I'd like to bring the October 13, 2025 council meeting to order. Please rise if you can for the pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands. One nation under God, indivisible. Make a motion to adopt tonight's agenda. >> Second. >> Have a motion and a second. All those in favor? >> I. >> Item uh four A. >> Uh Mr. Mayor and Council. Tonight we have a uh proposed ordinance change for the mayor and council member compensation on pages 3 to five. I'll just get that for the viewing public. Uh essentially on uh September 22nd, the council work session meeting, council directed staff to prepare an ordinance change specific to compensation. And at that point uh there was a discussion to bump it by 10% and then do an automatic escalator. After kind of reviewing both of those, the the first 10%'s not an issue. The escalator does kind of become have two problems with it. uh the first being a conflict of interest with labor agreements or perceived conflict of interest and then uh the second one is that it kind of flies in contrary to Minnesota state statute 415.11 uh requiring an election prior to an increase in salary. So seeing as we don't have elections every single year, we have it every other year. If you had an increase on the off year, it would kind of kind of contradict that a little bit or be out of compliance with that. Uh but you um as was noted in the September 22nd meeting, there hasn't been any increase since 2005. Uh and uh when comparing it to compare other cities around um this increased amount is uh is comparable to them and um it again would not take effect till January um of the following the next municipal election. So I have before you here a resolution for your consideration and would stand for any questions. Do we have a motion on this? I'll make a motion to modify ordinance number 2025-05 amending um the East Bethl code of ordinances regulating compensation for the mayor and city council in the city of East Bethl. >> Second that. >> Okay, we have a motion. Second. Further discussion. Okay. I am curious. So all councils that want that vote in a raise or is that this the only way council gets pay increases? Am I correct? >> I can't speak for other councils. Uh my recollection fails me dating back to 2010 uh when I was on Ramsey City Council. But um at least as it related I'm not sure when the ordinance uh I'm sorry the law went into effect um 415.11 but based on that law it would seem as though if they do that they could be challenged. So, um, in the interest of, you know, trying to make sure that everything done is is law following, I would I would discourage the the increase at this point or the following um, not the increase, but the automatic increase is following. >> No, I don't have a problem with that. I understand that makes absolute sense with the >> I like the concept. I like the concept because, you know, very similar to what happened in East Bethl since 2005, no one's really, you know, wanted to address it or or um hasn't been brought up. But um so then what happens is cities that haven't been increasing are out of line with other cities. And if you make a big jump, then then you have criticism obviously because why why such a large jump? Well, then you have to explain it's been, you know, 10 years since we've had any increases, but um >> 20 But it is good to check other cities, make sure everything's similar, you know, keeping in line with other people. It's not Minneapolis where they're getting 100 some thousand. I know that's been brought up. >> Uh but uh but at any rate, um it's it's reasonable compared to what comparable cities are are are um >> okay. I know, like I said at the previous deal, a lot of them to get away from what Matt's talking about there on the cola or whatever it is, uh, is they set themselves as a pdeium for extra minutes. And I don't know how that's ever written up, but I know there's a couple cities around us that do that. >> Oh, yeah. Yeah, you did mention that. So any further discussion >> now for the people watching uh sometimes you don't don't really understand and this is I'm guilty of it when I got elected is you don't know that there's other things involved with being a councilman like being liaison for different departments in the city of which you have to attend their meetings also not only yours here and uh we all have extras I've at Rum River. I know Brian's got the other side of the watershed. Um, but there are a lot more things involved than just coming to this meeting and it takes a lot of time and uh since 2005 councils have been doing it until recently. So, in case you didn't know that we do a lot more than just come to this meeting. There's a lot of research for every packet as as you'll catch on tonight because I've got I'll be bringing up a lot of things of where I've researched other sites to see how things compare to what the city is requesting and what's in the packet. So, a lot of research takes a lot of time any further. Okay. All those in favor? >> I >> opposed. None heard. Motion passes. Item six, consent agenda. >> I'll make a motion to approve the consent agenda. I'd like to pull D, E, and H, please. >> Not not to skip forward, but we do have public forum before consent. >> Oh, I'm sorry. I I don't think there's anybody signed up, but Yeah. Okay. So, we'll go keep going with Miss because there's no way for public form. >> Okay. I'll second her motion. And you wanted D, E, and F. P >> H >> and H. >> Any others? >> I have a question on A. >> Pull A, please. >> Okay, we have a motion. Second. uh on the agenda as amended. All those in favor? >> I opposed. None heard. Item A. Item A. Uh this week we've got an email that came out from um the finance department about the arena and its operations. I just have a question. If if we have spent $11,000 so far this year on uh electric utilities, this month we have a bill of $7500 for the arena. Is that because we've just geared it up again? Is Is that what it takes to do a startup on this? >> So I'm I'm assuming you're referring to electrical >> electrical. Yeah. >> Yeah. That's that's just making ice. Very expensive. >> That's what I was figuring. >> Yeah. So during these during these months where we're making ice, that's going to you're going to see a spike in that and then when when hockey season wraps up and they clear the ice out, you'll see that drop down to just kind of keeping the uh facility on um bare bones operation at that point. >> Yeah, that was my question. Thank you. >> Make a motion pass. >> Like to make the motion to pass uh item A. >> Second. >> Have a motion second. Any further discussion? None being heard. All those in favor? I opposed. None heard. Item D. >> Item D is a public hearing date for delinquent accounts for utilities. Um I am just curious. I just feel like that's a huge amount for it's like over $1,000 a person for you for sewer water for um 19 people or is it 19? Um is there any way we can reduce the fees for those people? I just feel so bad for them. >> Uh Mr. Mayor and Council Member Urgal. Um we have in here kind of a list of what they were prior prior years. It is higher uh than it was in prior years. Uh this is just essentially establishing a um a date uh so that there can be a public hearing so that people can contest it if they want to. It's part of the process of before it would get put on taxes or anything else. What we find actually is once this is done and they're notified, you we usually get compliance right away um on payment. Uh but for whatever reason, uh some people don't pay their bills and it accumulates and gets to a shocking number and then um and then at the very end they pay. And there's there's a certain segment that do that. I I can't