54] And so we're in the process of updating

[1:01:56] that We got grant funding.

[1:01:58] So no cost to us And so that's we're

[1:02:02] hoping to have the results of that

[1:02:03] here in the next 1 to two months.

[1:02:06] So okay, so other than us bringing it up,

[1:02:09] it hasn't been brought up in these conversations.

[1:02:11] That part all so no I mean, I guess I have not we have not.

[1:02:17] So I mean, I so between the central park

[1:02:23] and then going towards the cemetery Correct.

[1:02:26] Oh so Yeah.

[1:02:27] On the west side Right.

[1:02:30] Yes.

[1:02:31] OK I mean, I think Right.

[1:02:37] Yeah, some people aren't some people are Yeah So again,

[1:02:45] I like the idea of the sidewalk being an elm.

[1:02:47] But how we get there is a whole nother discussion

[1:02:51] and I like the idea of including a safe after school.

[1:02:53] I just haven't heard it come up naturally in these

[1:02:57] in these are review meetings.

[1:02:58] So that's has surprised so if you think it should be.

[1:03:02] I'm all for it i'm just thrown out

[1:03:05] there is that's a funding option and if it's

[1:03:07] not included in the plan.

[1:03:09] Now as we're going potentially bare bones if we see it

[1:03:13] as the council sitting here now and asking me to consider

[1:03:16] putting that in a new revised plan for, say, for our school

[1:03:19] to make, it is essentially feeder towards downtown

[1:03:22] and the Two trails.

[1:03:24] We have now and etc. that can be our direction

[1:03:27] And then i don't I'm just looking again at funding sources

[1:03:32] and how we get there.

[1:03:33] Yeah, I'm aligned with your strategy of,

[1:03:35] you know, keeping it as front and center.

[1:03:37] But out of scope for the original project

[1:03:39] we're talking about Right, right.

[1:03:40] I agree.

[1:03:41] I think it should be a separate project.

[1:03:43] Yep I don't know if we going to get any other responses.

[1:03:47] We've had several meetings, several inquiries

[1:03:50] in our notifications to these 60 properties.

[1:03:52] So i mean, I guess we can maybe come to consensus

[1:03:55] and we can maybe go one more meeting in case

[1:03:58] we get the feedback or do or if somebody wants to just

[1:04:01] go with it right now, we can whatever

[1:04:04] the recommendation of from this is right as info though.

[1:04:08] So no action taken Council can make an action

[1:04:12] and then take action on this.

[1:04:14] We've got three different options in the packet.

[1:04:16] Proceed with the full reconsider action is proposed.

[1:04:19] Proceed with reduce scope barebones project

[1:04:21] or delay the project.

[1:04:22] And definitely One more question or another question.

[1:04:25] I should put it so talked about that it'd be 1 million

[1:04:29] of the roughly 1.8 from the utility scale right?

[1:04:33] So whereas I guess walk us through

[1:04:36] right now where the other 1.1 1.2 million

[1:04:39] of sewer and from those dedicated okay so

[1:04:43] that part to get to that level.

[1:04:45] Now you're talking about the funding

[1:04:46] sources that's the next level.

[1:04:48] What would be approved?

[1:04:49] Yeah Yeah.

[1:04:50] Just before I would be able to go forward right?

[1:04:54] Yeah.

[1:04:55] So the next if, if, if approved now to move

[1:04:57] forward with the $2.2 million.

[1:04:59] Well, we would then request that the city engineers

[1:05:04] would move forward with a specifically

[1:05:07] what would be the next step.

[1:05:08] So you're going project scope engineering and funding sources.

[1:05:12] Yes, we would put to get we would work with Sharon

[1:05:14] and the city administrator to put together a funding

[1:05:17] plan, presumably the restricted fund or the street funding

[1:05:20] and water fund would be the two primary funding sources

[1:05:23] that we would bring back.

[1:05:25] And then we would also put together an engineering proposal

[1:05:27] to bring forth and a schedule and the full

[1:05:30] here's the proposal for moving forward

[1:05:31] with this, this new scope of the project

[1:05:35] And I do see it is in here, just was kind of heightened

[1:05:37] sense of the council wish to move forward the smaller project

[1:05:39] staff are very projects on the plan and design

[1:05:43] proposal for consideration of a feature

[1:05:45] at a future council meeting.

[1:05:46] So so right now you're looking for consensus or a motion

[1:05:51] a motion would motion deal deal.

[1:05:53] And the idea okay, I'll make the most Second to you

[1:05:57] scope barebones project.

[1:05:58] Second that.

[1:05:59] Mr. Mayor.

[1:05:59] All right.

[1:06:00] We got a first and second.

[1:06:01] Any questions before we go?

[1:06:03] I would just say thank you again to Heidi and Austin.

[1:06:06] How much they mean, how much they've

[1:06:07] gone through what they've taken, her feedback and they've

[1:06:10] come back with results.

[1:06:13] And at they showed they've been listening to us.

[1:06:15] And the fact that we provided and the residents and I know

[1:06:17] there's a times residents don't always feel

[1:06:20] heard But you came back time and time again and showed up.

[1:06:23] And I thought, you operate in very good faith.

[1:06:25] And I appreciate that.

[1:06:26] And with answers.

[1:06:26] Thank you.

[1:06:27] You.

[1:06:28] I'm just looking forward to denise Martin with us.

[1:06:30] South County Press.

[1:06:31] And it's on again right at the top, again on again.

[1:06:34] That's those are her headlines.

[1:06:36] So what's she going to write about the next 30 years on this?

[1:06:39] I have to tease or a little bit.

[1:06:41] So All right.

[1:06:42] We've got a first and second question before we go.

[1:06:45] All right.

[1:06:46] All in favor.

[1:06:46] Signify by saying I, I i.

[1:06:48] Any opposed fast unanimously Thank you All right.

