Okay, at this time I'll call the uh September 14th, 2026 council for regular meeting to order. Please rise if you're can for the pledgece to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all >> make a motion to adopt tonight's agenda second. >> [sighs] >> Okay, we have a motion and a second. All in favor? >> I >> I item 4 A1. >> Mr. Mayor and Council, uh before you here this evening are a couple of presentations and public hearings for the uh preliminary levy and adoption and also the ordinance pertaining to the nuisance firearms uh ordinance. And uh just uh kind of getting into the first one there. Uh the prelim preliminary budget is before you here this evening for adoption. There are four different resolutions uh to consider this evening. One is setting the date for the final adoption and uh the others are the preliminary levy, the EDA levy, the HA levy and I will remind everyone that with the preliminary we can set it this evening and then um on December 14th I think it is uh we uh we can lower it but we cannot raise it at that point. So just kind of getting into it here on July 13th, city staff and contractor personnel as well as administration, finance, fire, police, and public works departments presented their budgets and proposals to the entire city council for comment and review. And on August 10th, the city council had a follow-up meeting to further uh look at uh uh the budget at that point. The preliminary 2007 2027 general fund exponential. >> Excuse me, ma'am. >> Yes. [clears throat] We lost it. Interesting. [laughter] Try and shut it down here and we'll uh restart it. See what happens. One quick >> [clears throat] >> 20 seconds to power on. Bear with us. I don't know what to tell you. That one's powering up. [clears throat] Sure. Okay. Okay. He'll do his best to follow along with us as we're moving through some of this. Um the preliminary 2027 general fund expenditure budget is projected to increase by 7% or $498,700. This expenditure increase would result in a corresponding levy increase of 5.8% or $384,900 to balance the 2027 budget. Uh overall the general tax levy, debt service levy, EDA levy, and HA levy would increase by 5.9% to four 401,000. Uh the budget model currently reflects the following expenditure inputs uh which are the primary drivers of the overall increase. You'll see them noted there. the union contract. Uh we negotiated a 3% COLA increase for the nine union 13 nine union 13 non-union and 40 paid on call employees. Uh the union contract also has an increase of of $50 to 1510 per month for the cafeteria contribution. Uh we have a fully funded uh community development director position in there. Uh we have a part-time seasonal administrative scanning intern in there. And the overall salary and benefits in this amount represent 201,000 of that increase. The law enforcement contract has a 3.9% increase, a 62,000 uh increase. The assessor has a 1% or $500. The city attorney contract remains the same. We have a $6,000 increase for the Metro Inet consortium that we belong to that they're increasing and the audit contract is a $2,000 increase as well. And one of the other notable increases is the equipment replacement fund is being increased by $40,000. This is the fire truck um compensation plan, shall we say, to uh to increase we've seen big increases in that equipment and the equipment replacement fund was not necessarily set up to account for those increases. The street capital fund we increase by $50,000 every year. Um, and the park capital fund has an increase of uh $10,000. Um, aside from that, I I think um, you know, as I've always said, I think government increases roughly about 6% every single year. You add in your electricity and gas and employee costs and that sort of thing. Anything below that, of course, is is uh is being very responsible. We've had a couple of the big cost drivers that is um uh with uh with the equipment replacement fund that was not anticipated you could say um but is a responsible step going forward that's kind of increasing some of the money that we're looking at this year. So stand for questions if there are questions. Well, I have a question. Something that's not driving with my brain is we've had huge property taxes due to huge property evalu valuation increases. Now, that brings a lot of extra money into the city or not. It does not. >> So, um [clears throat] first of all, what what I'll say um Mr. chair and council is that um the we need to look at it as a pie. Um the city establishes a budget. Let's call it a pie. Everybody gets a slice of that pie. And um depending on how you rate with your neighbor depends on, you know, if you have more square footage or more valuable house, you might pay more or have a larger slice of that pie than your neighbor would. Um, but we do not, let's say that, uh, we get a bunch new development coming in and they all pay more taxes. That means everyone gets a little smaller piece of pie. We don't get more revenue coming in. We establish our pie or we establish our budget. That's the amount of money that we're levying and that does not change with the amount of u development that occurs unless we increase that budget. So, say for example, uh, housing development comes in and they're going to require more police force or more fire service and we need to increase those budgets, then that pie gets bigger. But, um, if we held everything constant, if we had held all of our budget and salaries and everything constant and you had a lot of increase in development, everyone would pay less in taxes essentially. >> I don't think anybody is experiencing that. I think we've all experienced huge tax increases in our property taxes and >> right but what I will just to clarify not to cut you off but just to clarify is when you look at your property tax statement you have to isolate out the city portion because that's the only thing this board can control >> right >> there's the school board there's the county there's 911 there's um you know other drivers to that and you have to really then look at those and see, you know, who's driving up the cost of taxes and and then you can >> call up your elected representatives and ask them why essentially. >> Yeah. >> Because I know >> if you live in the St. Francis [snorts and clears throat] school district, there's two additional levies in there underneath theirs too. >> It's driving a lot of this. >> I understand that. Um I did change a sub. I don't have anything else on this, but I am getting texts saying it's not online. So, I don't know if um there's an issue with switching computers or what. >> So, YouTube is down or not streaming >> channel or YouTube, >> right? We've had trouble with the um ability to to broadcast this immediately or live. It will be available tomorrow as it has been. We have, as I mentioned um couple of weeks ago, we have a a DVR that went down and the only one I think that's available is in Nigeria. So um at any rate, we're trying to find solutions to that. And the problem is a lot of our broadcasting equipment is so old that um current suppliers don't even know what to recommend. Okay. >> That is not included in the budget as a replacement of the system. >> I understand. [laughter] >> Any other questions of Matt? We got to go through through each one of these and make a motion. Second and approve them. Four or five of them. So, I'll make a motion to approve uh resolution 2026-43 set final levy and budget date. >> Second. >> We have a motion second. Any further discussion? >> On being heard, all in favor? >> I opposed. Unheard. Resolution 26 2043. 202 2643. >> That was 43. Yeah, 44. >> 44. I mean, >> 44 is next. I'll make a motion to approve resolution 2026-44 setting the preliminary property tax levy and budget for 2027. I'll second that. Any further uh we have a motion, a second. Any further discussion on I have a question. Um, when it comes to requesting a lowering of it, if we if by some chance some bells go off in my head, I'm like, "Hey, we can cut this." What is the process? >> That just be bringing it to a council meeting. >> Yeah. >> Well, it'll be December 14th, right? Or not before. >> We can change it anytime. Any, right? Just call that, have it put on the agenda and >> anytime. Okay. Yep. >> Got it. >> Any other further discussion? On being heard, all those in favor? >> I opposed. Unheard. Resolution 202645. >> I'll make a motion to approve resolution 2026-45 setting the prelim preliminary economic development authority, property tax levy, and budget for 2027. Second. >> We have a motion, a second. Any further discussion? >> None being heard. All those in favor? >> I I >> opposed. Resolution 2026-46. make a resolution approving or make a motion to approve resolution 2026-46 setting the preliminary 2027 H levy and budget >> second have a motion to second any further discussion on being heard all those in favor >> I opposed unheard item 4B. >> Mr. Mayor and Council, before you this evening is the ordinance amendment regarding the firearms and disorderly conduct. On a work session of August 10th, council discussed chapter 4 of the firearms ordinance. At that time, it was decided that the ordinance was vague and needed further uh refining as it related to nuisance discharge of firearms. This was somewhat brought on by some calls that we were receiving um in a particular neighborhood that we'll leave uh nameless at this point, but I think everyone's familiar with it. uh and uh and so we kind of started researching then Minnesota state statute 609.72 as it uh as it defines disorderly conduct as an engagement an offensive abusive boisterous or noisy conduct or use of offensive obscene or abusive language tending to reasonably arouse alarm anger or resentment in others. Um, and uh, we brought this before the council on the 24th and uh, there was good discussion on that, but I think was council member Urkl wanted to kind of memorialize some of the language as it relates to confiscation if that uh, if it gets to that point and uh, that language should be redlined here for you. Uh but essentially uh the the ordinance uh remains the same except for a statement that says further all Minnesota uh state statutes pertaining to firearm seized are applicable to this ordinance as appropriate is re reviewed by our attorney and um and I think it gives the responding officers the ability to educate certainly I don't know that they'll um you know use a nuclear option right away, but I think it's a good opportunity to inform folks that hey, this can happen. Um, and as with any ordinance, this can be changed. Um, and uh, and we we need some method of control for um, shall we call it maybe punitive discharge of weapons to upset neighbors. Anyways, questions >> questions. Nope. >> The only question I would have Matt, how how do we make sure ordinary target shooting hunting practices isn't unintentionally captured by this ordinance? >> Yeah, Mr. Mayor, councel, I we've given some thought to that and I you know, I think in this community you have I mean just this evening we I think the wind was blowing right and and you could hear all the gunshots going off at the uh at the range. Uh, and so I think people are are somewhat um um used to maybe discharge of weapons to a certain degree. I think what we had was a situation where um there was reckless discharge, continuous discharge. I mean, it was just I think nine out of 10 people would probably have said that was a little over the top, you know, type of thing. So, um, again, I think you know, the these type of things, as with a lot of enforcement, is kind of at the discretion of the officer that's responding. And I I would say they're