explain why, but uh I would say that um out of fairness, they're getting the same bill that everyone else is. Um and um why they're not paying it, I'm not sure. Can't answer that. Yeah. In the past, like Mr. was saying, uh, when this first report comes out, a lot of these lesser amounts get paid off right away, whether it's just a late bill for a month or something that last month that they missed. Uh, another explanation that I've been told is some people prefer to pay it this way rather than pay it monthly. I don't know why, but that's been one explanation I've been given. They'd rather just have it on their tax roll and pay it off that way. >> Okay, with that, I'll make a motion to approve item D on the consent agenda. >> Second. >> Have a motion and a second. Uh, any further discussion? None being heard. All those in favor? >> I I opposed. Unheard. Item E. >> Item E. I read through that and my understanding is the city is planning on increasing our um liability and I don't I didn't print out the page I print out the wrong pages. Um I don't know remember the exact numbers but from 1 million to 1.5 million or something. Is that really necessary? I mean have we ever used that much? Um, Mr. Mayor and Council Member Urkel. Uh, so essentially the way the the state has set things up for the cities is we have we have liability limitations. So essentially somebody gets hurt um they can't sue the city for $100 million. There's a limitation as to what they can sue and it protects the residents actually. And um and if you and if you uh wave that um then um then you are subject to whatever the courts decide at that point and correct me if I'm wrong uh attorney. Um but then also in addition to that we have an um over over the years we have decided not just this year but in the past as well that not only will we have insurance coverage for the required amount but then we'll have an additional million on top of that for and and we chatted about that. Mike and I chatted about that just today as to why the additional million and um and it was recommended by our attorney back before uh as additional coverage. We've never used it to the best of my knowledge. Uh but um you know if in the event that for some reason the courts awarded it, you have coverage at that point. So this is for a somebody just getting hurt or is it for other things? >> Could be for somebody that gets injured in a park. It could be uh somebody gets hit by a snowplow. It could be um our fire department is responding to a call and gets in an accident and and you know somebody gets seriously injured. Um it's essentially ensuring the city for what the max amount is plus a kicker on on you know I think in a in a residential way of looking at it or an individual way of looking at you have an umbrella policy maybe a larger a policy that kind of covers everything on top of it but um anyways I don't know if Jake if you got a explanation. >> Yeah I can help out mayor council. Thank you Mr. Luck. Um, so my understanding is the league standard insurance covers up to $2 million. Um, torque caps are set at half a million dollars. Um, as Mr. Lo indicated, that's the limit of liability for most claims against the city. There are some types of claims that, um, in which tort caps don't apply. So, takings claims, uh, liquor liability claims on behalf of the city, um, certain other ADA claims, you know, the the plaintiff could conceivably be awarded more than $500,000, conceivably more than the $2 million of LMCIT coverage. And that's where the excess liability policy kicks in to to apply coverage above the 2 million um factor. As to what the correct number is, you know, I don't know. I'll defer to Mike and to Mr. Look on that. Um, but that would be the reason why you'd still want to obtain excess liability coverage. Um, if anyone's reading the newspapers, there was an interesting article about Metro Transit and the denial or the the application of tort caps in a recent case where Metroransit's liability is limited at $500,000. Um, even though the jury had awarded damages far in excess of that number. So, what's it cost in the residence for that extra million dollars that we have to that you're suggesting that we take? >> I you know, I cannot answer that question. I just don't have the information, but um you know, insurance is insurance. Um I know I don't mean to sound roundabout there, but I think the idea is you purchase additional insurance for the purpose of saving money on potential claims. Um but I think Mr. Look and Mike can help provide some information there. But >> I can talk to the council on what that amount is. I I don't believe it's very much because we're we're meeting if we don't wave it, we're meeting the you know the the minimum amount. Um and um I I think based on our history and we got good people working for us and safe people um we just don't have these these lawsuits that are happening. So I think based on our history the the million-doll rider would probably not be that significant. That's what I'm just curious because that you guys are asking us to raise a million for coverage, but yet we don't know how much that costs. >> So, it's hard for me to say, "Oh, yeah, let's raise it a million, but I don't know what it's going to cost us." >> It I'm not Yeah, it's been raised for years, actually, the million, not new this year. >> So, it's just something they've done we've done in the past and it's same thing going forward. that that what has changed is the uh tort liability limit. It used to be 300,000 and they've increased it 500,000. So um >> so we'd be paying what we would normally normally be paying. >> Yes, sir. Yeah. >> So we're not >> plus whatever nominal increases a company would >> we're not taking on an a new $100 million. >> No, >> the bill would still be what the bill was last year and year before >> within reason. >> Whatever inflationary >> Yeah. within reason. >> Y >> Okay. How does the League of Minnesota fit into this? We get sued. >> So, the League of Minnesota Cities are is our insurance trust and all cities kind of belong to that. I I don't know if every single one does, but you can certainly belong to that and we do. And um and essentially uh if if we get sued, they represent us. And um if there's a payout, they pay that out unless I think there's negligence. And Jake was actually on the worked for the league at uh in a prior life maybe. Um but um but yes, it's um it's an insurance through the through the league that that we have and have every year it's it's been that way. So >> I'll expand on that just to say uh well want a blast from the past for sure. That was 10 years ago or so. Um, but the the league is really an alternative to a private market insurer. So, you could uh cities could obtain insurance from travelers. I know they used to provide municipal insurance. I don't know how many companies are left out there, but the LMCIT provides incredibly cost competitive uh I I would say unbeatable rates to cities, unbeatable service to cities, unbeatable claims representation to cities. >> Is that what they recommend? We have something of this nature. This is from the league, right? >> Sorry, what was the question? >> This is from the League of Minnesota Cities. We're paying. Is this in addition to what we pay them already or >> This is just a document saying whether we're going to wave or not wave the monetary limits on municip municipal tort liability. And that's really the decision you're making here is we need to check one and we've always checked the we're not going to wave um and be exposed to whatever some jury in court might decide. Um I think this is the most the safest route for a city least exposure and and I'll back that up Mr. look