question. Matt, so you've got this additional item down as 2.0. >> Yes. >> So, >> let me just >> is adopt the agenda or should it be 3.0 or when are we doing it? >> Let's just do it right after adopting the agenda and if you want I'll read it. >> Okay. >> Swear I'm in. Okay. >> Okay. Yeah, that'd be great. >> We're ready when you are. >> Okay, let's call the uh July 21, 2025. I call the EDA meeting to order. Um first item 2.0 Oh, we've got an oath of office. Are we >> If if you want to adopt the agenda with this and then I'll I'd move to adopt the agenda with the >> addition first. All right. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I I motion carries. All right. Then we'll go to item three. New item 3.0 where we >> have to do the oath of office. >> Yep. >> Yeah. Madam Chair and Commissioners, um at the May 12th, 2025 meeting, the council approved an amendment to the enabling resolution of the East Bethl EDA. The amendment will transition the EDA membership over to elected officials as the current membership terms expire. The membership has been uh modified by appointing council members to the vacant EDA authority seats. The net result will be modifying a seven member authority to a five member authority once all the terms have expired and council members have been appointed. Katherine Lanc Crane recently uh resigned from her term as EDA uh member. Want to thank you for her service. And uh the last remaining city council member, Jim Smith, uh will then assume her position will need to be sworn in this evening. So, Commissioner Smith, if you'll raise your right hand. I, Jim Smith, do solemnly swear to support >> I, Jim Smith, do solemnly swear to support >> the Constitution of the United States. Constitution of the United States >> the Constitution of the State of Minnesota. >> Constitution of the State of Minnesota. >> And to discharge faithfully the duties as a member >> and to discharge faithfully in the duties as a member >> of the city of East Bethl Economic Development Authority. >> of the city of East Bethl Economic Development Authority. >> In the county of Anoka and the state of Minnesota. >> In the county of Anoka in the state of Minnesota. >> To the best of my judgment and ability. So help me God. >> To the best of my judgment and ability. So help me God. Congratulations. And what we'll have you do then is sign that and we'll notoriize that and keep that on file uh for the record. Okay. >> All right. And then uh item revised item four 5.0 city council report. >> No, three meeting minutes. >> The meeting minutes. >> Oh, I'm sorry. I'm skipping ahead. >> You're throwing me all off. Okay. Item uh 34, approve the May 19th, 2025 EDA mini meeting minutes. >> I'll make a motion. Any questions? No. >> I'll make a motion to approve the >> Okay. >> May 19th EDA meeting minutes. >> Do I have a second? >> I'll second. >> All right. All in favor? >> I >> I opposed. All right. We're approved on the meeting minutes. All right. Now we are to the city council report. Uh madam chair and commissioners just want to give a quick update. Um this has to do with the uh budget. We uh have gone through the process of meeting with all the department heads and coming up with their needs for uh 2026 and uh we are looking at right now an increase of 3.8% um to the to the budget for 2026. I think you'll be seeing probably double digits for a lot of communities out there. I think 3.6 six. We've kind of hovered in that three range in the past historically. And uh and I know our department's heads have done a great job of identifying needs and wants and making sure that uh they're asking for the things they absolutely need and and we're managing those dollars well. The uh the accounts that we have are healthy and uh they're being well managed by Mike and we appreciate his hard work on that. And uh so what's going to happen now is uh going forward in September we will have uh the preliminary uh budget approval and once that happens then you can lower it you cannot increase it and then your final budget approvals in November and then you move into 2026 and actual use of that budget. So anyways stand for questions on that otherwise just a quick update unless anyone else has updates. any main items that were causes for increases or was it pretty much across the board? >> Yeah. So, so one of the challenges that we're seeing um is, you know, we had a long-term union contract. It was a three-year union contract that kind of went from before inflation was high, ramped up in the middle to when inflation was high and now toward the end of the contract when inflation is kind of settled. Other communities renegotiated during the higher inflations. So their um their kind of basis point for salaries are what we estimated to be about 10% higher than East Bethl. And so the scenario that that creates is then a um a competitive scenario where people say well if it's the same job here as it is next door whatever pick your community um you know and that means x amount of dollars that's now an incentive to possibly leave you know the employment of East Bethl. What happens then is you need to fill that position. You go out in the market, the market's paying that higher wage. You pay that higher wage anyways to get somebody in. They're not trained. You know, you have to then go through the whole training process. And so that was one of the drivers. Um this year the union contract that was negotiated was an 8% this year, 3% next year, and 3% the following year. And that's consistent. We're hearing a lot of five, five, and fives out there right now. Um, so it's consistent with what I I I'm hearing other um negotiated union contracts are coming in at. Uh, I think the sheriff's office was 55 and four. Maybe it might have been five as well. Um, at any rate, it's consistent with that and we felt it was a um, you know, we certainly appreciate the work they do. You know, um, public works is a um, it's a it's an area where you can get complaints if not done right. And we rarely rarely get complaints from these guys because they're out there doing a fantastic job. Uh so we feel it was a a good a good negotiated process and a good outcome on that. So but that is kind of the main driver. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Any other questions or anything else on the city council report? >> Nope. That's that. Okay. >> All right. >> So, next, >> Madam Chair, uh at this point, what we'll do is we'll pause the meeting. We'll be offsite um touring the Elvivage facilities over there and uh kind of getting an idea of that uh economic development that's happening right now. Talking a little bit about the phase one that's completed and moving into some of the ideas for phase two that they have. They also have commercial on the front. And so, it was a good opportunity. they were available um to go over there and tour them and then we'll come back here and given time we'll try and get through the rest of the agenda. If we don't um you know have enough time to get through that we can always bump it to the next EDA meeting as well. >> Sure. >> So anyways um I suppose we'll just have a motion to pause the meeting. >> Okay. >> Make a motion pause the meeting for the offsite portion. Uh we'll resume when we return. Second. All right. All uh all in favor? >> I >> All right. Opposed. All right. We are paused. >> Okay. I'll make a motion to resume the July >> what's the date the 14th >> 21st EDA meeting >> second >> all in favor >> I opposed all right we are resumed So, agenda item number six, update on the 1345 Sims property. Okay, madam chair and commissioners, I just wanted to give a quick update on this. Uh, we um as council was directed last or uh staff rather was directed last time to um to start negotiations on this property, we've done that. Uh the asking price on this property was 265,000. Um the uh estimated value assessed value on it was uh about 248,000 I believe. Um and uh and so we started going through the process. The um in the state of Minnesota in order to sell property you have to ensure that the septic system is operational and and it was not did not pass. Uh and so the uh seller decided to the options were either to replace it or to get an an estimate and then just reduce the price by that amount. And so they got an estimate, three estimates. Um the highest being $25,000 to replace it. And um and so they deducted that from the from the purchase price. Uh so we are in the process now of getting the signatures for that. uh and then we will do the necessary ser survey work on this and we should be closed in 30 days or so on this property. So uh again this is if you look at on here kind of the size of this property to to um um you know the other commercial properties here uh very similar in size. Uh so um I know that uh you know there's various different options uh for you know for this property in terms of uh you know what can possibly go in there kind of given some of the change that might be occurring in this area. Uh no decisions yet on on anything you know in terms of what can go in there but um but you know if you know there's a lot of ideas coffee shops or you know uh perhaps fast food or something like that um but definitely um gives you know given the the changes that'll be happening kind of in that quadrant I think that this will be a a valuable property. So essentially the house that is on there then um would not be functional without a working septic system. The city can replace that se septic system if we'd like or we can demo the house and raise the property and make it uh pad ready for for any sort of project that could be coming. So um just want to give you a quick update on that if there are any questions. So, is the city actually purchasing it? >> Yes. >> Yeah. Did Did council direct that? >> Yes. >> It was a direction to proceed with the negotiation on that. Yeah. I >> think we voted on it. >> And do you know what meeting that was at? >> Um, I don't have the meeting date right off the top. Okay. Could you look into that and >> send me an email? >> Yep. >> So, listing price minus the cost of the sewer. Okay. >> Okay. Okay, moving into the legislative update. Uh just uh want to also give you a quick update on the legislative update. This year uh was a um a bonding year. Next year is a policy year. and the uh bonding request that we had in this year, there was about $700 million that was approved uh for bonding. You'll recall the last two years there was no bonding and each year there's probably about a billion dollars each. So, you can imagine the backlog of projects that are out there. Our legislators are working on trying to get this prioritized. Uh and uh we are currently working with um uh the Met Council to see what options are out there for again this water treatment plant uh in that SIMS location with uh with the piping uh that would go to uh Cedar Creek Elementary and East Bethl Elementary and we did meet with the school uh sat down with them and chat a little about a little bit about where they're at in terms of their infrastructure uh the status of their uh septic system, the status of their well, um the the the you know the treatment that uh that they will ultimately need in that water or um the the testing that they continually have to have. Uh they were kind of indicating that the that the replacement of their system would be in excess of a million dollars to do that work. Uh so they are actively very interested in what options might be available to hook up to city sewer and water uh to those both those projects. um they do work with um um lobbyists that kind of focus