probably going to use pretty pretty decent common sense. And if it's out of control, they'll probably say, you know, it's, you know, let's bring it down here a little bit. It's upsetting folks. We had we had a family that wouldn't let their kids out of the house because they didn't know if there were bullets flying around or you know at that point it's you know summer summer days and kids like to play outside and should you know play outside. Um that that creates a different threshold of of concern I think for a neighborhood. I I think depending on the complaints we can monitor them. you know, um I don't know that we've gotten since I've been here any complaints like this except this one kind of outlying anomaly perhaps. Um and I would hope that remains that way. >> All right. Does this got to be a public hearing or not? You got it listed as one. Yeah, I mean you can call, you know, for a public hearing if there's anyone that has comment on that. Um, >> okay. This time we'll open up a public hearing from the public if anybody wants to speak on this issue. Going once, twice. Hearing none, we'll close the public hearing and go to the council vote. I'll make a motion to approve uh an ordinance amending chapter 42 article 4 of the city code adding language defining disorderly conduct as it relates to the discharge of firearms. >> Second. >> Okay, we got a motion and a second. Any further discussion? >> None being heard. All those in favor? >> I opposed. Unheard. Okay. public forum she somewhere. Suzanne Peterson, please come up to the mic here and state your name and address. >> My name Can you hear? Okay. My name is Suzanne Peterson. I live at 4820 South Tri Oak Circle Northeast. Um I'm actually here to encourage you all to get an ordinance in place for short-term rentals. As many of you know, we have a party house in the neighborhood and uh I don't live right next door. I live probably quarter mile away, maybe. Um but I walk the circle every day. I mean it is Trioke Circle, right? And I can definitely tell when there are events at this particular property that are problematic. This is why we need an ordinance so that we have some way to try to rein some of this in because it's ridiculous. They had a postp prom party. You know, you walk the circle, right? No trash. 200 foot stretch where the cars were. You pick up a bag of trash. Wait, that's not okay. And it certainly is not acceptable in a residential neighborhood. I love where I live. It's a great place. Lots of people walk the circle. We're It's wonderful. But this particular house needs to be reigned in and the only way we can do that is through an ordinance as much as the city can do. And yes, I do want the city to have teeth and punish this person because they don't respect our neighborhood and it really affects how we feel about where we live because East Bethl is a great place. So that's all I wanted to say is just encouraging you to do that and as as tough as we can be, I would really I would really appreciate that it within the limits of what we have of course. Yeah. >> All right. Thank you. Channing pass these out. Um, I'm Channing Stole. I live on uh 3231 227th Lane Northeast, just off East Bethl over there. I'm back here uh kind of updating you on the results from the In Noa County Election Integrity Team. and I was here about a month ago. Uh this is to let you know um if you saw the news last week, the Minnesota Supreme Court ruled in favor of Oakrove being able to choose to use paper as opposed to electronic polls in voting. Um I've handed out kind of a detailed followup. The next to the last page is really uh what I'm here to let you know in terms of next steps for the city council that we would see here. Uh given the nature of the ruling that the cities do have the authority to make this decision. This was a real plus for local control, local rule. uh we're recommending you cancel your existing pole pad agreement whether you still want to use them or not. That agreement has old wording that misstates the facts in terms of the nature of who gets to do what in terms of choosing the results there. Um if you choose to use electronic pole pads, we've got sample resolutions you can use for that as well. Uh also the basic uh resolution 202580-80 from the county needs to be amended to reflect the uh Supreme Court ruling. And then we'd also ask you to ask the county to withdraw the 2024 memo that they sent to Oak Grove threatening them with a f with a felony if their judges used paper pole pads. Uh completely uncalled for threat, but that memo is still out and hasn't been rescended yet. We'd ask you to restore that. Uh if you want to get in contact with us, that's on the last page. We'll be glad to assist you with any follow-up questions or uh help help you need here. Thank you. >> Thank you, Channing. >> Jim Busy. Mr. Mayor, members of the council, my name is Tim Busy. My family owns a small twobedroom lakehouse on 3408 Edmar Lane that we operate as an existing short-term rental. Uh I apologize for missing the July meeting. Uh my wife and I just welcomed our third child, Elelliana, on July 12th. So at that point, our household was operating under newly adopted regulations, uh feeding schedules and occupancy limits and repeated noise complaints. Um, I understand why the city is considering regulation of short-term rental properties. Properties functioning as event venues can create legitimate concerns involving noise, parking, septic capacity, fire safety, and neighborhood disruption, and I support clear rules addressing those impacts. I'm speaking concerning the chapter 51 ordinance and respectfully request that the council table it for further legal and drafting review. The draft does not adequately distinguish between highintensity event property and a small responsible operated rental like ours. Our two-bedroom property would require discretionary interim use permit merely because it is a nonh homestead and offered for rental more than 120 days per year. Homestead status is a tax classification does not establish occupancy, noise, parking demand, septic load, or nuisance risk. Also, the 120day rule is unclear. It regulates a property when it is available rather than when it is actually rented. So, we need to know does the visible online listing make the property available every single day? Uh are block days, owner uh use days, maintenance days, cancellations, or multiple platforms covered or counted? uh the required records or recordings concerning actual occupancy which does not establish a theoretical availability as well. The ordinance defines an STR as the rental of fewer than 30 days um but prohibits stays longer than 21 days. It doesn't explain what happens to that 22 to 29 day gap. It also does not clearly address hourly rentals through platforms like peer space. Uh the enforcement provisions present an additional legal concern. Uh a license or IUP may be suspended or revoked based on repeated complaints and or nuisance conditions, but the ordinance does not require complaints to be verified or define how many are repeated uh to be a violation. It provides no clear investigation standard, opportunity to cure, revocation hearing, written findings, or appeal. A complaint should trigger investigation. It should not itself count as a violation. The IUP uh process also lacks clear STR specific approval criteria. An applicant may satisfy every objective requirement, occupancy, parking, septic capacity, insurance, and local contact without knowing whether approval will follow or whether generalized neighborhood opposition can control the decision. Finally, the ordinance does not clearly explain how existing lawful rentals will be treated, including whether Minnesota's protection for existing uses apply or how future reservations and ordinary estate planning transfers will be handled. I have provided a written statement or can provide a written statement rather identifying these and other ambiguities. I respectfully ask that they be included in the record if possible for today's meeting and that the ordinance be tabled until the city establishes objective standards, verified complaint procedures, due process protections, and fair treatment of existing low impact rentals. Thank you for your time. And if I'm able to submit uh a further um written record, I would gladly do that. >> Yes, please. >> We would love that. Yeah. >> And I apologize. I do not have a copy for everyone, but I'm more than willing to email it to the appropriate so that everyone can >> give that to Matt over. >> Yep. >> Okay. Very good. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> All right. Mr. Lewis. >> Good evening. [clears throat] Last time I was here, I asked what I thought was a simple question and that was of you, mayor, and you, Dino, of why, or Brian, too, why you guys denied Stacy Miller the opportunity to serve up the four and a half months of her late husband's term. What was the urgency? What was the motivation? And uh neither nobody had an answer for me. So, it got me to thinking and in circumstances like this, you tend to follow what uh city attorney's familiar with. It's called quib bono. Who benefits is what it means in Latin. I had to look it up. I don't speak Latin. But anyway, I got to thinking of 2010 and 11. And I sure don't want to live through that again. But I suspect that it's the same moneyed interests that own a whole bunch of land in the Musa and immediately adjacent to it to the east who are putting pressure on members of the council. And quite possibly it's also because of the pending I think appointment of a group to update the comprehensive plan. Is that on the agenda in the near future too? because the comprehensive plan is due for updating. But whatever it is, I mean, we have people over there. This is all public information. I looked at the county website and the secretary of state. The Osbornes have an over 100 acres over there in the Musa. The that's a municipal utility service area, the water and sewer district for better better explanation. and uh east. I know that Viking Meadows definitely wants to sell that 30 acres that we would not extend the muse of for before. Probably quintuple or more the value of that land. Uh there's a thing called East Bethl 6481 Land LLC. That's Ben Minkx. I don't know Mr. Minkx, but he lives in Ramsey. It says Gavin and Carol Carlson have 40 acres over there. And so we understand that those people stand to make a lot of money. I'm a capitalist, but I don't believe in corrupt capitalism. I I hate it. I really do. People who give bribes, people who lie, people who force people do things against their will, which is what was done to the people of East Bethl in 2010 and 2011. I've been out here 30 and a half years. And uh that was that was a disgusting what happened back then. That really was because the community was very clear. We did not want to pay other people's bills. You want to improve the value of your land, fine. You pay for it. Don't put it off on all the rest of us. And we knew that, especially where I live over on Lake Beach area, we knew it's going to be of any benefit to us. Why would we want to pay $35 million off? So anyway, but then the question becomes, okay, we understand what the incentive is. who benefits and who they're going to put pressure on, which is you guys. I know because I had it put on me when I was in your position, mayor, by the guy who was the head of the ownership group of Viking Meadows. Made it very clear. They intended to get their way. Made it very clear. I never said that at the time, but that's the truth. [clears throat] But then how does the benefit that they get red down to