and say on the question of the waiver question, I would recommend that you do not wave toward caps for the city, but of course that is a policy decision. >> And we have always done do does not wave. Correct. Always. >> All right. So, I'm going to make a motion to approve item E that we do not wave the monetary limits. >> Second. We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? None being heard. All those in favor? >> I opposed. None heard. Motion passes. Item H. >> Item H is for a new vehicle um uh pickup truck to replace the one that we currently have, which I think does need to be replaced. My question is why are we going out for a 2026 vehicle? When I went on the the Sax and Fleet Services site and they have a one that's like two years old for uh 10,000 or so less. It only has it has less than 20,000 miles on it. What? which is when our family is budgeting stuff and we could go buy a brand new vehicle, sure, and have higher payments, but we prefer to get a used vehicle, maybe one or two years old, and drive it to the 300,000 miles that we usually drive our vehicles to before we um get it. So, I'm just wondering why we would go for a brand new, fancy, fully loaded 2026 instead of getting a 2024 or 23 with low mileage and will do the job and probably last just as long. >> Um, I believe this is through the state contract. >> Yes. >> And that's how we get our vehicles. Nate could probably >> I understand. And I went to this fleet service site and they have used vehicles that are auction their site. >> Is that an auction? The fleet service auction. >> No, it's what they have in their inventory. >> Yeah. >> Right. But that vehicle might not be on the state bid. >> So, Mr. Mayor and Council, if I can just explain the way we our current system kind of works. We do go out for new vehicles. We maintain them uh perfectly. We drive them well. Uh we put, you know, 50 to 100,000 miles on it. Whatever. There's there's a sweet spot with every vehicle. And what the sweet spot is is when we turn a vehicle back for auction based on a certain mileage, you will get maximum dollars back. Okay? Uh we just sold a couple of Fords on auction and what we find more often than not is that the price we pay on state contract is lower than what you and I are going to pay on open market. When we drive it for say 50,000 or 100,000 miles and turn and sell it on auction, we almost get what we paid for out of it. So, aside from gas and aside from insurance and some possible repairs, um, that vehicle is costing us very little to own from a capital expenditure standpoint. And so, that model is kind of the one we've used. Um, it's it works great. If you buy an older vehicle and you put 300,000 miles on it, as I do and you have and and others as well, you find that it starts to break down and you have to now account for repairs on that vehicle. Uh and also when you go to sell it, it's depreciated. You know, $30,000 vehicle is depreciated to $3,000. You have to account for that as well as a loss of what you the original payment was. And if we can if we can structure a if you could buy a vehicle today, drive it for two years, turn around and sell it for what you paid for it, you'd do it all day long because that's kind of what we have going right now um with this with this arrangement with the state contract. Now, if there's if there is a shortage of chips or if there's, you know, some sort of issue that all of a sudden there's not enough vehicles out there, that kind of throws a wrench in that in that game plan. Uh but so far we um we've been very successful in doing this and um and I don't think they're fully loaded. >> Yeah. >> Mayor Cel that picture on there that's not the truck that's their standard uh one that goes on. These are government fleet vehicles. They have kind of bare bone stuff on them. They're not fully loaded at all. They're the bottom tier four cylinder engine. Um like Matt was saying, we sold these other for over $100,000 that just a couple weeks ago and basically paid for one and a half of our new vehicles with that money. So, we take good care of them. Uh they're serviced regularly, get them at a discount to start with and we're able to uh not have a lot of money involved in these vehicles over time. State of Minnesota buys vehicles, uses them for three years while they're still under warranty, and they turn around and sell them. So, they don't have to get into the uh repair side of things. Um, it's a lot of paperwork and buying and selling, but it's another way to to look at doing this process as well. So, >> and I assume we get a better warranty with a new vehicle versus a used. >> Well, we know we Yeah, that's a big part of we, you know, for three years everything's covered. We don't know what a used vehicle has for what was done to it or what kind of work it needs to have repairs done to it, that kind of stuff. When we buy used vehicles too, there's some purchasing uh requirements that we have to get multiple bids on that have to be apples to apples. Makes it kind of difficult too. The state contract, we can just buy it right off there without all that other stuff that goes along. So >> Okay, thank you. >> Question. >> That answers all my questions. I appreciate it. With that, I'll make a motion to approve item H on the consent agenda. Second. >> Have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? None being heard. All those in favor? >> I opposed. None heard. Item 7 A1. Grace. >> Just getting my screen set up here. Having an issue here. Let's use this one. Did you drag it over to that window? >> It's not letting me drag over. Email me that. >> Let's do it that way. Bear with us one quick minute. Okay. Okay. Which one is it down here? This one. Start. Start. >> Yeah, you can start it. Okay. Good evening, mayor and council. Thank you for your patience. Uh, this application is for a site plan and conditional use permit for Atlas Villa's memory care stone group construction. The applicant has applied for a site plan review and conditional use permit to allow the construction and operation of a 26 room memory care facility known as Atlas Villa's Memory Care along Ulysiz Street east of 185th Avenue Northeast. This is project is on two properties which are to be combined uh after the site plan review. Properties once combined will be 4.36 acres. If you want to go back the slide uh this property is zoned B3 highway commercial and is guided commercial. The properties to the north are zoned and guided the same. The properties to the west are zoned and guided light industrial. Property properties to the south are zoned B3 and guided mixed use. and Highway 65 is to the east of this site. The application is for a conditional use permit to allow the operation of a residential care facility serving seven or more persons on a parcel zoned B3. The second application is for a site plan review to allow the construction of a 17,236qt memory care facility containing 26 units, dining and kitchen space, activity spaces, and a secure yard for outdoor recreation. When reviewing a site plan and a CUP, the city's discretion is limited to whether the proposed site plan and CUP meet the standards outlined in the city's subdivision and zoning ordinance. If they meet these standards, the city must must approve the requests. Also, a part of this project is an easement vacation for a drainage and utility easement that's in the middle of this site. Uh that is up for review and public hearing next. Each request should be reviewed individually. A residential care facility serving seven or more people is a conditional use within the B B3 zoning district. Residential care facility is defined on the screen. This is basically any public or private