[1:06:55] Have you want to nine delta and ask to consider approval

[1:06:58] of an ordinance amending city code section 66-943 which is

[1:07:03] design standards for permitted building

[1:07:04] materials and amending the design overlay

[1:07:06] district maps ordinance.

[1:07:07] Sandra, you want to kick this off?

[1:07:09] Yeah.

[1:07:10] Good evening, Mayor and council all before you tonight is

[1:07:12] a request to approve an ordinance to amend city code

[1:07:16] section 66 9:43 for design standards regarding

[1:07:19] the class one materials and modification

[1:07:21] of the design standards map.

[1:07:23] This has been discussed for the past several months.

[1:07:26] It kind of really goes back to last year

[1:07:27] when we started looking at the industrial park looking

[1:07:29] at design standards, trying to find ways to be more flexible

[1:07:33] and to support businesses and attract additional development

[1:07:36] in the community.

[1:07:38] Was recently like the council and the planning

[1:07:41] Commission held a joint work session

[1:07:42] back in June, and from there.

[1:07:44] There was discussion at the Planning Commission meeting,

[1:07:47] kind of following that after discussions of proposed changes

[1:07:51] to the to the design standards map

[1:07:54] and adding additional materials to be included as permitted

[1:07:59] And so one of the materials to be added

[1:08:01] was engineered wood siding as a Class one building

[1:08:04] material, durable water resistant that again, provides

[1:08:08] flexibility for builders or people

[1:08:10] looking to invest into the community

[1:08:13] And so essentially, we will be adding that as a permitted

[1:08:15] use based off of that, the second option would be to amend

[1:08:20] the design standards map like I spoke of up on the screen

[1:08:23] right now, there's showing where the existing

[1:08:26] design standards are at.

[1:08:28] Everything that's red is zone one, orange is zone 2 and yellow

[1:08:33] is on three.

[1:08:34] I'm the proposed changes would be, again,

[1:08:37] the orange or one excuse me that red for one orange

[1:08:40] for two and the yellow for 3, in 2.

[1:08:42] Going to give you little bit more of a breakdown.

[1:08:44] We're going to show you the differences.

[1:08:47] Essentially And I know this is hard to see

[1:08:48] and but here's the existing and here's

[1:08:51] the changes that were being made essentially for zone 1.

[1:08:54] There's an area over by where the outlet mall essentially.

[1:08:58] And making that entire parcel they're already in zone 1.

[1:09:01] And so there's no like discrepancy for us ones or two.

[1:09:04] And so it's entirely part of zone 1, The zone 2,

[1:09:08] we looked at modifying the area of the link avenue corridor from

[1:09:11] three 92nd Street up to roughly three 999 three 99th Street,

[1:09:16] and then also modifying the area along Interstate 35,

[1:09:19] South of where the furniture store is switching that

[1:09:23] to a zone 2 and then making changes

[1:09:26] in the industrial park for that to go

[1:09:28] to all of the zoning three.

[1:09:31] And then removing the existing portions that were zoned

[1:09:37] residential taking those out of the design standard

[1:09:39] classifications And so it really those are the changes

[1:09:42] that we kind of discussed.

[1:09:43] And so kind of going back to what was proposed,

[1:09:45] this is the resulting map So everything

[1:09:47] yellow again zone 3 2 the orange,

[1:09:51] and then the red is zone 1.

[1:09:54] And so with that, the Planning Commission held that

[1:09:57] public hearing on August 4th.

[1:09:58] There were no public comments received,

[1:10:01] but at the previous meeting that the Planning

[1:10:02] Commission had there was support for the modification

[1:10:05] and amendments.

[1:10:07] And so with that, we we're looking for the Planning

[1:10:10] Commission recommended approval And so this

[1:10:11] is before you this evening for your consideration All right.

[1:10:16] Questions for Nate I I mean, this is something we've

[1:10:20] been pushing for a long time.

[1:10:22] Common sense changes is.

[1:10:23] Yes it is.

[1:10:25] There's some things up a little bit more flexibility All right.

[1:10:29] So we've got an ordinance in front of us there.

[1:10:31] We're being asked to approve.

[1:10:33] So we have a motion.

[1:10:34] I'll make some All right.

[1:10:36] That's for ordinance number four.

[1:10:37] One 4, dash two six.

[1:10:39] Yep.

[1:10:40] Correct.

[1:10:40] OK.

[1:10:41] Second.

[1:10:42] And the first and second, the question before

[1:10:44] we go, all right.

[1:10:45] All in favor.

[1:10:46] Signify by saying I the opposed passed

[1:10:49] unanimously Thank you, Nate.

[1:10:52] We'll move on to the next one then.

[1:10:53] And that is to consider approval of an ordinance allowing

[1:10:57] twin homes in quad and townhouses

[1:10:59] as permitted uses in the central business district

[1:11:02] So Nate taken away for mayor and council

[1:11:03] before you, here again, is another ordinance amendment.

[1:11:06] This one is, as you mentioned to make those modifications

[1:11:08] to the central business district to allow twin homes

[1:11:11] and townhomes essentially in the central business

[1:11:13] district This discussed originally back in July.

[1:11:17] You know, there is discussion that we've had as you kind

[1:11:20] of look at where the central business district is currently

[1:11:22] at, it currently allows duplexes and multi family buildings

[1:11:27] that are 3 to 7 units.

[1:11:28] But there's not allow twin homes or townhome homes.

[1:11:31] And so just kind of looking at the permitted uses,

[1:11:33] it kind of seemed like that didn't really

[1:11:35] you know why did I would one be permitted

[1:11:36] not the other one because they're very similar items.

[1:11:39] And so i've got a map up here showing the central business

[1:11:42] district kind of give me your reference essentially

[1:11:45] at the central business district is

[1:11:47] a long main street from rancho Avenue to Grand Avenue.

[1:11:53] And then a block on both sides in the line County 30

[1:11:56] from Cedar down to just south of the Oak Street So everything.

[1:12:02] This is in this dark red area here.

[1:12:03] And so I just kind of in our discussions,

[1:12:05] we really felt like that.