you? What's your incentive? And uh that's the part I haven't figured out yet. I don't think it would they're too smart to do it in a public record kind of way like give you a piece of an LLC or give you a lot or anything because all that has to be on the public record. So I guess you're left with the old mafia way of the brown paper bag and nonsequential large bills or something. I don't know. But anyway, that's the part I'll be working on next. I want to understand how this happened. And if this is going to happen again in East Bethl, I am for damn sure moving out of this city. I am sick of paying other people's bills. I really am. So anyway, thanks for your time. All right, Kevin. Thank you, [clears throat] Joe. Joseph Lost Lash probably butchered it. That's Joseph. Joseph Lock. Um I very similar to what he was saying. Uh but last time we were at the meeting, we have a short-term rental uh that's under Airbnb. And uh it was really interesting all of the conversation that went on last time about the negativity towards what seemed to be the one home that was a problem. So it'd be interesting to know what percentage of Airbnbs are actually a problem. And with all the rules that w were uh uh wanting to be put in place, it would basically make us violators of a lot of those rules. Even though we've been told that it would probably be ignored and to just not tell the city, it makes us feel like we would be in violation. um even though no one's complained and how many other Airbnbs would feel the same way about either vehicles or the number of people there at their property even though their community doesn't have an issue with it or their neighbors. Um we've never had a complaint in two years and uh even though all of these rules would technically put us in violation. My wife has more details on those things. Uh, I don't have a whole list of all of these different things. The previous guy had had a a really good layout of all the different rules that there were. So, I just wanted to say that. Um, I didn't get up and speak last time because I really didn't know what to say uh when it was open to the public and then uh the council members were all talking and there was a lot going on and it uh the mic was not open to the public again otherwise I may have said something and asked some questions back then. So I don't know if any of that can all be revisited and rethought out um about how rules [snorts] are there to basically be broken, but can't there be other ways that rules are are put into place for certain extreme situations, especially the uh the first person that spoke, I really do feel for her, for her community out there. Um if it is a major issue, [clears throat] uh I just don't understand how making those types of rules on everybody to follow with uh septics, limitations on people, visitors, a lot of that sounded very extreme. Um if you were to just have a family party, you you'd be in violation of all of that. Also, um but with an interm youth permit or any of those things or even if you are homesteading it, I I don't understand the rule basis, I guess. Um, I didn't put my wife's name on the list, but I don't know if she wanted to say anything or add anything to that. I don't know if that'd be okay. >> I think we got the gist of it. >> Okay. >> If she does have suggestions, um, please have her email them to uh, Mr. Look. >> Okay. We just weren't sure when anything was getting voted on or any of those things. >> Yeah, it's the first >> They can push that all out. >> Yeah, it's the first time it's been brought forward to us [clears throat] tonight to actual city council before. participant from planning and zoning. So, it's our first opportunity to really look at it and with any new ordinances that we put in place. We always like to try to get it right the first time, but sometimes so uh I'm sure there will be discussion and if we feel that u there needs to be some changes made bring it back to staff uh with some of the input that's already been given then we can certainly do that. >> Okay. Thank you. Thank you. >> All right. Moving on to six, item six, consent agenda. [clears throat] >> Make a motion to approve the consent agenda as presented. >> I'll second. I'd like to pull item EFG and I >> EFG. I want to pull E and G. >> EG. Okay. So, it's just the four of them. EFGI. So, we got a motion and a second. All those in favor of the amended agenda say I. >> I. >> I. >> Opposed? None. >> Item E. >> Item E is the law enforcement contract. And I want to table this because there are questions that have not been answered yet. >> So I make a motion to table it. >> Time we got on that. >> Mr. Mayor, we have to we have a hard stop on the um preliminary budget which this impacts >> tonight. So the so the discussion as I've understood it so far is a potential reduction in hours is what is wants to be investigated. If that were to happen that would be a reduction in the levy which would then uh we could make that happen before the December vote on the final final levy. So that can still happen. That's not a problem. Um, we can get into some of the semantics of that, but um of the actual reduction of hours, but um that can still happen. We just have to have I have to set a preliminary budget this evening. >> Is there any timeline that this contract needs to be accepted by? Are we under any time crunch? Uh well, [sighs] you know, we wouldn't be able to necessarily authorize the contract until a final levy is adopted because that would be the funding source for that contract. It'd have to be signed. Obviously, we've not received any signatures on that yet. So, >> so with that said, uh we still looking at Jim and Suzanne meeting with the sheriff. Yeah, we we tried to get meetings put together and their conflicts and it just didn't happen. So, my apology on that. We we definitely put our best foot forward. Uh but they're willing to meet. Um they're willing to sit down and chat. So, >> okay, let's do that. >> Yeah. >> So, as long as we just approve it now, we're not held to it. >> It's just a preliminary budget. >> Okay. You okay with that, Suzanne? >> So, we can change anything in the contract after we vote for this. >> And there's other things we had questions on. >> I don't think you can change the contract language. We can change the levy, but not the contract language. >> So, >> unless you come to a something conclusion with the sheriff somewhere. So, let me answer that question and try and be as clear as I can be. Um, we can try and change anything we want in the contract. They may not extend a contract to us based on the changes. And so, >> well, they can't deny us service, emergency service. So, if that's the way they're going to be, that's the way they're going to be. But I don't think they will do that. Well, uh, we can we can certainly look into the legalities of it, but they're not required to provide police service for us in this community. They have a they have a a you know, roving uh um sheriff vehicle that goes across the entire county. Uh, but that's not going to give you any sort of service that you're looking for. Uh, unless by chance it happens to be here at the time a call comes in. So essentially, you're saying unless we approve contract, we would not have police service. >> I'm then violation of state statute. >> I don't want to I don't want to throw the sheriff under the bus or put words into his mouth. But >> um your other option is to start your own police force, which is not a >> not that a solid option right now. >> Not that we're considering. But to answer the question, if we don't approve the contract, the sheriff has no obligation to serve us. >> No, >> it's called negotiation. We'll talk to him and see where we go with it. >> Yeah. And I think, you know, he's open to uh, you know, conversation and I think there were some good points brought up about other communities and ours and that and that should be addressed and >> it's all good stuff. Um, I don't think that they're going to shy away from that conversation, but My overwhelming thought >> don't think >> of [laughter] of how the meeting would go is that they would say well based on the number of calls we need this number of hours we feel so >> right that's what we'll negotiate about. So >> y problem with that >> try and set that up before our next meeting then good >> we're going to try and meet their schedules with our schedules. It wasn't easy last time but we're going to try and get that done. So, >> okay. I'll make a motion for item E. >> Second. >> So, >> to approve it or approve. No. >> Okay. >> I'm not voting for it. So, >> okay. We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? None being heard. All those in favor? I >> I >> opposed. >> I >> motion passes. Item F. Oh, that's me. Item F. Um, I'm on it there, so I'm going to abstain. >> I'll make a motion approve. >> I'll second. Any further discussion? None being heard. All those in favor? >> I opposed. >> Item G. >> Item G is the resignation of uh Mike Zowski, our finance director, and I just want to say thank him for his service and wish him the best of luck. >> Yeah, I I would second that. Uh Mike has always given uh the city stellar service and uh my been a very valuable employee. >> I agree. Mike's [clears throat] always answered any questions that I've had and he's been very thorough and uh I think we'll miss him. One thing I was asking though is I want to know did we do an RFP as soon as he did that? Is it out there? So we can do that. G is an authorization of posting the position. >> Yeah, Mike uh he kept the money like it was his own there. But um the other thing on this issue um authorizing the posting of position, what position are we posting? Because he held three. So uh Mr. Mr. Mayor and Council, essentially he had multiple hats. Uh, but the [clears throat] finance director position would be the position we're advertising for. He did um HR work as well. We have an internal person that came from doing HR work, FA, and we think that she would be well suited to um taking on those duties. There would be a compensation obvious obviously for that. Um but it would be a HR communication role. Uh communication being internal uh for staff and communication being external as well for newsletter and you know media calls all sorts of things. Um and um the third position he had remind me. >> Well he was the deputy city administrator finance director and then HR. >> Yeah. I mean I We're not going to necessarily fill the deputy city administrator right off the bat unless you know we absolutely have to. Um but uh it was nice to obviously have that. If I was on vacation or something, he could handle those type of issues. But um but so far I think we can we can probably navigate that. >> So it's just going to be the finance director position, >> right? So that would come with a different pay than what Mike was getting. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> With that, I'll approve make a motion to approve item G of the consent agenda. >> Second. >> Motion and second. Any further discussion? None being heard. All those in favor? >> I opposed. None heard. Item I. Item I is the irrigation quote for Viking Meadows. Why is the city doing this and not the contractor is my question? Because I was under the impression the contractor was taking care of all this. Anything that had to do with m >> uh we have Nate here this evening who might be able to answer this better than me, but my assumption is we're using the park dedication fees to pay for the park and the irrigation and and the related uh I think there were wood chips that went in and everything else. So the contractor the contractor is paying for it >> through the park >> did they pay park dedication because I was under the assumption in lie of that they were putting up >> trails and doing all this other stuff over there the pool and all this stuff >> they are definitely paying park dedication fees. So >> okay all right with that I'll pro make a motion to approve item I of the irrigation of the consent agenda. Second >> motion to second. Any further discussion? None being heard. All those in favor? >> I >> opposed. Unheard. [clears throat] Item 7 A1. Just do this. Thank you, Mayor and Council. Um, tonight before you have a application from North Country Concrete, uh, located at 23035 Ulissi Street Northeast. Um they are requesting approval of a site plan review for improvements associated with exterior storage at that property. Their site is approximately 3.07 acres zoned industrial and the uh area is proposed to be developed with crushed asphalt millings, surface storage, perimeter fencing and gates, two driveway access [clears throat] points, landscaping, sight lighting, grading, and storm water improvements. Um the council previously did Um, let's see if I can find a decent site plan. Um, council did appre previously approve a conditional use permit for this exterior storage on the property uh in 2024. Uh, the site plan um before you tonight does not reconsider that exterior storage that was approval was granted but addresses the implementation of that of that approval and the physical site improvements. Planning Commission did review this application supporting materials in August 2026 and adopted their resolution uh PC2617 recommending approval of the site plan subject to conditions. Um the planning commission's finding recognizes property is zoned and guided light industrial that exterior storage was approved through the council resolution and the proposed site plan implements that uh approved use. Um The key issues that you should be just again to touch on uh with the site plan involve the exterior screening of the exterior storage area from adjoining residential properties uh appropriate landscaping, lighting, access, drainage and storm water management. the residential property. Let's see if I have to the north um and immediately to the west. Um they do will have perimeter fencing uh surrounding the property. However, they are they've been asked to update their their fence design to a decorative uh wood solid wood fence, sixoot wood fence, and that is part of the plan. um as shown um their drainage plan, all of their drainage goes to the north and east. Um the site plan and drainage elements were reviewed by the city engineer. His report is in your is in your packet. Um and it will be sent to an infiltration basin here in the northeast uh and should capture all the storm water and nothing will uh be drained from the site to other other properties. Uh from a landscaping standpoint, um they did update their their landscaping plan to demonstrate compliance with the city's rules. There's an overstory of of large Austrian pine and a number of smaller plantings around that perimeter which should adequately screen that site in addition to the wood fence uh to the north. Um their phototric design or their exterior lighting of this area is uh this is their updated plan. Um, and I know it shows a lot of gobbledegook, but essentially they have to be at 0.5 foot candles at the property line and um, they're um, they're lighting typical Cobra heads with a full cut off design and they're meeting the city's requirements for height and glare and what have you. Um, uh, are proposing some additional signage related to access points. Um, not commercial signage or anything to that effect. um about how uh people will come onto the property from their adjacent site to the east. Um again, this this does show their current existing fencing. Um that will be around the perimeter except for that north side. Um and this is about where their signing will be. Um so it's not very big, but it's just intended to inform um their staff or potential visitors dropping off material. Um just some site images if you've not been over to the site recently. Uh again their their current yard consists of a number of outside storage for their concrete business and they're basically looking to uh expand um into that other area. Um again these images are in your packet um what have you. So, um, consistent with the planning commission finding, staff recommends that the city council adopt resolution 202649 approving the site plan review for north country concrete at 23035 Ulysi Street substantially in accordance with the landform professional services civil landscape design uh, dated August 25th, 2026 and subject to the conditions contained in the resolution. >> [snorts] >> I'll make a motion to approve resolution 2026-49 approving a site [clears throat] plan for Northern Country Concrete at 23035 Ulysus Street Northeast. >> Second. We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Yeah, I was I was over at the property and I took a look at it and the operation that they got going right now is in my view topnotch. Their equipment, everything is like in order. So, I have no issues with this at all. I think they'll do a great job. Everything looks super at their operation right now. So, I see no reason why they would do the same there. That's my opinion. >> I um I have some questions. I do want to say I'm glad to hear that they are modernizing their fencing, but do you know exactly what they're going to put in there? Is it the equipment they already have that's um and they're just consolidating over in that area or are they bringing in different trucks or what? >> In my visiting and uh pardon me, mayor and council um uh in my visiting with the the operator um and the site visit um their site is at capacity on their current site to the east. And so they will be I mean their business is growing. They'll be adding more equipment, more storage, what have you. So it's It's in addition to what they have, >> but similar to what they have. Okay. Um, so if neighbors begin to complain, do we have any kind of fallback for that? >> If I may, >> I don't expect it, but you know, just >> so Mayor Council, um, you know, they do the city did grant the condition the underlying conditional use permit. Um, so you would have some ability to go back to that applicant or the applicants and say, "Hey, let's make sure you're towing the line with compliance with that cup." I think the last resort is barring some clear non-compliance with that CUP. Speculating at what could happen would be a little tough. Um, >> we've had no complaints. Correct. >> No, ma'am. Not that I'm >> none. Okay. Um, what about the lights at nighttime? Is that going to be like something that's going to bother the neighbors? Because I know it would bother me. >> Well, the ordinance requires them to be at full cutoff and limiting the height and limiting the the the foot candles. Um, if they're willing to potentially put those on a timer, something you could you could ask. um to require it might be a different story. Um but they do have security concerns and their lighting designs and fixture criteria are compliant with your rules. >> Okay. >> One thing too is when I was there, I mean to the north there's a huge tree line there also. So I mean [snorts] >> this time of year it'll definitely block any lighting because of leaves and stuff like that. And my thought is if we haven't had any complaints, I wouldn't think we would because they've been operating their business out of there and that'll change nothing. So >> neighbors neighbors change, mayor and council and things can come and go and >> it is zoned industrial. The land use >> plan is zoned industrial in effect. So >> it's kind of par part par for the course. >> Okay. I have nothing else. Any further discussion? Okay, we have a motion and a second. All those in favor? >> Opposed? None heard. Motion passes. Item 782. Okay, let's see if I can close this. Make this bigger. Um, again, thank you, mayor and councel. Uh, also tonight you have before you a variance request from Daniel and Jacqueline Daycart of 1 19533 East Front Boulevard. Uh, the daycarts are requesting variance associated with construction of an attached garage with living space above and exterior stairs at at that address. Uh, the property is zone Lake as residential is also located within the Shorland zone. Um this map on your screen shows the the location again relative to Lake and in the shoreland zone overlay. The proposed garage requires relief from the required 25 ft setback from Eastfront Boulevard which is on the west side and of their property here and the required 7 foot northerly light set northerly side [snorts] setback. The application also seeks relief from the required 75 foot um separation from the ordinary high watermark um for the exterior stairs and from the 25% impervious surface standards within that shorland zone. So just these some images here um uh the front of the house is existing um here and this would be an addition certainly this is just a schematic of it. Um there is not an attached garage to the home in its current form. They're seeking some storage space above the property or above the garage area um with some stairs out the back. Uh in this case, it's flipped on the right side of your screen. Um some of the specific site conditions are uh this looks from the back of the property towards the street that this shed would need to be removed as part of the conditions as it meets some of their accessory structure sizes. Um trying to thinking so this is the front of the home. The garage would be essentially shown there where the blue arrow is. You can see the lake in the back. Um the pink stake in the foreground is the lot line and it runs uh due east from there. Uh the neighbors to the west um have provided a letter of support. Um this garage would be approximately uh 3 feet from this lot line on the street side and moved towards 7 feet on the lake. Um this is the current front of the home. Um so the garage would be to the left of that westerly gable. Um, so I think you get the lay of the land pretty well. See if there's anything else here. That's kind of it. Okay. So, the principal issue is whether the requested variances satisfy the city's practical difficulties criteria. Staff and the planning commission found that the proposed attached garage represents a reasonable residential use and that the practical difficulty results from the combined effect of the 1957 dwellings existing dwelling placement. the lock configuration, applicable setbacks, the existing well, wastewater holding tank, utilities, and other established site improvements. Commission also further found that with appropriate limitations, proposal would not alter the essential character of the locality or certainly the neighborhood. Um, and I mentioned that the the applicant had support from um the uh abuing property owner. I put a survey in here. I apologize. Um, so the planning commission um recommended that for approval with some conditions that are certainly in your in your in your resolution 2026-43. Um, but the garage must maintain a setback of not less than 17.2 feet from East Front Boulevard right away. And that's basically the same uh location as the front of the home. So it would not extend further than that front of the home. No portion of the garage or upper living space may extend forward of existing front wall of that residence. Again, and not less than 3 ft from the northerly property line. Again, that's with that stake there. Roof overhangs, eaves, and gutters, similar projections uh toward the northerly property line