on on school related items policy and uh and so we're going to be uh discussing with them kind of what sort of uh work we can do together in terms of possibly using some of their lobbyists and and what other strategies might be out there to hit the ground running next year. Next year again being a policy year does not mean that there will not be bonding. There could very well be bonding and there is bonding in policy years. Um but um we'll have to see what the what the lay of the land is in terms of whether they'll be receptive to to uh bonding. It'll be coming on a election year. So uh many times the bonding is the bring the bacon home type of type of u approach. So that might um that might be work in our favor in terms of uh the the legislature as a whole considering bonding a lot of projects. I I was just watching or listening to uh Senator Jazinski. He's a transportation guru down at the capital and um he he was indicating that he was not pleased with the um the dollars that were spent this year on projects that are very important. you know, so he he was advocating for a lot more dollars to be spent uh to try and chip away at some of these very important projects. That's particular to roads and his specialty. But um but even even roads, which generally gets a lion share of of the bonding in any given year, uh those that advocate for roads were not very happy with that. So that may be setting up for a good a good year next year even though it's policy. So, we'll see how that how that plays out. But interested in in trying to move this forward. Obviously, if you're looking at a um you know 5% uh rate of inflation on a $10 million project, you know, two years into it at a million dollars. So, it just it just keeps going up. And um and I think everybody knows that generally water is not a partisan issue. It's a um it's an issue that both sides can get behind for clean water and especially uh for kids that are going to be drinking this water and in close proximity to a decommissioned landfill. So I think we have the necessary components. We just need to get it across the finish line and hopefully our legislators can do that for us. So all right, any questions on that? >> No. >> Okay. Okay. Okay, I'm going to move on to item number eight, which is the inventory of city-owned land. And I included in your packet, which seems pretty cryptic. Um, but it's the pin numbers. >> Okay. >> All the pin numbers in there, and these are all the city- owned parcels. >> Okay. >> And and if you go to this website here is the nook county GIS property search. And if you punch in, let me find a uh a number here. Punch in one of the the numbers on this sheet. I get no results. Me punching incorrectly. Unless I did that. And it kind of gives you, you can zoom out on this. And this is down by the beach. Gives you a parcel that the city owns. Okay. Um, this might be a parcel that can be sold. It might be a parcel that somebody wants to join to their property and and build on. Um, there's a number of different parcels. A lot of them are there's park and there's slivers and um parcels that can't be built on. And so um a lot of it is is difficult to I've actually gone through all these and kind of highlighted the um the ones that um that here's one here. I'll I'll punch this one in. This one Brian probably knows about Mr. Mundle. Oh my goodness. What do we got here? So, this is the Whispering Aspen development there, and this is the parcel to the north of that city- owned. And um and so these are these are all parcels that can be sold, can be built on, can um um you might incent a developer to come in, you know, at a reduced price or something like that. But um there are a handful of properties on here that um that can be liquidated, shall we say. Uh and um and the rest if it's lowland or swamp or if it's parkland, obviously you can't. Um highway 65 frontage, there's maybe a sliver by by um Quick Trip and that you can't obviously build on that, but the city owns that. >> Yes, >> Matt. the history of some of those parcels down at Lake Beach was CDBG community development block grant money was used to acquire those and it was uh sometimes they were tax forfeits some things you know there was a lot of different reasons I wouldn't characterize all those parcels as being buildable especially down in the beach so just some back history on Yeah, I wouldn't I wouldn't say that they all are, but it might be, you know, >> the idea where >> the idea was that if someone was having a failing septic system down there, >> right, >> and if they abudded one of those parcels, the city would enable them to basically buy it for cost so that they could then put in a septic system or build a bigger her house or whatever. It was We just saw it as a fact that essentially it was what's your term for it? Other people's money. >> Opium. Yes. Other people's money. >> Yeah. And that it was a uh it just seemed like a judicious thing to do at the time, but I mean they are not all buildable lots. Okay. This parcel over here on Jackson Street, you'll see a lot of this is low low land here obviously. Um, you got a property up here and perhaps this is buildable here. I'm not sure. Difficult to tell from the um from the uh from the aerial, but um it's these type of parcels that are in city ownership right now and could very well be something that could be marketed. Um is that city or county owned? Uh this will be city owned I believe. >> Yes, >> city be. Okay. >> I was told a lot of the properties that we own were donated. Not all of them. Some were tax forfeits and other things or sold to us but with stipulations that they can't be developed or that has to be if we do anything it has to be a park or something like that. So, I think that has to be researched for sure. >> Yeah, those would be