[1:12:06] Like I mentioned, that these are very similar uses

[1:12:09] and it's trying to just, you know,

[1:12:11] seem to like that the correct thing to do

[1:12:13] is to have all of those really be permitted in that district.

[1:12:17] So if you look at the permitted uses table,

[1:12:19] this is the existing art in the top.

[1:12:21] So you can see that these are not included.

[1:12:23] These would be the townhomes and that the twin homes,

[1:12:28] there's nothing there.

[1:12:29] And we're proposing to include those as permitted uses.

[1:12:32] That's going to provide more flexibility more consistency

[1:12:35] through the downtown Planning Commission held

[1:12:38] a public hearing in August.

[1:12:41] There was one comment provided at the meeting.

[1:12:43] They were in support of the proposed changes They felt

[1:12:45] that it provided for more flexibility

[1:12:48] And, within the central business district,

[1:12:51] I mean, currently apartments are allowed there.

[1:12:53] And this is all for a less intensive use.

[1:12:56] And so they thought that would be a good modification

[1:12:59] to the code.

[1:13:00] So with that is your consideration of the ordinance

[1:13:04] this evening Any questions for Nate?

[1:13:10] No comment You know.

[1:13:14] Yeah.

[1:13:16] I just want to highlight the last piece you said

[1:13:18] about the less intense of usage, less intense

[1:13:22] than apartments and thinking, you

[1:13:24] know, very specifically about large vacant old school lot.

[1:13:28] And what potentially makes more sense.

[1:13:31] There in the planning mindset.

[1:13:34] And to the residents that live in that facility Something

[1:13:40] like this conversation we're having

[1:13:42] I think is a lot more palatable and makes

[1:13:43] sense for that neighborhood.

[1:13:44] And the surrounding area.

[1:13:45] So i think that just gives another option also

[1:13:47] for the developers, potential developers

[1:13:50] to look at that look at that area.

[1:13:52] So it's and Nate, with that developer,

[1:13:55] those interested in that old school lot is some

[1:13:58] of the conversations about this being brought on by what they're

[1:14:02] trying to accomplish to figure out you know, so there's just

[1:14:06] we've had discussions with multiple properties

[1:14:08] and so there's other vacant lots that

[1:14:09] are within the central business district.

[1:14:11] And so we typically try to whenever we make changes

[1:14:13] to zoning ordinance, we look at the whole district is not

[1:14:16] a specific use, but I mean, that lot

[1:14:19] would definitely be you know, one that would be impacted

[1:14:22] by changes or violations.

[1:14:24] So yeah, I wasn't alluding to a specific conversation,

[1:14:27] just thinking over the last you and I have had this conversation

[1:14:30] in three years.

[1:14:31] I'm council about that lot.

[1:14:33] And what the community feels would be more appropriate,

[1:14:36] falls more in line with this and with other vacant lots

[1:14:39] of that area.

[1:14:41] And just with that said, the other one,

[1:14:43] the the public comment was from the owner of the vacant lots,

[1:14:46] the old Main Street site.

[1:14:48] And so he was providing he was in support of these changes

[1:14:51] would make sense.

[1:14:52] Right?

[1:14:52] It makes sense.

[1:14:53] Oh, yes.

[1:14:54] Or flexibility.

[1:14:54] OK All right.

[1:14:55] Just wanted to make a confirm.

[1:14:57] Adam.

[1:14:59] All right.

[1:14:59] So the ask then is to consider approving that ordinance.

[1:15:03] So our making a motion Me I'll make that motion to approve

[1:15:09] ordinance number 1526 OK.

[1:15:14] And we have a second Second.

[1:15:18] I've got a first and second.

[1:15:19] Any questions before we vote?

[1:15:22] All in favor.

[1:15:22] Signify by saying I i any opposed unanimously.

[1:15:26] Thank you.

[1:15:27] You.

[1:15:27] Appreciate that.

[1:15:28] And thank you.

[1:15:29] The planning commission for all the hard work they're doing.

[1:15:32] We've got more coming.

[1:15:33] That's good.

[1:15:34] You can come in this month.

[1:15:35] Thank you All right.

[1:15:36] Now we're up to our June finance update.

[1:15:38] So our finance director, Sharon who I kicked us off.

[1:15:41] Thank you, Mayor and council The city's financial position

[1:15:45] remains very strong.

[1:15:47] Through June.

[1:15:48] As of June, we had a 9.1 million in cash and equivalents

[1:15:53] and 16.8 million and investment funds

[1:15:57] within trust rates remaining stable.

[1:15:59] The city also received its first property tax settlement from

[1:16:03] Chisago County in early July.

[1:16:06] This is typically the larger portion of the settlement,

[1:16:10] as many taxpayers pay their full amount of annual property taxes

[1:16:15] At that time the liquor stores are entering their busiest

[1:16:20] season of the year, although sales are projected to be

[1:16:24] slightly below expectations Staff have done an excellent job

[1:16:28] managing expenses The stores remain on track to make the full

[1:16:33] $350,000 transfer and finish the year with a net profit

[1:16:38] margin of approximately 9%.

[1:16:43] The EDA Fund is projected to finish

[1:16:46] the year with approximately 500,000 in net income.

[1:16:50] The general fund is also tracking positively with

[1:16:53] approximately 400,000 Am projected netting,

[1:16:57] indicating that the city's tax levy is appropriate

[1:17:00] Lee Supporting ongoing.

[1:17:02] So the upper Asians all utility funds remain

[1:17:06] in good financial condition.

[1:17:08] The sewer fund continues to perform particularly well

[1:17:12] while the water storm and generation funds

[1:17:15] are all projected to finish the year with positive results

[1:17:19] Overall, the city continues to maintain

[1:17:22] a strong financial position with healthy cash

[1:17:25] and investment balances.

[1:17:27] Positive operating results and sound performance across the two

[1:17:31] major funds All right.

[1:17:33] Questions for Sharon No, no.