are limited to six inches beyond the beyond the garage wall. So, um, sometimes homes have two foot overhangs. That would essentially be, um, putting the home one foot from the lot line. Your city ordinance does allow that encroachment into the uh, for overhangs, but in this case, it would seem to be a reasonable thing to limit that to 6 in. It should allow for drainage and and gutter systems. Um the existing lake shed that I mentioned should be removed prior to final occupancy and the lakeside stairs would be need to be redesigned with the midpoint landing and change direction to main a setback maintain a setback of not less than 60 ft from ordinary high water mark. Um and finally the impervious surface coverage should not exceed 25.1%. Again, a really small criteria, but this was from their surveyor, so we just figured just put it in there and be done with it. So, uh with that, mayor and council, the planning commission uh did uh recommend approval. Um a proposed resolution also recommending approval is or seeking approval is in your packet at 2026 uh-48. Can you go back to that drawing where of a finished project? >> Sure. >> There. >> Yeah. >> So, it's going to be high on two ends and small and shorter in the middle there. That >> that would be the case. Yes. >> Like Ohio, high in the middle, >> right? [laughter] I just don't understand why they went try and put a second floor up to part of their house if they need additional living area. Are they going to have any uh plumbing, water, running water or anything up there? >> I I don't know off top of my head. I I >> isn't that against our ordinances anyways to have water in there? >> If it was a norm normal detached, I think you'd be right that you could not have plumbing, but I think having it being attached to the house, it's no different from my estimation than having a bonus room above a garage. Mayor and council, they would be if they if they could do it and they're desiring to do it, they would have to meet all the city's requirements for um uh habitability. >> They'd have to get permits. >> Per Yes. Yes, ma'am. did have to be permitted to okay to do that. I thought I hadn't included a site plan in my in my but I'll just pull that up here if I can catch up with you here at least. It might give up at a little bit better detail about the site itself. Hard I apologize. A little bit hard to see. That's better. Um so the proposed garage is here on this north side. As you see it does not extend in front of the current structure. Um it would be 3 feet from this corner and 7 ft um from this corner which is the li which is the requirement. Um as part of their application um and discussion the setback from the ordinary high watermark as they showed it was 53.2. Planning Commission requested that they make a turn in the stairs. So there'd be a landing here and then they they so the landing comes out this direction. Maybe they want to have their stairs on the west side or sorry the north side and turn them this way. The applicant didn't have any objection to either of those concepts. Um and the proposed four seasons and the new deck are not part of the application at this time. >> Okay. And then my last question is, does their septic have to be increased if they're increasing a living area? Because isn't septics based on number of bedrooms and bathrooms and stuff? >> They have holding tanks. So, um, if they're adding more capacity, they'll just be emptying out their holding tanks quite >> Okay. A little bit more off. Got it. >> So, >> okay. I don't have anything else. >> I was out there and I looked at the site. The only thing that I'm thinking and concerning and I don't know if they've thought of it where their well is once they put the structure in there if they have to service their well. How do they plan on doing that? There's not a lot of room between them and the house >> next to them. Well, maybe they could put a hole in the back of their garage and drive it through that way, but lever the crane or, you know, um, if they're going to, >> you know, if a well fails, you know, maybe it's just the pump that's submerged, maybe they can pull it out, >> you know, but terms of drilling a new well, >> that might be a different story. >> That's all I really was thinking about. >> 6 inch overhang, too. kind of short for two stories. The water is going to come pounding down there if we get any good rains, but maybe they're going to put gutters or something on. >> They would have to put gutters on. And the thought of the 6-in overhang would still allow them to have an eve, >> you know, versus nothing. >> I know. 6 in. >> It's up to you folks, of course. >> That's all I got. That could be a dilemma. Is can you go back to the picture of um where you have it circle where the garage is going to be? Cuz I want I just want to see something about >> like that. >> No, the actual photograph. >> Oh, sure. >> With the >> Yeah, >> that one. Maybe. So if they put it up there, if they did need to get a vehicle in the back, would they be able to Is there a room on going on the neighbors? >> They'd have to go on the neighbor's property. >> So they would just have to get permission to do that. >> That would probably be okay then. >> Neighbors have a shed there, too, though. >> They'd be required to remove the shed, right? >> The shed has to go. >> Neighbors have a shed also. >> Yeah. But they'd be able to get >> Is that tree on this property or the neighbor's property? That tree is on their property, >> so they'll be removing that. >> I did ask if they were going to keep the tree removed. Not that it matters, at least from what, but they thought they would have to remove it. >> I suppose worst case scenario, you wait till winter and have the lake freeze and drive the rig across the ice. It's an option. Uh, do we have a motion on this yet? >> Not yet. >> Okay, I'll make a motion to approve resolution 2026-48. >> I'll second. >> Okay, we have a motion, a second. Any further discussion? None being heard. All those in favor? >> I opposed. None heard. Motion passes. Item eight, one. Okay, too much paper. >> [clears throat] >> 28 207 287 287 now if I can just spin it right. Okay. So, so Mayor and Council, um I try to think about what might be the best way to just kind of present this to you. you might so just I think I'd just write go down my my short summary here and if if you'd like me to go through the planning commission PowerPoint I can do that too. There have been a few changes to it but um basically if there's something you wanted to touch on we can always go back. Um so uh in April of this year the council uh directed the planning commission uh to review short-term rentals and consider appropriate regulatory framework. commission discussed the issue in May 26 and and provided direction to staff to develop propo proposed ordinance. Um commission did hold that public hearing following putting uh the legal notices out and um putting the the advertisement in your city's newsletter. So that was held on July 28th. Um it was well attended um at that time. Um, and the planning commission did adopt resolution PC2609 recommending approval of the ordinance, and that's that's in your packet. Um, the proposed ordinance does establish uh a new chapter 50 51 of your city code regulating short-term rentals. Um, I think we all have a good understanding what short-term rentals are. U however it creates a hybrid approval process under which lower intensity short-term rentals may qualify for an administrative license while higher intensity operations and those near lakes which is where many of them are would require an interim use permit and separate public review. The intent of the planning commission or thought of the planning commission was that the interim use permit process would enable public discussion and public engagement about what might be going on at a given property and their application. Um so an administrative license would generally be available only if it would contain three or fewer bedrooms. It's classified as a and remains a homestead property. In that case, um the the resident lives there, they're present. Um is available for short-term rental no more than 120 days per calendar year. The question of is available is is what the language the planning commission uh coalesed around is not that it's rented for, but rather that it's available. Um that is it is open for business. Um much like if you had a hotel just just because nobody comes doesn't mean the hotel doesn't have an impact on the property. It's it is available from no more than 120 days. Is located outside of the Shorland Overlay District. And the rationale of the planning commission there was that the um smaller units um that have fewer bedrooms and are not in a heavily sought after short-term rental area. um is preferable to an administrative license. And the best way to simply define that um from an ordinance standpoint is to use a tool you already have and that's your shorland zone. So basically everything within a th00and ft of of your lakes um and is located more than 250 ft from an approved short from an existing approved short-term rental. So, the the thought there by the planning commission was that um you don't want your community or certain neighborhoods to be packed with short-term rentals. Um rather you prefer them to have them spaced out. Not that they can't be next to each other, but the second one would require an interim use permit. Um, moving on from that standpoint, interim use permit would be required where any of those standards are not met or when potential eligible accessory building is proposed for a short-term rental. Maybe they have an outbuilding that's habitable. Um, the ordinance also establishes standards relating to maximum occupancy, two persons per bedroom plus one additional host, if you will. Um, rental duration. um not more than 21 days. Um so somebody could have that for 21 days and then maybe somebody could have it for seven days. Um so how you do that math is always is always a question but um the key goal is to have no rental would be uh more than 21 days in in the eyes of the planning commission. Making sure there's adequate off- streetet parking, making sure there's adequate system septic system capacity. um that there is a responsible party who's available, whether it's the owner or somebody within an hour. If there's a problem, who do they call? Um inspections related to health, safety, and welfare um that are simple, asking for basic recordeping about occupancy. Um for swimming pools, swimming pools are are heavily regulated by the state in Anoka County. Um it would prohibit um those from being used as short-term rentals without first um licensed from uh Anoka County and proving the facility is safe. Um can't host prohibited events, can't have parties, you can't have weddings, you can't have these things. It's intended for the occupants um who want to rent that for their use, not to rent it and then bring guests over. Um it talks about what is a nuisance activity options for suspension and revocation. Um certainly the question of is does the city and and you all know this and we all know this city doesn't instantly react and and and f and issue citations. We have a due diligence responsible responsibility to communicate with the homeowner which we know we're doing in a in a current situation. Um sending letters [snorts] documenting um because we don't take sides. Um we say what's truly going on. We take pictures. we document and all of your new all of your complaints that you deal with in your city, you require somebody to write a bonafide letter of complaint. Um, so those are the things the