identified as Parkland probably. I'm just trying to see here. >> I'll give you another one here that's um uh Taylor Street, Taylor Street property right here. We've gotten a lot of interest in there. There's city sewer and water that can connect to this property. Um, and there was a David Wills was interested in putting homes in here, uh, you know, senior type of homes, single level, and then they can go into the senior living and utilize other options in the vicinity. So, these type of properties are are valuable. this is, you know, a parcel that's valued at $300 to $500,000 somewhere in there. Um, and so we're currently currently working with him a little bit. I think he's the primary person interested in that parcel right now. And and uh this is Nexus down here. Um, so at any rate, wanted to just give everyone a list of those. And if you wanted to go through there and kind of see what things were, you'll find that a lot of them are are um impossible to build on and might even be an opportunity to sell the neighbor a strip, you know, uh to kind of get it off the city rolls. Part of the issue that I've always think about is is that of exposure. Um if somebody gets hurt on on that parcel, you know, now sudden the city is named in a potential lawsuit. and and um and of course everybody likes to go on other people's land that no one you know controls type of thing. So it can be a it can be a little bit of a risk but um but at any rate it's as you can see it's a lengthy not sure what the total number is on here but it's um three and a half pages of pin numbers. So quite a few properties out there. >> Interesting. Do you do we have a value on this stuff? >> There is. If you go into like this one here, if you go into um tax link and go into property values, this would be your assessed value. Um the county admits that that assessed value is a little higher. It's probably close to this. Um so this number here the builder has come back and said if they you know if you if you sell for a half million dollars for example they can't they can't make the numbers work uh for the units. So then you have to decide what you you know we do have we do have housing dollars that are available uh that you know if they were to build um homes that meet certain qualifications for you know fixed income or lower income or whatever the state qualification is on that they may we may able to subsidize by using some of those dollars to reimburse a city for a sale on this type of a project. But yeah, if you go into the tax property values, you can find out what the what the value is on those. >> Has somebody put a total value on this list yet? >> On this list? >> Yeah. >> No, >> no. Um, I'll put one up. I'll I'll actually do another one here and we'll see. Um, where we at here? We'll see if they have this strip. if there's any value on it. So, here's a nice little strip. Can't do anything with that, obviously. Uh but, uh if you go to the tax link, property value $1,300 >> is what the county has established for that. Now, that might be that might be something where this property owner, you know, owns all this may want to add that to it or that property owner may want to zoom out on that just a little bit. That's over by Cooper Lake there. That section was intended to be used as a trail between the neighborhood and >> Sure. That's what that is, isn't it? >> Yeah. >> Yep. >> So that that's why that's city-owned trail to get back in here. >> Yeah. To for that neighborhood to access John Anderson Park. >> Oh, is that the beach just of there? Okay. Yeah. >> So, no trail as of yet. >> No trail as of yet. >> Okay. Well, that one might make sense for the future then. Don't hold on to that one. Don't want to sell that one then. But at any rate, >> there was a request to put together a list of those and um and it um it's worth looking at if there if people want to do some deals out there. So, >> sorry. Thank you. Ideally, someday it would be great to have a map that goes to all of those, but that's, you know, >> we can try and highlight them all. Maybe. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Housing report, if you're ready for that. >> That was interesting. >> Uh, housing report. I apologize for the I apologize for the size of it. As you can see, it's quite a few pages. Um this was the housing report that was put together by uh NOA County and um and it's consistent kind of met with the Met Council uh population estimate reports that come out in 2024. Uh the housing units in East Beleto were 4,683. We have an occupancy rate of 93.25% 25% and uh we have essentially 4367 households with 2.67 persons per household. Today on the tour we you know we heard about rooftops and um development following rooftops and and so as these numbers go up you'll see some of the other estimates here. Um the so in the population census in 2020 for East Bethl was 11786. Population estimate in 2024 was 11715. So dropped by a little bit uh lost 71 people. Uh and so obviously people site selectors are looking at at this information when they're considering a grocery store for example. Um and then there's the the kind of the breakdown of um what type of households there are. The single families, the town homes, duplex, multif family, accessory dwelling units, manufactured homes, and other units totaling that 4683. So we have 4,18 single family. It says five town homes, but we know that th those have gone up now. So this uh 2024 is needs to be updated 12 duplex 213 multif family of five units or more and 340 accessory or manufactured homes rather. So, um, the report, if you if you peruse through the report there, it's, um, you know, there's a there's a need for additional housing, affordable housing. And um and I think uh you know I think when you look at whether it's Elivage that we toured or