[1:17:38] Got a lot of money sitting in the investment fund And yes.

[1:17:43] So when we get to utilize some of that,

[1:17:47] we will utilize interest We're trying to utilize some of it

[1:17:53] for our Northwest old town.

[1:17:55] But okay so so if there's any comments

[1:18:03] otherwise we can go on to the next No.

[1:18:06] All right.

[1:18:07] The budget 2027, Mayor, I mean, honestly,

[1:18:10] to your question it shows up in the budget projections

[1:18:14] for the revenue for next year The interest income

[1:18:17] is significantly higher.

[1:18:19] And it's a projection based on what I mean,

[1:18:21] that is directly impacting general fund

[1:18:26] So yeah, the interest is allocated across all the funds

[1:18:31] depending on how much cash they carry.

[1:18:33] So every month, we reevaluate the cash balances and allocate

[1:18:39] the interest appropriately across cash

[1:18:43] balances of the question.

[1:18:48] Before I move on to the budget All right, Let's tack well,

[1:18:51] one last comment just called to the liquor

[1:18:54] store because we challenged them last year with the $350,000.

[1:18:57] And to be able to pull that off a pretty big deal.

[1:18:59] Yeah, they did very well Good.

[1:19:02] Very well.

[1:19:03] In Carlin's here.

[1:19:03] Can you talk about the online.

[1:19:06] The online ordering?

[1:19:09] Oh, it's really launched the online store.

[1:19:12] There's been a few kinks that we've had to work out,

[1:19:14] so I haven't like it push of like, getting it out there

[1:19:17] with finance department and how to record

[1:19:19] it into our financial software.

[1:19:23] Well, we've gotten a few orders for in the month of July

[1:19:25] about six of them.

[1:19:26] So now we I think we got it kind of figured out and can start

[1:19:31] taking more online orders.

[1:19:34] Only store one is doing it.

[1:19:35] The big store at so we'll see advanced order

[1:19:38] and just pick it up and go online do online shopping.

[1:19:41] We put it all together.

[1:19:42] They just come in verify their ID.

[1:19:44] That is the person that purchased it and all the door,

[1:19:48] they can go, okay, all right Sounds good.

[1:19:51] I like it.

[1:19:54] As long as they're of made.

[1:19:55] Yes Thank you.

[1:19:58] Thank you.

[1:19:59] All right.

[1:19:59] Can we get to the budget conversation

[1:20:01] Let's let's get this audience Got one more question?

[1:20:04] Yeah, yeah.

[1:20:05] Just try to tackle now So, mayor and council,

[1:20:13] we've implemented the new levy tracking mechanism

[1:20:16] to provide the council with a clearer understanding of how

[1:20:20] the proposed levy is being developed

[1:20:22] and how individual adjust affect the overall levy

[1:20:28] on you can you show the chair and I'm sorry to interrupt you.

[1:20:32] Could you pull your microphone closer?

[1:20:34] Yes Everything in here, I can So on this form,

[1:20:39] it starts out with the levy from 2026

[1:20:43] and then the with so it starts out

[1:21:04] with levy from 2026, which in general fund was 6.6 million.

[1:21:11] And then that is adapted using percentages from the county

[1:21:22] So the county had provided us with a new construct action

[1:21:26] values and estimated market values

[1:21:30] and using their percentage goes to calculate how much the 2026

[1:21:38] would increase by those percentages

[1:21:42] to get to keep us on track going forward

[1:21:45] So the new construction one is one that I would highly

[1:21:51] encourage never diminishing, because that's new houses that

[1:21:58] are built the new property taxes coming in,

[1:22:01] the home values is the estimate.

[1:22:04] The market value that has changed on the homes

[1:22:08] starting between 26 and 27.

[1:22:12] And that amount you can see is 315,000.

[1:22:17] And then if you scroll down to the bottom there are percentages

[1:22:22] down at the bottom, you can see the 1.93 is

[1:22:26] the percentage of new growth.

[1:22:28] And then the 4.7 is the percent Each of market adjustment

[1:22:37] with the total being the 6.69.

[1:22:41] That is slightly off from what the county

[1:22:43] has the county and 6.68.

[1:22:48] I could not get my percentages to roll

[1:22:50] the right way so it's off by 100th of a percent.

[1:22:56] But if you go back up the next columns have

[1:23:03] the different new projects.

[1:23:06] So i have four columns, but we only use three.

[1:23:09] There's support for equipment, there's staffing increases,

[1:23:15] and then there's support to parks.

[1:23:17] And those would all be new monies

[1:23:20] And so then you if you go further to the right,

[1:23:24] it shows you how much that takes the levy up.

[1:23:29] And so the general fund levy would come in that 7.6 million

[1:23:36] and off to the right is 15.11%.

[1:23:41] By the time you add in the debt that is occurring for the year,

[1:23:47] it brings it to 15.67 and then the EDA

[1:23:55] is included on there and the percentages for the EDA

[1:24:02] and the total deal with that is 14.81 increase over prior year

[1:24:11] Now this is a format that is to show where the amounts are

[1:24:17] and can be adjusted in order to hit a levy that is more in line

[1:24:27] with what city Council is hoping to achieve So if in discussion

[1:24:36] with the advisory council, they had said that their preference

[1:24:40] would be equipment them personnel and then the parks

[1:24:45] And so as we go along,

[1:24:48] that would be the priority given to those different items

[1:24:53] and so i've kind of jumped ahead on my thing.

[1:25:04] So let me get back on track So including these new funding

[1:25:10] priorities, the proposed increase in tax levy

[1:25:13] would be approximately 15.67%.

[1:25:16] But we're continuing to evaluate this

[1:25:19] and make adjustments to reduce the overall increase

[1:25:27] for additions.

[1:25:28] No context to this.

[1:25:30] The proposed general fund budget expenses totaled 10.6 million,

[1:25:36] including the requested equipment staffing and park

[1:25:39] improvements This represents an 8.31

[1:25:44] increase over the 26 General Fund budget expenses of 9.8.