facility that is required to be licensed by a governmental agency and provides care that cannot be uh provided in one's home. Our zoning code provides 10 standards for the review of a cup. Staff has provided an in-depth analysis of these standards within your packet. The applicant has also provided a narrative describing this project and the day-to-day operation of the facility that has also been included in your packet. City staff has reviewed this request and provided conditions of approval. These are all standard things such as maintaining lensure. Uh the property owner also operates a similar facility in Centerville and has since 2013. So they are also familiar with these things. Staff does not have any major concerns regarding any of the standards for review. Similar to a conditional use permit, there are standards. Uh the city zoning code uh offers standards of review for the site plan review. Staff has provided an in-depth analysis of these within your packet along with the applicant's site, civil, parking, lighting, landscaping, and building plans. The city engineer has provided feedback on these site plans and compliance with his comments has been included as a condition of approval. This is a quick look at the site plan. Uh it shows the proposed building, parking area, and yard. Also on this site plan is the future expansion area. Uh this is not up for review tonight. If it were to be uh suggested or proposed at a later time, it would require a conditional use permit amendment and another site plan review. I'd also like to highlight that there are no variances being requested for the site plan and it generally meets the standards outlined in the code. Anything that may need to be uh altered slightly before uh the building permits are issued is noted in the resolution as a condition of approval. Staff finds that the general cup and site plan standards have been met without the need for variances. The city engineer, city attorney, and city staff have reviewed this item and provided comments which have been added as conditions of approval. The approval of the site plan and CUP is dependent on the approval of a vacation of the drainage and utility easement. As mentioned earlier, the planning commission held a public hearing and reviewed this item on September 23rd. The property owner and the general contractor were present to speak on the request and no other public comments were received. The planning commission voted 5 to zero to recommend approval of the CUP and site plan review request uh with conditions recommended by staff pending the easement vacation. Therefore, staff directs the city council to adopt the resolution approving the request for a site planning conditional use permit for the construction of Atlas Villa's memory care on lots five and six block two of Solders's Commercial Park with the lots to be combined as recommended by the planning commission. The council may modify the draft resolution. Um conditions have also been included in this resolution to address the comments by staff. Uh the applicant is here to speak if you would like to ask any questions. I'm also h happy to answer any questions. Thank you. Make a motion to approve resolution number 2025-56. Resolution approving the request for a site plan and conditional use permit for the construction of a residential care facility on lots five and six block two SERS commercial park. I'll second that. Any further discussion? >> I have some questions. Uh my first question is why that spot? Why not closer to the um senior living facility that we have? I mean, I'm thinking what are they going to do when 65 in five 10 years from now with 65 wants to expand and become a second 35W or whatever they're is planning. And the more that people move out here, the more I see that 65 it's going to expand one way or another. They're going to put bridges in. They're going to put um onoff ramps and all kinds of stuff. So, is that in a plan? And I would like to see what this is going to look like, the finished project, how close it is to 65. Is it is there a parking lot between 65 and the building? Uh I'm I really the the drawings on here, most of them I were bigger than my computer, so I couldn't see half of them. But um I would just like to to know these these little things and the other thing is why are we vacating anything for any developer? That's my three questions. >> Yeah. Um so the applicant may be able to provide greater insight onto why this site was selected. Um this is a commercial parcel. It's guided commercial. It's zoned commercial. Um, so, uh, it is in staff's opinion a great candidate for this type of commercial development. Um, as for your concern regarding Highway 65, um, the area for that highway has been dedicated. This is well out of that dedicated rightofway for that highway. This is all proposed, this building is all proposed to be on the lot that was created back in 1990 when this development was platted. So, it's building on a lot that's already created. It's the highway's not going to be expanded into that anytime soon. The highway has its right of way and it will remain in that right of way unless something insane happens. Um, thinking back to your other question, um, yeah, so for as for the location of the parking lot, that is on the western side. So, that will be accessed off of Ulyses Street. The closest part to Highway 65 is the yard. Uh, it's quite a substantial yard. It provides a lot of space for residents to get their activity in, walk around, and between the yard and the highway is also ponding. So, that's where this the facility's storm water is going to be drained and managed in there. Very standard for a site like this. Uh staff doesn't really have any concerns about the longevity or the design of it. Um the applicant has worked with our engineer and our staff to make a plan that is uh satisfactory for our zoning code and our our city code standards. Um and then can you remind me of oh the vacation that question um that's up next for discussion. Um but just a little bit of a overview on that. Basically when you divide a lot of or you subdivide any properties you plat properties you dedicate drainage and utility easements um so that you can um work on the edge of a property and you know have drainage have your utilities go there. Um, when you are combining properties, uh, as will happen in this case if this is approved, uh, you'll often have a drainage and utility easement running right down the middle of that property. That's not really workable for a developer. Um, typically they're combining lots because they want to build in an area that needs to be combined. So, that's why the city is vacating that easement area. There is more than enough storm water drainage on this site and we're maintaining the perimeter easements for the drainage and utility easements that are common on properties. Um, so nothing really going on here is reinventing the wheel. This is all very typical stuff. >> Okay. So, you said we're going to talk about the vacating next. The thing is, this microphone's driving me crazy. Um the thing is what if the vacation didn't get approved but everything else does? How does that work? >> So this is contingent on the approval of the vacation. I presented this first because this is an overview of the site and then we get into the vacation which is a little bit more narrow. Um so I just wanted to give you guys greater context for that. Um, but yes, if the vacation is not approved, then this is not approved because it's contingent. >> I got a question. Hawinson Anderson has two separate letters requesting a bunch of stuff. Has that been met or is that just sitting there waiting? >> Yes. So, that's uh quite typical. Um, Hawinson Anderson has those letters um and they're always sent to the developer after staff receives them. So the developer in this case has been working with staff to address those. Uh we are satisfied by their uh their commitment towards working towards those standards and anything that hasn't been addressed is a condition of approval in the resolution. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Question. Is this a tax exempt business? >> No. No. >> What was your question? >> If it was tax exempt. >> Okay. like >> so I guess I I'm a little uncomfortable approving something that has issues that have to be resolved be of like the things Mr. Smith just were talking about. >> So what if some of that never gets accomplished or what if it doesn't get accomplished, but the city thinks it got accomplished and approved it and then we find out a year from now we oh we approved it but they never did it. >> Yes. So there's a few safeguards in place for that. So first of all this is just the approval for them to for the developer to apply for that building permit. But before the building permit is applied for they will have to satisfy those conditions in the resolution. uh city will not issue a building permit for the site if those things are not satisfied. Additionally, you may notice in your packet we have the site improvement performance agreement. Um that is another document that the developer and the city both execute that uh outlines what needs to happen on the site, the landscaping, the design of the building. It holds the developer accountable to what was approved tonight or what will what could be approved tonight. So everything on the Hawas Anderson questions will be fixed or answered before you give a building permit. >> Yes. Yep. It's pretty typical for a commercial development like this to not be 100% hammered out at the city council meeting. There's a little bit of work after um that happens behind the scenes to get it to the final stage. >> Any more discussion? >> So let me get this straight. We're we're voting on something that's going to approve them being able to do this again. Correct. >> No. So this >> or is this >> So this is for the land use approvals. Um this would be the council saying you can go forward with uh your approval for the site plan here. Um this does not issue any building permits. So after the approval is received for the site plan with the conditions noted in the in the resolution um then the applicant can later apply for the building permit that happens administratively. I look through that our building inspectors approve it. Um that's a separate act that will happen later. >> But nothing comes back to us regarding this. >> It will not come back to you. No. Well, I would like um the applicant is here to explain why they prefer this site over a site closer to the assisted living that we have. Is that possible? >> Thank you. Hi. >> Hi. >> Um, so I'm Amber Gian. I'm one of the owners and um my husband and I actually picked out the site and um we really liked it because um the the amount of traffic that goes past there. We're planning on having a big sign, you know, visible to 65. It's just we felt like it was a really good location. We also liked that it was two lots that we could buy and then potentially expand later. Um and then what was that? >> Do you want to come up and explain some of um and the sewer access and >> sewer and water access were another thing. That's kind of my husband and their department. Um, but and then in addition, you don't really want to have two assisted livingings right next to each other either. Um, that's not the greatest for for business. So, you want to have a little bit of a separation between them. We have a a current property over in Centerville and so we're pretty experienced at the marketing aspect of it. >> Is this going to look just like the one in Centerville or is it different? It's going to look um the same except larger. So um our current facility is 16 rooms and this is going to be 26. So it'll just be expanded in length. >> Oh, sure. >> I would love to see that. >> Yeah, absolutely. Um, >> I know back when the apartments were coming in also toward 65, they're on their existing plan. They had a clinic possible proposed for their when they first came in. >> A clinic? >> Yep. Clinic Pharmacy. >> And on the screen right now is also uh uh the elevations that were submitted by the developer. So, >> stone and siding. That's our current exterior. >> Okay. >> And then the inside, we really catered it towards people issues. So the inside we actually have a sky ceiling that beautiful. Yeah. It's really >> Oh, I like it. >> Thank you. So, what are you going to do if think about that hotel down by in Blaine on 242? Do you ever drive by there? Because that used to be when it first came in, you could just turn right off 65 and go in there. And now there's a big wall and you can barely see it. What if something like that happens? And guaranteed Minda has priority. They can change the plans. We can't stop them. as we know from the day turns. >> Yeah. I mean, I I think that's probably a risk that you take when wherever you're building. >> Okay. >> And our plan is to really um just become a a great building in the community and just have a really great reputation. Um initially it's important to have, you know, the traffic and what I was speaking of, but like our current facility, so many of our residents come from word of mouth from previous families that have lived there. >> Okay. Thank you. Any further discussion? I have a motion and a second. All those in favor? >> I I >> opposed. None heard. Motion passes. Item 7 A2. >> This is the vacation of a drainage and utility easement for Atlasville's memory care. Stone construction. and the general contractor has applied for the vacation of a drainage and utility easement to allow the construction of Atlasville as memory care. This drainage and utility easement adjoins the two lots which are to be combined uh and this easement is not needed if the lots are combined. This request has been reviewed by the city engineer, public works department and the city attorney. Uh this easement was established in 1990 through the plat of solders commercial park. Uh the city council should evaluate the request and determine if the request will have a negative impact on the property or on surrounding properties. This is a quick look at the easement area to be vacated. Uh the area to be vacated is 70 or 7,800 square ft. It is 20 in wide or 20 ft wide ending 10 feet from the eastern and western property lines. Uh this easement vacation does maintain the 10-ft drainage and utility easements around the per perimeter of the parcel. Um so if you think about these first two parcels had a 10-ft easement around each of their boundaries. This is doing that same thing. It's just that 10-ft easement around the boundaries of the parcel once it's combined. Based on the recommendation of staff, uh staff recommends that the city open the public hearing and consider the approval of the request to vacate a drainage and utility easement adjoining lots five and six block two of Saers Commercial Park for the construction of Atlasville as Memory Care. The council may modify the resolution. Happy to answer any questions. >> Okay, at this time we'll open the public hearing for any comments from the public. Nobody. Okay. That part of the public hearing is closed. Council discuss or make a motion. >> Make a motion to approve resolution 2025-57. Uh, approval of the request to vacate a drainage and utility easement adjoining lots five and six, block two of SER's commercial park for the construction of a residential care facility as with conditions