planning commission really really dove into. Um, and finally, at least is on this screen, um, would be permitted only within the Lake rural residential and R1 zoning districts and essentially required to main those homes in those districts to remain residential in character. You're not allowing a hotel. You're not allowing a motel. You're not you're not engaging in somebody to come in and host weddings and host events. Rather allow people to quietly um keep that rural car or that residential character in place. Um the planning commission talked a lot about um trying to find a way to make this workable for everyone. Um and that's kind of why they came up with this two-tier uh system. Um more than three bedrooms would also be a requirement for an interim use permit. Again, that you're getting into higher intensity, more visitors, uh more people coming to the to those neighborhoods. Um, and I think we all know that when you're going to a hotel, a motel, a rented space, you probably don't treat it the same way as a resident, as somebody who lives there. You're there. Yes, you're there. You're supposed to be respectful, but you're there to have fun. We've all seen the complaints. We've all dealt with noise complaints um with associated with these. So, it happens. Not everywhere and certainly probably the large majority of them thought the planning commission but it does but it does happen. Um so a couple other things they talked about uh what would be the license fees. Um you currently have an interim use permit requirement of $300 for a base fee and $300 plus an escrow. I'm sorry $300 escrow plus any city review cost for attorney time permitting issuance from them. Publishing of of meetings and such. Um, for an administrative fee, we would propose $150. Uh, again, it's not a significant amount compared to other communities or um it's just enough to make sure we can track the dollars and probably cover a few minor minor city staff costs and an annual renewal renewal of $100. We could do an annual inspection, you know, what have you. Um, one thing the planning commission did talk about was um requiring a $1,000 compliance escrow in addition to um any of those other fees I just mentioned. And the thought there was that would be a thousand dollar escrow that the city would hold and would refund the dollars once the uh license was uh released by the owner or didn't want the renewals anymore so long as they didn't have any any violations. And the advantages of doing it, it would provide an enforcement tool before any suspension or revocation. some minor modest I'm sorry a modest financial incentive for timely compliance. Hey look we have this complaint it appears bonafide you know you did provide an escrow you know so there so there's some there's some responsibility of placing those enforcement costs on the operator rather than the general taxpayer. There's disadvantages to that, however. Ongoing tracking of deposits, withdrawals, um requiring clear assignment of responsibility from community development and finance. Um requiring consistent procedures for documenting withdrawals and notice resolving disputes. Um and and these are all true. So I think from a staff perspective it from the finance side it was it was not uh something they would prefer. Um which makes sense. Um but it probably would be a good tool from an an early enforcement standpoint making people have skin in the game and that was the thought. So the again in your packet proposed city action tonight is ordinance establishing chapter 51 of the East Bethl code of ordinances. Um the ordinance also allows the city administrator clerk to make any non-s substantive changes have spelling or grammar or punctuation problems what have you. Um, so the planning commission found the regulation short-term rentals is appropriate to protect the neighbor compatibility, public health, safety, and welfare, and the reasonable use, enjoyment of surrounding properties. Many cities have been through this. They all have very similar designs, very similar layouts of of their ordinances. Um, so some thoughts, uh, if you would discuss the thousand compliance escrow, if it's important. Um, I did want to note looking at section 513-3 part 2H and 3G. Um, maybe if I can just touch base on that real quick. Um, not going. So these would be these parts two and part three on your screen. Again, I talked a little bit about what when would a certain application apply and you'd have to meet all the following parameters for it to be um uh administratively issued. Frankly, we'd prefer a lot of them to be administratively issued if possible. Um it's certainly easier from a staff perspective. Um but the I wanted to note on both of these under under H under administrative and G um under part three is that um sometimes properties can become problematic regardless of the ownership. And we don't want to see a property change hands from one owner who is might be not the compliant operator to a new non-compliant operator. Sometimes we all know there are problem properties. So um if it is a problem property, they would be required under part 3G to get an interim use permit. If there's never been an issue at a given property, they've been a great operator, then uh they would have standing to get an administrative license under uh part 2H. So, um I'm bringing that up because that I think is the only substantive change that staff had following the planning commission recommendations. Um twists and turns aside, that was largely it. Um so mayor councel this is kind of the genesis and the whole background of it all. Um your your options are or discussion points may be adopt ordinance 202604 establishing chapter 51. Um and uh subsequent to that, approve resolution 2026 uh updating the city fee schedule to account for the administrative short-term rentals and renewal fees. Uh section 202, ordinance 2024 here does include language for a summary publication as well. So that's a lot to roll through and I'll zip it now. So, >> and I think we should table this until we because the last thing I want to do is punish law-abiding uh Airbnb rental owners. Um, and if this is doing that, I think we need to maybe make some more modifications to it. Um, so I don't know what the council thinks, but based on what we heard from residents, they don't deserve to be punished because somebody else is abusing our generosity. So I think we need to see what it that is in here that is conflicting with good decent people versus uh and I know there's the people who live out there who are anxious to get this going and to get this stopped but I don't want to punish people who are doing the right thing. So, I my I'd like to table it, but in fact, I'm going to make a motion to table it. It will either pass or fail. So, that's my motion. >> I'd second the motion. [clears throat and cough] And uh it's a lot to take in. And with uh the reason why we're looking at it tonight is because of one problem problem property and we do want a solution to that. But this is a whole lot and pretty much the short-term rentals is only brought up because of that one problem property. So, I would agree that uh we want to make sure we try to get this right the first time and not uh we we want a cure. We want [clears throat] to make sure this is a proper cure, >> right? >> I agree with what Suzanne said, too. And I want to thank the residents for coming here tonight and speaking on their behalf. And I agree with the table too because to me, I mean, I have a solution to this whole thing, but I don't know if be good. But I'd like to uh invite the two guys that were talking there and they have good ideas to maybe write up some stuff for us that we can go over and look at because I agree we need to get this right. And to me, when I was looking through this and I read through it, it's like to me there's so much stuff in there that to my eyes, it don't make sense, you can make it a lot easier. And I have some ideas of my own, but we can talk about that after. That's my opinion. >> Okay, we got a motion and a second and uh >> Yeah. So, any further discussion on that? I mean, >> do we know how many short-term rentals we have and stuff? >> So, if I may, mayor, >> there's quite a few. >> Yeah. So, there's we did some poking around on the Airbnbs and VBO's. We found about 20. Now, there's probably overlap in the two in the two advertisements in the two >> um >> so 15 to 20 be safe >> and some might be more seasonal than than others. >> Well, this ordinance, Eric, if I tell me if I'm correct or not, is pretty much based off of what other cities are doing. >> Yes, sir. >> And and that tends to be a huge issue in the lake areas, no matter what part of the state you're in. Um, >> Mr. Mayor, if I could, I'll make a comment to that. And that's a good point is that this does mirror other cities that have short-term rental ordinances. So that was kind of a basis to help us guide us through generating them. So as you look at them, understand that um it is a forwardinking um it's it's a forward-thinking plan to have this type of ordinance in place just be because it's true. You hate to have the the the one bad apple upset the rest and that is kind of what brought this to the forefront. But it does set out some uh some really good direction for how to handle short-term rentals and over the over the years and stuff like that because I don't think there'll be personally I don't think there'll be fewer short-term rentals going forward. There's probably going to be more because the city does have the lakes. They're desirable. People want to come and use them. And so I totally understand wanting to table it and take in the input from the the people that are here and we can certainly do that as a staff. But just uh know that that it's it's it's it's on a trajectory of of a lot of cities that that uh that see properties being used as rental properties that have these on these types of ordinances on the books. One one thing, mayor and council, I I know that I know the the theory or the conversation about punishing operators um is I think I think it's a little broad thought um good in this case in this case a good operator would be entitled to the would be entitled to the permit regardless of the mechanism. Um there's performance standards within the ordinance that says meet this test, meet this test, meet this test. It can't be denied. Um when the interim use permit comes into play is essentially what you're facilitating is your neighborhood to speak. Not much more than that. you're enabling the your your the neighbors, the budding property owners, that surrounding property to come in and have their say about it, too, because they're impacted. Um, is that a punishment? Is that negative to the operator? I can understand why that they might feel that way, but the interim use permit is intentionally designed to require civic engagement. Um it can't be the city can't be arbitrary in denying it mind you. So if they've supplied the application they meet the test as we outlined in the ordinance city really can't deny it but for good cause. Um so is it is it a punishment? Not at all. Is it is it burdensome? Some might think so. um planning commission didn't feel so asking for an application and explaining what you want to do in a neighborhood that might change the nature of a neighborhood probably doesn't seem unreasonable from another perspective. Um, just a thought. >> Well, I'd just like to compare what their issues are to what we have in writing here. And I don't want it to be undo burdensome for anybody, especially if they've been perfect um landlords, >> you know. So, let's look and see. And if it's all