[1:25:50] Some of that, obviously is offset by other revenue sources

[1:25:54] but I believe right now i have about 3 million

[1:25:58] in other revenue sources each year.

[1:26:03] So this stuff reviews the city's financial position.

[1:26:06] Service demands infrastructure needs

[1:26:09] and projected growth to determine

[1:26:11] an appropriate tax levy.

[1:26:13] The objective is to provide sufficient resources

[1:26:17] to meet the city's growing needs while being

[1:26:19] mindful of the financial impact on taxpayers.

[1:26:23] As North Branch continues to grow,

[1:26:25] the city's responsibilities and community expectations also

[1:26:29] grew the city must maintain the services residents rely on

[1:26:33] while making responsible investments in roads, facilities

[1:26:37] parks, equipment and other infrastructure The budget

[1:26:41] discussion is often really about finding the appropriate balance

[1:26:45] between maintain iNG the level of service expected

[1:26:49] by the community, addressing critical equipment,

[1:26:52] infrastructure needs, investing in parks and other community

[1:26:56] assets, providing adequate staffing

[1:26:59] to port city operations and future growth.

[1:27:03] Preparing financially for long term needs

[1:27:06] and being responsible stewards of taxpayer dollars

[1:27:11] The goal is to ensure that North branch

[1:27:12] remains a community, which can be proud of not only today.

[1:27:16] But for future generations.

[1:27:18] At this stage of the budget process,

[1:27:21] staff are seeking feedback and direction

[1:27:23] from City Council regarding the proposed budget funding

[1:27:27] priorities and preferred approach

[1:27:29] to the levy and potential pay.

[1:27:32] Particular council direction and the relative price already

[1:27:37] of staffing, equipment and park improvements

[1:27:40] will help refine the proposed budget levy as listed city moves

[1:27:45] forward with the budget development

[1:27:47] process Finance Advisory yeah, a couple of questions

[1:27:54] So thank you.

[1:27:55] I do like the floor.

[1:27:56] It's much easier to understand as

[1:27:58] far as the additions, but just a quick type of questions.

[1:28:01] The Labor increases year over year What are we estimating

[1:28:06] for next year in current staff?

[1:28:11] Wage increases not so much additional headcount

[1:28:14] wage increase, medical?

[1:28:16] Well, the medical is a separate question

[1:28:18] because the insurance side, there's two aspects of that.

[1:28:21] Medical insurance plus the paid family medical leave Act.

[1:28:24] Yeah, I've heard that is severely underfunded Yes

[1:28:29] So the state has decided not to increase.

[1:28:35] It doesn't change the problem But yes, no,

[1:28:37] I agree We are under contract with MetLife for that.

[1:28:44] And so they work with the state to make sure that all

[1:28:48] that's handled appropriately.

[1:28:51] So at this time, we are still expecting the same fee in 27.

[1:28:58] It just means it'll go up double in 28.

[1:29:02] Yeah when they negotiate restart.

[1:29:05] So so the salaries and benefits for 27 are just thunder.

[1:29:13] $6.3 million in 26.

[1:29:17] The budget was approved at 5.5 million.

[1:29:22] If you took the positions that were started mid-year

[1:29:26] and extrapolate them to the full year it comes up to 5.8 million.

[1:29:33] So that would be our difference between what we had

[1:29:39] and what we're proposing If the new positions are not approved,

[1:29:46] it would take our Four 27 proposed budget just

[1:29:52] under $6 million.

[1:29:57] Yeah, the question here, yes, the right one.

[1:30:04] So Sharon, when I look at that.

[1:30:07] That model that you've got up there your forecasting what

[1:30:13] are increasing construction, you know,

[1:30:16] value as along with revenue taxes as well as the increase

[1:30:22] in property values, which is going to increase, you know,

[1:30:25] taxes.

[1:30:25] And just naturally they just because of the valuation

[1:30:30] So if I'm looking at that right, we're at 6.7%.

[1:30:34] If we were to hold the budget at that, that would be

[1:30:36] the natural increase right We don't

[1:30:40] know if everybody's property tax would go up that much,

[1:30:42] but that's over for their taxes closer to the 4.75.

[1:30:46] But that's just for the city portion.

[1:30:48] So their total taxes mean may go up or down from that.

[1:30:52] So here's my question You know, it's been discussed a lot about,

[1:30:59] you know, keeping the lights on.

[1:31:00] Right?

[1:31:00] I don't like that term because we have made improvements

[1:31:02] over the last few years.

[1:31:04] So to maintain what we have right now through 2027,

[1:31:08] what does that expenditure look like ?

[1:31:13] I feel like we calculated how much we're going to naturally

[1:31:15] get because of new construction and increase in property values.

[1:31:19] And I'm kind of just stopping there for now.

[1:31:21] But if we just maintain what we have,

[1:31:24] we don't add new positions, we just

[1:31:25] maintain the standard that we have this year for next year.

[1:31:29] What is that total number?

[1:31:32] So without any new additions, the total expenses for the year

[1:31:37] would be $9.8 million.

[1:31:40] OK That's not on that spreadsheet

[1:31:45] All that's on the expenditure spreadsheet

[1:31:52] that's in the packet.

[1:31:53] Yep Or more detail on whether or not

[1:31:58] I see it all on all of Monday months when there is some OK.

[1:32:19] So second to the last column.

[1:32:20] Yeah.

[1:32:21] So okay, scroll down again So we're looking deeper into that.

[1:32:28] Yeah.

[1:32:28] That's kind of the reason why I asked

[1:32:30] about the natural march market increase for boys

[1:32:36] and then the insurance side of it.

[1:32:38] It basically takes that property value increase

[1:32:42] portion off the table right?

[1:32:45] So that's just to keep up right Yeah.

[1:32:48] Okay Okay.