set forth in the resolution. >> I'll second that. Any further discussion? >> Yeah, because I'm still confused about this vacating. Um >> well I believe if you just down the road on the corner when uh Designing Earth came in, they had to do the same thing. >> That was two lots in that corner that they took and we vacated for them, I believe. Um Matt, can you bring up page 97 of the packet? Let me see if I can get out of this and 97 and sometimes it does that. Hold on a quick second. Some computer issues today. Okay, that works. So, this shows the two lots with a building on it, proposed building with the with the drainage easement on it as well. right there. If you can zoom in just a little bit, you can see that the building crosses the property line and crosses that easement. There is no need for that easement to be in the center of it. Uh there is still a 10 it 10ft easement ac around the entire property that will facilitate any needs for drainage or utilities. But as they are combining the lots, that lot line goes away, that easement is not needed and there's no reason to have a drainage utility easement through the middle of a property, through the middle of a building. >> So would their proposed um expansion influence this at all? >> That is not up for discussion tonight. Um, but that shouldn't influence this. I believe during our pre-application meetings, the drainage on the site was designed actually to accommodate even that expansion. So, they have over what they need right now. Um, and if they do want to do that expansion later on, uh, there should be no concerns regarding the easements or the drainage on the site. Mr. Mayor and Council, I think when these lots are set up, it's just kind of garden variety you put in the easements in a situation where you're combining the two. Obviously, you don't need it at that point, but that wasn't envisioned back when the lots were set up. So, this is quite common when you're combining two lots and needing to build a larger structure on there. So long as this is the important part. So long as they have the the drainage portion accounted for in here, which is where engineers going to come in and calculate all that and make sure that's in line. >> Mr. Mayor, if I can jump in, I I'll add to what Mr. Luke said, and I I'm reluctant to speak for the city engineer, but as Mr. said those calculations have been made based on the applicant materials and in this case and m uh the planner can correct me here if I am wrong but these drainage facilities will be privately owned and so the city does not need to maintain that public right of access to the um storm water infrastructure >> that helps okay I guess I don't have any >> any other discussion Okay, we have a motion, a second. All those in favor? >> I opposed. >> Unheard. Motion passes. >> Mr. Luck, before we move on, and I hate to interject again. Did we have uh a public hearing on the CUP application? I did not I don't recall hearing a >> That was at the planning commission meeting. >> Okay. Thank you. Item 7 A3. >> This is a reszoning of four properties along Johnson Street south of 241st Avenue. At the request of the city council, city staff has initiated initiated a zoning map amendment for four properties on the east side of Johnson Street south of 241st Avenue Northeast. The city was the city was made made aware of the possible need for this zoning map amendment uh during a conversation with a property owner of one of those four properties regarding a building permit application for a poleb barn. During this discussion, staff discovered that the property in question was zoned light industrial, but it was guided low density residential. This was an incompatibility between the zoning map and the land use map. Uh this was brought before the city council at the August 25th work meeting where the council directed staff to initiate the process of reszoning these parcels to correct the incompatibility between the zoning and land use maps. The current zoning for these parcels is light industrial within the shoreland overlay district and the proposed zoning is single family and town home residential within the shoreland overlay district. These parcels are guided lowdensity residential and that will not change with this reszoning. Each of these four parcels currently contains a single family home. The parcels to the west across the street are zoned R2 and guided lowdensity residential. The properties to the south are zoned and guided light industrial. The properties to the north and northeast are zoned and guided mixed use. The request again is to reszone these four properties from light industrial to single family and town home residential. For a bit of context, the zoning map and ordinance are tools for enforcing the goals established within the comprehensive plan. Parcels are required to be zoned in a man manner that is compatible with their underlying land use designation. Our comprehensive plan even lists primary and secondary zoning districts that are associated with with each land use designation. Unsurprisingly, Light Industrial is not a zoning district that's compatible with the lowdensity residential land use. This incompatibility is why this resoning has been initiated. The city has a relatively high level of discretion in approving or denying a resoning. The proposed zoning for a property must be consistent with the city's comprehensive plan. If the proposed zoning is not consistent with the comp plan, the city must deny the the resoning. In this case, this resoning request is to make it consistent with the comprehensive plan. Within your packet, staff has provided an analysis of each of the standards for review for resoning established by our code and listed on the screen. Uh just a few things I want to highlight. I don't want to get too deep into it. Um but the first is that there's no new residential building activity being proposed as a part of this resoning. Um there's no new activity that staff would be aware of. There's not a big development coming in or anything. Um this is purely just to bring these properties into compliance with the land use map. Really the benefit here for property owners is that these properties are currently what is known as a legal non-conforming use. This is because these properties are zoned industrial but they are used for a residential purpose. They all contain single family homes. Our city code and most city codes say that legal non-conforming uses cannot be expanded or intensified. So this resoning actually allows property owners to intensify the residential nature of their properties. So what this might look like is a property owner building a pool barn or adding an addition or a deck onto their home. Those are all things that under this current zoning of industrial would not be allowed. So reszoning these parcels gives those property owners some greater freedom to do what they would typically do on any other residential parcel within the city, assuming their proposals meet the zoning code standards. This request was reviewed by the planning commission and a public hearing was held on September 23rd. Staff did receive comments. Uh these comments pertain to why staff has initiated this resoning and what the possible impacts of this resoning may be on those four properties and the surrounding property to the south. After this public hearing, the prop or the planning commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the resoning request. Staff directs the city council to adopt the ordinance approving the resoning of four properties along Johnson Street Northeast, south of 241st Avenue from Light Industrial to single family and town home residential as recommended by the planning