good, we'll approve it next time. If it's not, we'll make a couple changes and approve it next time. Would you Yeah. Would you at all want this to go back to the planning commission and have further discussion? >> Um, let let's see what >> Let's see what uh information we get now coincides with what we've got. >> If it's just some small stuff, then >> I guess I could put up with more pictures and more phone calls for a couple more weeks from certain people. >> And I I'll make a further [laughter] Mr. Mr. May, I'll make a further [clears throat] comment on that. On the one property that has been problematic, the city has moved forward with criminal prosecution matters as directed by the council and I think that hearing on that matter is coming up in the very near future. So, so there'll be some discussion with that particular property owner coming up very soon. >> Good to take action >> to try to cure that as >> as we deal with this. >> Correct. So with [clears throat] your motion, do you want to just add the the next item to it and they coincide? >> The next agenda item. >> What was the next item? >> U let's do that separately. >> Okay. So we have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? >> None being heard. All those in favor? >> I opposed. >> Unheard. Item two, amendments to chapter 50. >> Make a motion to table that to coincide with the previous agenda item. >> Second. >> We have a motion, a second. Any further discussion? >> None being heard. All in favor? >> I opposed. None heard. Item three, final plat by King Metals phase three. >> Let's see. just going to show this screen on February 12th. Mayor I'm sorry, mayor and council. Uh thank you again. So before you tonight, you have the approve of final plat for phase three of the third edition of Viking Meadows. On February 12th, 2024, the council approved a preliminary plat and PUD plan unit development for the overall Viking Meadows development um through resolution 2024-04. And on the screen shows the the general layout of the preliminary plat. Uh subsequent phases of development have proceeded through separate plat approvals um including Viking Metal second edition. uh about this time last year. Uh East Bethl 648-1 Land LLC um has now submitted the final plat for Viking Meadows third edition. Proposed plat includes 52 residential lots, three outlots, and substantially conforms to uh the approved preliminary plat PUB. I did outline on the drawing the area is shown in yellow. Uh again relative to the initial P initial plat um because the overall sub subdivision layout and development standards were established through the preliminary plat. The principal question is whether [clears throat] the final plat substantially conforms to these prior approvals and satisfies conditions necessary for recording. Um staff found that the Viking Meadows third edition final plat is consistent with the previous approved preliminary plat and PUD. City engineer reviewed the July 24th final plat. A construction plan and issued comments dated September 9th which that documents enclosed. Those comments address erosion control, grading, street lighting, hydrants, uh trails and sidewalks and few things that need to be updated um but are typical. Um city engineer also identified state permits and the need to submit a final project swift prior to construction related to storm water management. Um and ultimately the proposal resolution requires city engineer comments um to satisfactory address um those items before the plat is released for recording um development agreement and conditions. Again, prior to the release of a final plat following your past practice with phase two, the developer would be required to issue a I'm sorry, to execute a development agreement with the city, provide the financial guarantees and securities, pay applicable fees, park dedications, and any conditions uh that I'll that are noted in the uh resolution. Um, so in your packet, mayor and council, you have resolution 2026-50. Um, that approves this third edition final plat. Um, it does mimic your past actions for, uh, phase two. Um, we would bring back the development agreement in hopefully within the next 30 days for final review and approval by the council. Um, and Ultimately, they would dedicate outlot A to the city. Let's see. And that is I know it's all in on the let's see which way is north on this one. Uh on the west side of Meadows Drive. Um and that's this parcel here. And otherwise the outlot B and outlot C would remain uh undeveloped at this time that would be part of a future phase. Um, the last thing I'd like to show you, um, this is certainly a a handdrawn thing I did for might help you all with some context. Um, is, uh, the first phase was in yellow and, uh, let's see. And then the second phase was, my colors don't show up very well here. I apologize. We're We're Was this called the sack? Yep. And then down uh this street which is now good good hue. Good good hue street. Yep. Um my color didn't show up very well. And then this phase um is is this entirety with this blue area remaining an outlot uh on the north and then on the south side. And then in the in the bubble area would be a future phase. And um so yeah, that's kind of the the general lay of your land out there. So with that, mayor, council, staff would um ask that you please consider uh resolution 2026-50. >> I'll make a motion to approve um resolution 2026-05. >> 50. >> Oh, 50. >> Yeah, I'll second. have a motion and second a further discussion. >> Um, I just want to make a a question. Are these lots a little bit bigger? Is that what I'm seeing here or is that just the way it's drawn than the lots to the north? Well, Mayor and Council, um, generally there the the the applicant is here and I maybe if you if you're so willing to let him answer that question. >> Absolutely. [clears throat] >> Okay. >> That's up to you. >> Well, good evening, Mr. Mayor, members of the council, staff. My name is Tom Bacher, land project manager for Capstone Homes. Thank you for the opportunity being here this evening and moving forward with the proposed Meadows Viking Meadows third edition which is 52 lots and out of those 52 lots is 20 of them will be liberties and those are our 50 foot wide uh product and then the remaining would be the 70 foot wide product. Uh and then as we move further south in this territory right here, these will be 80 foot lots, but that's for a future future phase. So I just wanted to kind of give you an update that our goal is to start in February 27th and then have streets ready in August. So then um the progress that we have for phase one and phase two, I just wanted to let you know we have 44 homes sold uh to date. Obviously demonstrating steady demand and continue buyer interest in Viking Meadows. Phase one has 41 sales out of the 47. And then we have four market homes ready to sell right now. [clears throat] And then uh in phase two, we just finished completing this year for uh development and we already have three sales in there and um that's really due to activity that we we began this year. We have 15 homes in construction uh that are from framing uh to um right now foundation and framing. So we have a lot of activity going on right now in the second phase and interest. Um in regards to the continued advance on the schedule and with construction and sales, we are just very excited about keeping it going here in the city. Uh you guys have been a a great partner. Uh we've had some great great residents moving in and um uh they love the new park that the the city has there and um just to let you know um madam council member we've contributed already 162,000 to park dedication. [clears throat] If you remember we prepaid 35,000 of the third of the third phase so we can get that structure built this year. uh your public works department built it and they hired the group that uh got the lowest bid for the structure itself. So we have a remaining balance when we do the final plat but we were happy to do that for the city and uh then this next phase will we'll add another 43,000 for park dedication as well. So we uh we'd like to move forward on on this phase third edition and like to be back sometime next month to do the DA and get that approved. So, we've had two different attorneys, two different DAs, but they're very similar in nature. We want to keep it that way. So, I appreciate your time and thank you if you have any questions for me. >> Okay. What's What do you have planned for the west of those orange lines up there in the phase three area from this >> west? >> Yeah. Right now, this is the third edition. >> And to the left of it, >> to the left is all ponds and trails. >> It's all pond. >> Okay. >> Yes. We'll be grading this whole area out this year. >> Okay. >> The next phase. >> All right. Just nosy. >> Oh, yeah. No, it's And then we'll add more trails as per the plan. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Yeah. >> I have a question. On page 338, it says broadband for a million some dollars. Is that That's the next That's the next item. >> Oh, okay. >> Okay. Any further questions for Tom? >> Okay. We have a motion to second. Any further discussion? All in favor? >> I opposed. None heard. >> Thank you. >> Item G1, broadband. here today. Bear with me, Mr. Mayor. Throw this computer out after this meeting. Okay, Mr. Mayor. Um, back In 20 2023, uh, Commissioner Brasted and I when we were looking for ways to try and spend ARPA dollars from the federal government, uh, we knew that there was, uh, a lot of areas the north of Anoka County. I represented areas of, um, now then and she represented East Bethl and Lynwood and some of these other areas and Oak Grove. And we knew that there was a lot of connectivity issues. People did not have access to internet. there was a lot of um school at home type of things uh you know a lot of working from home kind of coming off of the uh COVID and um and so we allocated some ARPA dollars to broad broadband broadband expansion and uh then coming on board here at East Bethl lo and behold we were able to to apply for some of those dollars and none of that was planned but it just kind of worked out that So anyway, at any any rate, um we were able to get um uh a grant agreement with the NOA County for a million19,800 for broadband expansion with Midco. It had to be authorized uh before December 23rd, 2024, and the project had to be completed by the end of this year. Uh we've uh been in contact with Medco to get an invoice. They have not completed the entire project because parts of East Bethl, Bethl and Lynwood had to be a um had to be a uh they weren't going to work with each city. They wanted the city of East Bethl to take charge and uh do a joint powers agreement and um and I would say 90% of the work is done. It was I believe a $1.5 million project or 1.6 somewhere in that neighborhood. So Midco was bringing money to the table, county was bringing money to the table to get this done and so far over a million has been completed. So what we did was we asked Midco to submit an invoice which uh you see um here for the million uh 19,800 and this is what we submit to NOA County essentially saying that uh we've met that obligation and to give the you know cut a check to the city for a million19,800 in which case then we'll turn around and cut a check to Midco for that same amount. Uh this kind of gives you some of the time frames um of the project. Gives you some of the connectivity rates uh that they're putting in the ground. Miles I think we're 20ome miles of uh of fiber uh that were being being put in. And then finally uh is the properties um that are being impacted by this. So