[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.
[8:16] 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