[1:32:52] And this is before we even understand what these positions,

[1:32:54] what these positions are, we understand you guys are

[1:32:56] trying to put money aside for future for equipment purchases,

[1:33:00] right?

[1:33:01] Replacement So it would be replacement fund of 300,000.

[1:33:06] That would only be enough to continue to purchase equipment.

[1:33:11] As for the year of 2027, that would not

[1:33:15] be enough to roll it forward.

[1:33:20] Yeah the 300 grand you you're referring to is.

[1:33:23] So we wouldn't have to do a bond.

[1:33:24] The future like we did this right for equipment.

[1:33:26] But this is a replacement fund you brought up last year.

[1:33:29] Correct.

[1:33:29] OK.

[1:33:30] We wanted.

[1:33:30] Yeah like 150.

[1:33:32] Yeah, correct.

[1:33:33] Or 50,000 last year, did we put anything towards it?

[1:33:35] I don't remember.

[1:33:36] No.

[1:33:36] We did.

[1:33:37] We removed this stuff as a 0 to 300.

[1:33:41] I wish we could incrementally get.

[1:33:43] Yes Yeah, I shot for 100,000 last year.

[1:33:46] Yeah I this is tough.

[1:33:50] You know, I you get all new numbers new inflation numbers

[1:33:52] came out and in July was three point

[1:33:54] some percent increase in over last year and everybody's

[1:33:59] falling behind.

[1:34:00] You know I just i am struggling with this because we've had Five

[1:34:03] at least five years of this.

[1:34:05] I think.

[1:34:06] Yeah, I just don't know how we and again, I

[1:34:09] guess I'm sort pots right for another topic

[1:34:11] I just feel like we need to pause on any major idea

[1:34:15] additions to our budget.

[1:34:18] I just I think people are hurting

[1:34:20] and it's been going on for a while.

[1:34:22] And I just I don't know that it's fair to ask them to.

[1:34:25] And I'm all about understand what our community values are.

[1:34:28] What do we want for services, right?

[1:34:30] I mean, I think that's how we should determine our budget.

[1:34:32] You mentioned it's a balancing act,

[1:34:33] but this is kind of a another tough year Well, I look

[1:34:36] at it as a maintain versus cut.

[1:34:39] Right?

[1:34:39] Right.

[1:34:40] So I think a lot of the different funds

[1:34:43] that we have would still have money to redo roads and continue

[1:34:46] to replace the police cars and things like that

[1:34:49] that we've recently got back on track.

[1:34:51] So we wouldn't go backward right.

[1:34:54] But yeah, I think it's a little hard for us to go forward.

[1:34:57] I think this is going to tie into your last item on ten B

[1:35:02] where we kind of highlight goals for next year and i

[1:35:05] think that's where we should address some of the rest.

[1:35:07] But for staff direction and guidance,

[1:35:12] I'm i would wouldn't mind protecting the 100,000 towards

[1:35:16] the equipment fund But I don't want to go beyond that,

[1:35:19] especially not knowing what the county or the school are doing.

[1:35:23] Well, and, you know, again, we're every city is

[1:35:25] going through this right now.

[1:35:26] I think Minneapolis just talking about laying off on people

[1:35:28] and, you know $30 million debt, you know, that they've

[1:35:32] got to try to make up.

[1:35:33] And I think I saw today that these will be 60 million.

[1:35:37] I think there's another city of St Paul struggling to zero

[1:35:40] I'm not saying we're them.

[1:35:41] I mean, I think we're taking a different approach.

[1:35:44] Correct.

[1:35:44] But staying ahead of it is how we can not it?

[1:35:47] Yeah Yeah.

[1:35:48] I mean, we're planning.

[1:35:49] I'm sorry.

[1:35:50] Go ahead.

[1:35:51] I was just going to ask you to that group

[1:35:53] or maybe the Nate 175 to the sport, to the parks.

[1:35:58] What you know, Parks has their own fund, right?

[1:36:03] And there's money that's put in there when there's development

[1:36:06] park dedication fees and etc..

[1:36:07] So.

[1:36:08] So is it more context in.

[1:36:10] Give briefly about that.

[1:36:12] Sure.

[1:36:13] So the current funding structure for our park improvements

[1:36:15] for a new 4, any new development is through park subdivision Park

[1:36:21] dedication through subdivision development

[1:36:23] and so when a new development comes into the community,

[1:36:25] our review it to see if there's if we have the ability as a city

[1:36:29] by state statute to accept cash, land or a combination thereof.

[1:36:34] And so with that, based off of the number of units we get,

[1:36:37] you know, whatever the fee schedule is,

[1:36:39] it's currently $1,800 per lots.

[1:36:41] And that goes into a fee or into a funding fund account.

[1:36:46] And that money by state statute can only

[1:36:48] be utilized for park improvements

[1:36:50] for a new acquisition and development.

[1:36:53] If we do acquire land for development

[1:36:57] So like in Wilder Arts for example,

[1:36:58] that we acquired land for that.

[1:36:59] And so we don't we cannot accept additional cash above and beyond

[1:37:03] that land requirement And so if we don't have new developments,

[1:37:08] we don't have any, any funds essentially to improve new

[1:37:11] acquisition of our development $175,000 specifically,

[1:37:17] we've talked about.

[1:37:18] Sure.

[1:37:19] Hill mentioned the Elephant Avenue Trail We

[1:37:22] have over $825,000 of grants.

[1:37:25] We received for that project to date,

[1:37:26] and we want to make sure that we can make

[1:37:29] sure that project is completed.

[1:37:30] So Nate, I think that 175 has been in the budget

[1:37:35] for three years.

[1:37:37] Yeah, we've i don't think it's made it yet.

[1:37:39] Yeah, we've been, we've been trying to,

[1:37:41] you know, honestly, for I mean, for several years,

[1:37:45] trying to find another funding mechanism because we know

[1:37:47] that subdivision development I mean,

[1:37:50] you can't just rely on that to improve our parks You know,

[1:37:53] we hear from the associations all the time.