long story short, it's a successful grant. City of East Bethl got close to a million dollars to uh to connect up some neighborhoods. And um I know that Paul Johnson, if he's he's not watching because we're not doing it live, he might watch this meeting later, but he was a u a big advocate for for these dollars as well and and uh is is currently hooked up and I'm sure very happy about that. Uh at any rate, uh before you this evening then is just the approvals of these um essentially uh submitting this these documents to the county and uh requesting dollars from the county so we can close this out and pay Midco and complete this project. I find it I'll make a a motion to approve um this uh funding for Midco to be reimbursed by the county. >> Second. >> We have a motion to second. Any further discussion? I just find it interesting that some of these have one house number on a street 241st, one house on Viking, one house on 205th. How did they work that that they didn't do multiple houses or >> I So I think there's two parts. is laying the fiber and then there's those that hook up and it's not a forced hookup and people have that option >> as as people see the need and the benefit. There's obviously a cost for it, you know, it's not inexpensive, but um but if you're working from home >> and you need it, you know, highspeed internet service, it's just what you're going to have to pay to do business. So >> So the residents, they're not paying for the fiber lane. They're just paying like we would pay to access Midco, >> right? Yeah. Uh in the packet they they [clears throat] display the monthly base price and >> right >> that uh that's consistent with what I know >> Yeah. >> for medical service. >> That's awesome. Glad happened. If we're being a joint power here and we're getting this money back, do are we paying Bethl and Lynwood something or they send us an invoice or how's this work? >> No. Um, as spelled out in the joint powers agreement is we're kind of handling the financial part of it and we'll submit the invoice, get the money from the county and pay Midko. >> We're taking care of that for them. >> Any further discussion on being heard? Uh, all in favor? I I opposed unner staff report. >> Uh Mr. Mayor and Council, I just want to give a I know there [clears throat] was a conversation about Mike earlier and I want to save my comments to the end here. Um Mike has served this city for 13 years uh as finance director and also as we talked about wearing multiple hats. Uh he's been a phenomenal asset to this to this team. As I told somebody earlier, it kind of hurts to lose a Joe Mau. And uh and that's kind of the way I I I look at Mike. He's was just all around a a fantastic individual. He had an opportunity come up. It's closer to home. And um I think it's maybe a little less hats than he than he was wearing here. Uh but we we certainly want to extend him our our you know best wishes as he's you know looking to grow his career and and try out uh a larger city in this case and um and uh hopefully everything turns out well. We've said you know if you know if you need to be hired back you let us know because he's definitely a an incredible individual in terms of knowing the ins and outs and has the historical knowledge of of East Bethle obviously. Um we have a couple options for filling this position. Uh one is this evening you approved uh uh posting this uh in the in the event that we don't have anyone to respond to that posting. Abdo is a the u provider of our auditing service and they do have a wing that does this type of work very similar to contract work that you do with an attorney for example. um they will fill that gap and and are very well verssed in not only the city but in in knowing what to do in municipal government. Uh so there is that option. I will tell you that I've had one individual reach out to me already um from the county and uh I've worked with this individual and um he sent me his resume and it's I mean he is very well qualified for this. So, um, a lot of steps to get there. Obviously, we'll um we'll post this position. Uh, we'll we'll get in the interested parties. We'll we'll, um, have the finance, I'm sorry, the personnel committee be part of an interview process and, uh, we'll go through the available candidates and, uh, and hopefully my my preference is not to, um, hire an ABDO simply because it's going to take some time to get them up to speed. how we do things and this is our processes etc etc only then to hire somebody and go through all that again and uh if we can if we can find somebody who's qualified uh and um you know uh wants to accept a position then at that point I think we we um we'd be better off in terms of time spent and energy invested into um into this process. So things are looking good I think. Uh and and we're you know it's always touch and go when you're a small team and you lose I don't know what the percentage is 20%. [laughter] One person leaves it's 20% or whatever. Um it's tough. It's really tough and especially in a small team like ours when you wear multiple hats now you're the the the plus side of it is you get to restructure a little bit you know and um and figure out how duties are going to get divided but um but it is a little stressful in the process so uh we are working through that and um and uh trying to find the best suited candidate for this position. So, you're going to advertise on LinkedIn and all those sites? >> All the sites. I know um uh the League of Minnesota Cities has one that is very, you know, very well respected in terms of anyone in the industry goes to there to to try and find government related jobs. The the challenge is that [clears throat] the difference between private sector, CPA, and government is a is a totally different uh world. That's how you got to advertise it, not individual, >> right? So, um, so finding someone that has that experience is going to be critical to understanding again how we do it here and, um, and what's going to be necessary to pass audits and everything else. Um, it's critical for the work we do. So, but as I say, um, week ago, I might not have been as optimistic, but, uh, but I think things are looking up. That is all I have to report unless there is any questions. [clears throat] >> All right, council reports. >> I have one item. Uh we had a Sunrise River Watershed Management Organization meeting last week. Uh not a whole lot to really report on that. Uh not a whole lot going on. Um I did have a conversation with uh the administrator Jamie Sherban. Uh he works for the no conservation district. He's also the administrator for the upper rum uh water management organization which the city is a part of. Um, and we had a conversation about one of the agenda items of the uh, right now the board of water resources requires an audit every five years. Uh, and the state the office of the state auditor is reinterpreting. they're reinterpreting or has a interpretation of an orance that it needs to be required every every year. And so we had a conversation about that. Uh uh Bowser believes that they are correct and the other uh water management organizations are essentially coming to the same conclusion. Um Essentially with that, we're just going to hit pause. We're not going to react to it, not do anything until the two state agencies dish it out themselves. But uh because Upper Rum is also dealing with it, that's where I got in conversation with Jamie and uh and that uh right now [clears throat] we do not have a lizen for the upper room because that was Mr. Miller's role. Um uh normally with the water management organizations if you miss a couple meetings it's not that in the world uh but talking about a couple things are coming up on the upper room uh next two meetings one in November one in January one will be having budget discussions and one will be having uh starting the 10-year plan for the upper room. Uh those are items that we should have voice in, have a vote. Um and so I would be able to or I'm willing to step in for that role for those two meetings until we redefine the license in January. So just need a uh council vote on that. discussion. Any discussion on? >> No, but I have an item for my >> Well, on his >> Oh, no. >> Any thoughts on it? >> Jim, you're good with that or no? >> We need somebody to fill in. >> Unless wants to step in there in January. >> Yeah, [laughter] that was a thing. He'd [clears throat] just be there for one meeting and >> there you go. >> Yeah. We still won't have So, >> so I think we're in agreement that you can attend it to fill in just so that we can >> Yeah, we just need a motion for that. [clears throat] >> I'll make a motion uh for Brian to attend the upper room, right? >> To be appointed to that vacancy. >> Be appointed to the vacancy. >> Be appointed to that vacancy to fill it out. >> Got a motion, a second. Any further discussion? None being heard. All in favor? I >> I >> I >> All right. Thank you. That's all I had to say. [clears throat] >> Mr. Mayor and Council, just to stay on that same idea, I think the parks also has a vacancy. Um whether or not you want to appoint somebody to that or not, or >> I'll point myself. I guess I can fill in there. >> Okay. If that's okay with the rest of you, I'm going to make a motion on that too [clears throat] and we'll just formalize it and be yourself. >> Make a motion to appoint uh the mayor to the parks commission for lies on >> second. Have a motion. Second. Any further discussion? None being heard. All in favor? >> I motion passes. >> Anyone else? I was just going to say that we had [clears throat] a celebration of life for Tim Miller on the 29th of August and I want to thank the people that were there. Suzanne was there, I was there, Matt was there, Dave and Cherry Landis and there was a couple from the parks commission. I don't remember what their names were, but there was a ton of people there and it was really, really cool to see. And one thing I just want to share because when Tim and myself got elected, one of the first things we did was we changed the chicken ordinance and so you could have a rooster and all that. And during the ceremony there was some silent times and all of a sudden his rooster would just grow. I mean it was just the coolest thing ever. I mean it did it like four or five times. So it was just cool like he was just there. So I just wanted to share that. But that's all I have. >> Yeah, I shared a sent an email to Stacy and I couldn't attend because I was my youngest daughter's wedding that day. So I had I was tied up in paying that bill. [laughter] But uh I attended the chamber eastel chamber of commerce golf tournament. I participated. Some lucky kids will be earning a lot of money off the balls in the woods. >> [laughter] >> But it was well put together. I the committee did a good job and the chamber of commerce uh really represented the city well. >> They always do a great job on that golf tournament >> and the maintenance department got a whole big container of leftover cookies and brownies. >> Nice. >> Anything else? >> Yep. I um attended the airport meeting and I will I'm attending another one this Thursday afternoon. So I'll combine them in the next meeting. I do want to announce that this Thursday is the senior city staff appreciation lunch. So all the staff are welcome to come on over and have lunch and we're going to appreciate it. We do expect um Matt look to say a few words as usual. So, um, just give you a heads up on that. And I think that's all I have right now. >> All right. I'll entertain a motion to adjurnn. >> Motion to adjurnn. >> A second. >> Got a motion second. All in favor? Motion passes.