commission. Happy to answer any questions. I'll make a motion to approve ordinance number 202506 reszoning of um the properties drive listed PIDs or no just the properties >> in the record >> second >> we have a motion and a second further discussion >> yes I have a question do you know when this was reszone light industrial. Was that like right after the last compound or is there a date anywhere? >> So staff has not been able to track down a day when this reszoning hap or this zoning came into fruition. Um our assumption is that after each comp plan uh the city should redo its zoning map somehow during the last revision of the zoning map these parcels were missed is our guess at what happened here. >> Okay. And also, what is the approximate acreage of those properties? >> Yes, I believe they're about two acres. They're around two acres. >> That's what I kind of thought. All right. I don't have anything else. >> Any other discussion? >> Have a motion. Second. All in favor? I >> opposed. None heard. >> Item 7A or 8A, I mean. This is for a final plat for Viking Meadows second edition. Capstone Homes has applied for the approval of a final plat for Viking Meadows second edition on outlots J and K of the Viking Meadows subdivision. This final plat would create 61 new single family lots. Uh this property is currently zoned mixeduse R1 as a PUD and guided mixed use. The planned unit development and preliminary plat for this entire development, Viking Meadows, was approved on February 12th of 2024. Um, this is the second phase of the Viking Meadows development. Uh, the first phase of the subdivision was approved by the council on October 14th of 2024. That was for the first 47 lots and homes in this development. Probably seen them under construction uh, currently. When reviewing a final plat, the city's discretion is limited to whether the proposed plat meets the standards outlined in the city's subdivision and zoning ordinance and and is consistent with the preliminary plat previously approved by the council. If the request meets these standards, the city must approve it. A review of these standards has been included in your packet. This request has been reviewed by the city staff, including the city attorney and city engineer. Any comments provided by staff that have not already been resolved have been added as conditions of approval to the resolution and will be addressed prior prior to the release of the plat for filing at ana county. Uh you may notice that one of those conditions is the execution of a development agreement. Uh this agreement is currently being drafted by the city attorney and will be brought back before you for review on October 27th at the regular city council meeting. Um so that's not with you tonight, but you should see it at our next meeting. Uh this is a quick look at the uh final plat. Again, this is 61 new lots. It will be accessed off of Meadows Drive and Viking Boulevard. Uh considering that Viking is a uh county road, uh this has been reviewed by the Enoka County Highway Department. Uh I'd also like to note that grading has already been completed for uh this phase of the development. During the initial Viking Meadows approval back in 2024, uh the grading for phase one, phase two, and phase three or additions one, two, and three uh was approved. So, no new significant grading work is associated with this phase. Um staff finds that the final plat application does conform with the zoning ordinance and preliminary plat approved on February 12th of 2024. Therefore, staff recommends that the council move to adopt the resolution approving the final plat of Viking Meadows, second edition. I believe the applicant is here to answer any questions if you have any. Uh the resolution also does include conditions of approval that are recommended by staff. Again, these are things that the uh developer is working towards and staff believes will be satisfactorily addressed before the plat is released. Happy to answer any questions. Make a motion to approve resolution 2025-58 approving the final plat for Viking Meadows second edition uh subdivision located on Outlot J and Outlot K Viking Meadows pin 2933 2341 00017 and pin 2933 2341 00018 along with the conditions set forth by staff. >> Second. >> Okay, we have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? >> Yeah, I was looking at Hawkins and Anderson. They have a lot two pages of lists of things. Is this similar to what I asked questions about the other one? Grace? >> Yes, this is similar. Again, with a large development like this, there are going to be things the legend may not be correct on a plan that's submitted. very small comments that need to be addressed and the developers working >> because I was just curious after I read through all these it was like I would have thought after their first edition that there wouldn't hardly be any questions here you know what I mean? >> Yeah. Yeah. Um it's again pretty typical for those small things to come up every time. >> Okay. >> Thank you. I believe this is going to be scheduled kind of like they did the last one coming next March was when you're going to start everything again. >> That's correct. No. >> So, I have a concern about the culdeac and how many homes are on it. There's seven to eight depending if you count number 10 as part of the culdeac or not. Um because current culde-sacs in East Bethl have issues with snow buildup and um parking especially if there's visitors. Where are they going to park? Because there's it doesn't look like there would be space between driveways if they needed, you know, had a visitor or a couple of visitors at a time. How does that work? >> Yes. So, that was reviewed by the city engineer and the city um or and our city's public works department. Um they did not express any concerns about the culde-sac. Um I assume, you know, if people are having guests over, there will be some people parking in driveways or on the street. Um very typical of what you'd see in a residential development. Again, this layout for this development was approved in the preliminary plat uh that went through in 2024. So, uh, the developer is kind of tied to what was approved during that preliminary platting phase and that's, um, in addition to now, that's also when this call to sack was looked at. Any further discussion? We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? >> I I opposed. I >> motion passes. Item 8, G1. Matt, >> Mr. Mayor and Council, on August 11th, the city council approved and directed staff to start the process of soliciting requests for proposals RFPs for a facility needs study. And uh as a reminder, this study kind of provides an idea of cost and depending on estimates, council could decide on moving forward if they want to do this study. We have a um again, it's kind of a road map of uh what uh what we currently have, the age of of some of the facilities we have, what may need to be uh budgeted for coming up, say for example, a roof or, you know, a parking lot or or something of that nature. Um and um and then also as population increases, what other facilities may be needed to account for that. And um and we have here kind of a summary of those that have submitted. It ranges from $14,500 to $180,850. And I think Council Member Urkl wants to go with $180,000. Is that correct? No. Sorry. Um >> not today. >> Not today. Uh at any rate, um I have worked with um ICS Wool uh at the county. Uh they were the uh construction management company for uh the new 911 center that was put in as well as a lot of work that was done at the um government center as well. And uh they they come highly recommended. Wald is is fantastic. uh council didn't weigh in on on giving anyone any, you