[1:37:56] How can we support them?

[1:37:57] And without it?

[1:37:58] Because we aren't using general tax

[1:38:00] levy dollars for new improvements.

[1:38:02] That's just for the maintenance of them.

[1:38:03] And so we're trying to find some sort of way

[1:38:06] to be able to assist with that extent

[1:38:11] So we don't know what the revenue is for the campus

[1:38:13] for charitable gaming, right.

[1:38:15] But why can't we factor that into that 175 somehow?

[1:38:20] Yeah, I think we have the ability to do that.

[1:38:21] Once the funding is there, once it comes in.

[1:38:23] And I know we're not going to know for a full year

[1:38:25] kind of how it's going to go.

[1:38:26] But we'll have some idea anyway.

[1:38:29] But Mayor, I think that's a great idea as far as it's

[1:38:32] a flexible fund, that way we can kind of dedicate

[1:38:35] the amount we receive or a percentage thereof

[1:38:37] and manage it that way.

[1:38:39] Well, then it's not the end just strictly on the backs

[1:38:42] of you know, property taxes.

[1:38:43] Yeah, correct.

[1:38:44] And it's also the right intent for that fund we created.

[1:38:47] Right.

[1:38:48] Okay Matthew, Sharon, what else do you need from us right now?

[1:38:55] This is you know, this is the preliminary preliminary.

[1:38:58] So we're in a process right now.

[1:39:00] We wanted to bring everything to the council's

[1:39:01] attention, the full budget.

[1:39:03] Where we're standing right now This will then be going back

[1:39:06] to the finance advisory with the feedback

[1:39:08] that we're getting from the council

[1:39:09] this evening preparing for our September

[1:39:13] of preliminary budget Yeah.

[1:39:17] And can i just add to that too, for that September for summary

[1:39:21] budget, we'll probably approve a number a little higher than

[1:39:23] we're talking about right now because we cannot go above

[1:39:26] that number for any reason.

[1:39:28] So if we have insurance spikes or whatever,

[1:39:30] it comes back late we would have to take that out of staff

[1:39:33] or somewhere else to cover that cost correct?

[1:39:35] That's correct We might Final intent.

[1:39:39] Intent would be closer to that $100,000 towards

[1:39:42] the equipment fund to try and to your point,

[1:39:44] get some of that going.

[1:39:46] But I think we should in September,

[1:39:48] vote a little higher on that just to prepare ourselves

[1:39:50] in case we get surprised by something else Well,

[1:39:53] it'd be nice if you're hearing something

[1:39:55] about what the medical.

[1:39:56] Yeah, another 20% increase or whatever that looks

[1:39:58] like just from the employee benefits standpoint

[1:40:01] It's a big chunk of our budget right?

[1:40:03] What is the best guesstimate that we're hearing?

[1:40:05] I know we don't usually find out till October.

[1:40:08] Correct.

[1:40:09] Actually, with the 40 Niners now we won't

[1:40:10] hear until after the new year.

[1:40:12] So we need to be very aware of the plan

[1:40:16] that we move towards last year.

[1:40:19] So the renewal actually isn't until until March which

[1:40:23] with the person the change would occur in March

[1:40:29] we did hear before open enrollment last year.

[1:40:33] What they thought it would be.

[1:40:36] But they wouldn't guarantee it.

[1:40:38] And we're not getting any more updates this year

[1:40:41] going into looking at March, we will probably hear something

[1:40:48] towards as I think we usually do, open

[1:40:51] enrollment around Thanksgiving.

[1:40:54] And so we'll probably have a tentative number

[1:40:56] around Thanksgiving, but it's I know, way solid, right?

[1:41:03] It gives us something to go off of.

[1:41:04] Yeah.

[1:41:04] OK What's good guy.

[1:41:07] Yeah.

[1:41:08] Yeah.

[1:41:09] Councilmember i just want to make sure we're i appreciate

[1:41:12] the work you guys do, so I just want to again,

[1:41:16] when you said the 100,000, but before,

[1:41:19] you're also talking about ensuring

[1:41:21] that we're matching or budgeting for those staffing increases.

[1:41:26] So that we're not falling behind on that increase,

[1:41:29] or is that. basically covering the cost of the staff We added

[1:41:33] last year with the 26 and 27, would that be

[1:41:36] an additional add of headcount?

[1:41:37] OK But that we're covering that, correct.

[1:41:40] OK.

[1:41:40] But not going under OK.

[1:41:42] Thank you.

[1:41:43] That makes sense.

[1:41:44] Yeah, that makes sense All right.

[1:41:46] Now the questions for staff And if we do,

[1:41:50] we can obviously send them to share.

[1:41:51] And I'll probably request to sit down with you,

[1:41:52] kind of go through things bit more thoroughly, I guess on.

[1:41:57] We've been and lot of Lee thinking of doing

[1:41:59] a work session next Wednesday.

[1:42:01] I don't know if that's still enough for you Can we schedule

[1:42:09] our advisory committee before then I can probably make it work

[1:42:15] whenever you guys have the time so All right, well,

[1:42:21] let's we keep asking questions.

[1:42:23] Yeah.

[1:42:24] All right.

[1:42:25] Let's keep moving on.

[1:42:26] The last two won't be too long, so under mayor City Council

[1:42:30] Thank you, Sharon.

[1:42:31] Appreciate that.

[1:42:32] So I brought this up last year about the idea of a city gala

[1:42:35] and in my mind, the idea is to provide recognition

[1:42:42] for community members that maybe are achieving something

[1:42:45] special volunteer type stuff achievements for the city.

[1:42:50] You know, part of it, too, the thought

[1:42:52] was to share history right?

[1:42:55] Because people have postings on Facebook

[1:42:57] all the time and all that.

[1:42:58] The history buffs, and people that

[1:43:00] haven't lived here too long.