whether it's Capstone, they're looking at these same reports and they're determining marketability of their product uh and um and the need that's out there. And and of course, you know, we we heard a little bit tonight about how people are maybe working in the cities and still commuting out. Um that's going to obviously get a little easier when Highway 65 is completed. So that might create more of a draw actually to come out here and live in the country and work in the city type of type of concept. So um I won't go into too much more of that housing report, but it's um it's extremely detailed. Uh and um and I think it kind of all points to I think there was a 6,000 unit deficiency or somewhere in that ballpark of units that are needed in Anoka County. And um and you know, price of land's kind of the the driver. A lot of banks out there right now are um they've identified cheap land as as kind of one of the main drivers for closing a deal. And the land out here is arguably cheaper than it would be in Rapids or Blaine or, you know, Ramsay or Anoka or somewhere like that. Uh so I think the opportunity is there for for substantial growth. Um I think the interest rates need to cooperate just a little bit uh come down and um I know the federal government's battling over that issue right now and uh but given given that prospect of those coming down I think we'll see significant difference in in um maybe projects that are proposed and and development going on. So anyway, so that's all I have on that one unless there are questions. Just a quick comment too. I think you know we hear so we've got this new pool of renters and this new pool of buyer coming in. I mean when retailers take a look at these locations they're not only looking at rooftops they're looking at education levels of of our demographics and incomes of our demographics. So, what you saw tonight, I think you're you're going to be attracting a quality renter pool and it's just going to help build and um build more to what we've been looking for. >> I think those were nice units. >> They weren't Cadillacs. >> No, >> they weren't Chevys. >> They were Buicks. Good, solid, middle of the road. >> Yep. Very utilitarian. So, >> but nicer than any of the other inventory that we have up here for rental units. >> Yeah. And I'm not letting my wife get close to the place. >> Like I have a say on that. >> Yeah. So the household growth trend here that they've identified in the in the housing study for East Bethl in 2000 was 366 2010 is 40 460 2020 is 426 62 and um by 2030 they're expecting 4830 and 2040 5500 units. I'm not sure how they drive those numbers, but um >> I don't know. >> But I I think there's probably an average growth, you know, that they can attribute to it. And then if there's any outstanding reasons why the attraction would come here, I think, again, I think if you factor in Highway 65, it's it's a wild card. I mean, it's going to benefit you um more so than you would have thought just for ease of getting out here. people congested before may may not have wanted to drive this far out, but now that it's easier to get out here, they they don't have an issue with that. But yeah, anyways, persons per household 2.67, six, seven. >> When you uh Arty, when and Matt, when you met with the the the school district, did they have any projections on what they anticipated for future student needs that they were looking at at all? Did Would that Did that come up at all, Carsten? Say anything about that? >> They were going to get us something. >> They were going to get us something. >> Okay. go to page 217 Matt and it gives us uh the demand summary recommendations for east be I don't know if it's loading here or it takes a while to get to it. What does it say in particular there? >> It's got the recommendations and then uh the next page has your housing rental and senior housing >> just general projected demand for housing units. I will need 2023 to 2030. >> I don't know if the computer is not liking the number of pages here, but >> what page did you say? 217. >> 217. Oh, could my >> not on not on the PDF on the actual document, not PDF page, but the document page. It's actually page 235. >> Oh, thank you. >> You're welcome. >> I'm like, what? >> But that says Andover >> on the documents. >> Besides reading that, it's kind of interesting. I'm in a different area here. I'm trying to uh Well, still in a PDF it looks like. I don't know if this will work this time or not. Nope, not that time. Oh, you're on a fourpage document. >> Okay, let's see what this one is. >> There it is. >> There you go. >> There we go. >> Go forward further. It's actually 235 on >> Oh, 235. >> There it is. >> It should. You might get faster to it. Lynwood >> too far. >> Yeah, it's also friendly. Getting there. Ham Lake. Here we go. So, you got top paragraph pretty much for your recommendations. It shows you the sheet there. And then the next page will show you your housing. for sale, rental, and senior. >> 87 future single family lots. That's probably changed. >> Yeah, that's I mean, I don't know when this this was actually documented, >> right? >> I think it said they did report in 2023. >> Yeah, some of you have to take it. Yeah, I think it was cuz most your deals are 2023. It wasn't >> doesn't show in 2024. >> Yeah. >> Not sure when the county will update that, but I'm sure they'll be working on that at some point. >> Keep current. But anyways, that's all. >> It'll be interesting to see how fast Lisa goes at Sand Hill Parkway. Sounds like they're having some good traction. So, that's good. >> Are we to the end? >> We're at the end. >> Any other questions on the housing study or otherwise? I'll >> make a motion to adjurnn. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I opposed. We are adjourned. Thanks everybody.