[1:43:01] I mean, I've been there 15 years,

[1:43:02] but to just share that kind of history, I think

[1:43:05] helps us as a community just be a little bit closer

[1:43:08] to understand kind of where we've been,

[1:43:09] where we're at You know, we always talk about the challenges

[1:43:14] the problems.

[1:43:15] It feels like we're always talking

[1:43:16] about the negative stuff.

[1:43:17] And we have so many more positive things going on

[1:43:20] And I think this is an opportunity

[1:43:22] once a year to showcase share kind of the good things

[1:43:25] are going on with our community.

[1:43:26] So that's kind of what's driving this for me to say,

[1:43:30] hey, we should take time out to provide recognition

[1:43:33] and share these things to i don't

[1:43:35] know how much that would cost.

[1:43:36] I mean, I kind of brought it up.

[1:43:37] Last year, kind of have an idea but I'm just

[1:43:39] trying to figure out from the council

[1:43:41] if that's something you guys be interested in.

[1:43:42] You'd have to have an answer tonight.

[1:43:43] We can come back in the second meeting.

[1:43:46] You can make it into a fundraising fundraiser.

[1:43:48] I mean, it could be like a little something like that.

[1:43:50] But try to raise some money to maybe offset the cost.

[1:43:54] But but also provide donation, but potentially Matthew.

[1:43:59] Thank you.

[1:43:59] Mayor, I would like to put together

[1:44:01] a some like an informational packet for the city

[1:44:04] council in regards to gala's, what you can do as a city, what

[1:44:08] you can't do, fundraisers you can't do,

[1:44:10] but you can partner with somebody else

[1:44:12] within the nonprofit, within the community

[1:44:14] to provide an a fundraising opportunity

[1:44:17] as part of that project.

[1:44:18] So if it's all right, I'd like to put

[1:44:20] together some information.

[1:44:21] That'd be great Looking forward to that.

[1:44:24] Yeah Yeah.

[1:44:26] I would think I would ask Matthew also

[1:44:28] to put in some type of who's going who

[1:44:34] is potentially setting this up.

[1:44:35] Right.

[1:44:36] What are we going to be asking staff

[1:44:38] to cut the project for two months or six months

[1:44:41] to put this together?

[1:44:42] Or who are those potential community partners that we've

[1:44:44] worked with You know, immediately think

[1:44:47] about the Legion and we're asking Paul to take

[1:44:50] on another project between that and the school

[1:44:52] board and the chamber and all those other entities I know when

[1:44:56] we started on the memorial back in or whatever it was you know,

[1:45:02] that's how it started.

[1:45:04] I mean I shouldn't say that's what it started.

[1:45:06] That's when we got the momentum to move it to Central Park

[1:45:08] because we got a lot of these, you know, partners in a room

[1:45:11] act it out and came up with that plan You know,

[1:45:14] the beautification group they were leading it then,

[1:45:17] but then how do we get those next step?

[1:45:19] So I would think maybe whether it's

[1:45:21] roadmap potential partners Yeah, because we can't I

[1:45:25] can't see you.

[1:45:26] It's like, hey to put this on correctly

[1:45:29] and appropriately, I think where we would want it to to showcase

[1:45:33] the city, that's a planning.

[1:45:37] Yeah.

[1:45:37] So that's where my mind is at.

[1:45:41] I, I agree My word.

[1:45:43] Then we, we all say maybe having a council member assigned to it,

[1:45:46] you know.

[1:45:47] Well, absolutely yeah.

[1:45:48] Because come back to the council and council

[1:45:50] that were on that group.

[1:45:52] Yeah.

[1:45:52] There you go Yeah.

[1:45:53] And my thought too was to invite i think, residents.

[1:45:57] Right.

[1:45:58] Because I think that we get people

[1:45:59] who want to be part of that.

[1:46:01] Yeah, right.

[1:46:02] So i certainly wasn't jumping not to say staff had to do.

[1:46:04] No, no, no.

[1:46:05] I just i would want that in order.

[1:46:07] So with that assumed by here by the public,

[1:46:10] you know, and fighting like you said.

[1:46:12] Yep, absolutely So therefore, that's gone.

[1:46:16] It didn't have to be a long conversation tonight,

[1:46:18] but I just want to bring it up because I think

[1:46:19] it's important for us to share the good things that happen

[1:46:21] in this community Too often we dwell

[1:46:23] on the problems and the negativity

[1:46:25] and there's a lot more positivity than I think

[1:46:28] that we acknowledge right?

[1:46:29] So if we could move that direction, that'd be wonderful.

[1:46:33] Council goals for 2027.

[1:46:35] This is just a placeholder.

[1:46:36] Say hey next council meeting.

[1:46:38] I think we should each bring our ideas top.

[1:46:41] You know, a couple of things we want to do.

[1:46:43] And then collectively maybe paired

[1:46:44] on the list to whatever we can accomplish

[1:46:47] It doesn't have to necessarily mean money right?

[1:46:49] It could just be a focal point.

[1:46:51] So I just want to throw that out there

[1:46:53] because as we're talking about the budget,

[1:46:54] I think this is a good time to solidify that on the council

[1:46:58] right Makes sense.

[1:47:01] So that's all that's all I was looking for.

[1:47:03] I got my 1 or 2 things, you know, that i'll bring.

[1:47:05] But spend more time with kids sporting events

[1:47:09] and activities All right.

[1:47:13] Oh, okay All right.

[1:47:15] Anything?

[1:47:15] Anybody want to share?

[1:47:17] No, sir.

[1:47:18] No But i'm back on the gal.

[1:47:21] Would you have to worry or not?

[1:47:22] When he's serving you those you know,

[1:47:25] essentially I do what I have to for the committee.

[1:47:28] Right All right.

[1:47:30] Well, I'm going to make a motion to adjourn to have a second.

[1:47:33] Second, Mr. Mayor.

[1:47:34] All right.

[1:47:35] All in favor Signify by saying I, I, we are now adjourned.

[1:47:38] Thank you, everybody, for coming

City Council First Monthly Meeting

Agenda

Transcript