know, gave him the same talking points on this is what we're looking for. Uh Nate and I and and a lot of these people met and chatted about um uh what um you know what we're kind of looking for on this and this these are the numbers that came out. So, um, bottom line is we staff would recommend you review these and determine a if you want to proceed with one and b which one you would want to proceed with. The proposals were part of a um an attachment here because of the sheer number. I think there was 400 pages uh that of all the proposals. So um this is just a quick executive summary for you so you don't have to go through all those pages unless you wanted to. >> So combined all these different companies came back with a combined 400 pages of recommendations or what was in the 400 pages. >> I could click on it here for you. with the 13 proposals, all the pages of each proposal added up came up to over 400. >> That's what I asked. >> Right. So again, if you click on the link, you can go through and they, you know, the last page is generally the one that uh that you're interested in with the dollar figure, but they give you kind of the teams uh what their specialties are, how many years they've been in service. Uh Joe Dunning is uh is the guy I know from W. Very sharp individual, easy to work with. Um and um and then wrapping up from there, you go to the next one. And they also give you kind of a time frame of the information they would gather and uh and when they would complete their project, their summary. Um and then um they go on to references and the different projects they've done. city of Otana for example, Chicago um that's for WS and as you can see it's they put a lot of information in um Bray Architects is the next one and they kind of give their o firm overview project team project experience designs and feed proposal as well. So, um, lots of information that they provide you, but, um, but again, I I think if you're if you're looking at some are going to go over, some are some are really going to provide you the meat and potatoes of what you're looking for. And I think honestly the the work that um I think if Wool was was higher priced than some of some of the others, I may even recommend them based on the experience I've had with them. But fortunately, they're lower price. So, I think it's a a win-win if you if you choose to go that route. >> So, they will come in and decide or not decide but recommend we need new building, we need improvements, expansions, that kind of thing. Is that what we're looking for? >> Yeah. Um, Mr. chair and council member Burkel, for example, if you if your current population is 12,000 and you go to 24,000, how many fire stations are you going to need or what would they recommend? Um, doesn't mean you have to build them. Uh, but they can kind of give you an idea of what you might need. For example, if uh if you have a lot more roads you're going to be plowing, new developments coming in, that sort of thing, how many plow trucks are you going to need? How do you house those plow trucks? you might need a larger public works facility to do that. Don't have to build it, but um they they offer that recommendation based on what you know what other people are doing and what what works. Uh then as far as the existing facilities go, you know, your roofs have a certain lifespan to them, your parking lots have a certain lifespan. Every single facility in this building has a lifespan to it. This dis will need to be replaced at some point. might be a hundred years, but at some point it would need to be replaced. Um, carpeting, for example, um, you know, uh, maybe windows on a facility, you know, get old and, um, need replacement. So, it kind of gives you just a snapshot of where you're at today, what you can expect. Um what what Andrew Dystra is the uh facility guy at the at the county and he would say I want a plan that tells me the 10 year that gives me the fiveyear and the one year. So the one year feeds the five and feeds the 10, right? They're all connected. Uh but then you know every single year going forward, oh this year we're gonna have to for a budget we're gonna have to plan for a roof replacement that's going to cost $100,000 or something like that. Uh so it gives you that rather than a surprise. It allows you to budget for it and uh and that way you can also maximize when you're taking care of facilities and and um keeping them up. You get longer life out of them than if they're kind of not necessarily taken care of. Speaking of roofs, do you know when the last time any of our roofs were replaced that I don't recall in the last >> I think the mayor knows. >> Yeah, I've added a roof on top of this one before. >> It's been a while. >> Yeah, >> the fire station the fire station one that's coming up on 20 years and that's about the time you have your issues. >> I don't think we have any leaks in this facility. So, it must have been a bangup job when they did it. This one was done in 2012 just the rest. >> Yeah. >> Interesting. Yeah. Um >> so essentially you you get their their summary or their document as one one source that you can go to and any facility you have you can see what's going to be needed and plan for that and budget for it. It's a good good tool that we don't currently have. Now, before we do this, I I'd almost like to table this. I would like to actually tour every single one of the city buildings before I make a decision on this and talk to the building managers. Is that possible? And I don't know about the other council if they're interested in doing something like that. >> Just with the sheer amount of uh information, I was going to recommend tableabling until we can actually go through everything. It's going over over 400 pages in one weekend and trying to study everything. It's it's a lot. >> I agree. So based on that reasoning and your reasoning, >> I'm going to make a motion to table this till the next meeting. >> I'll second have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor? >> I uh staff report. >> Uh Mr. Mayor and Council, just a couple of items I want to update you on. Uh the first was we had a Senate bonding tour that was scheduled for the 9th. Um they got rescheduled. Unfortunately, they're running behind. They have a lot of requests out there. So, we have that rescheduled now for the 28th at uh 5:30. Um and uh so I will be out there and uh I know the mayor was interested in being there as well and we'll certainly express to them the need for um the $10.5 million that we requested from the state. This would be our third year in doing this and reminding folks that is the the project on the kind of corner of Sims and 65 that would connect the schools. uh would allow us to drill two wells and um have a water tower and a water treatment plant uh to provide water to not only the schools but potentially the the development to the south there, the housing development and then also the new commercial industrial development on the uh west side west side of um 65 Sims and 65. Uh so that'll be coming up on the 28th and um and hopefully we'll have positive response from that. Um also wanted to say that uh got a request on this transition of to duty crew. Uh wondering about how we're budgeting for those dollars. Um we estimated about a $15,000 impact for that. And essentially the way it would be uh set up is we have the chief and the deputy chief and then there would be two individuals that'd be on duty crew that would be able to respond to calls during the busiest times when we get most of those calls. And um and the impact is less than what it probably would be because we won't have as many firefighters needing to respond to these calls. will have these people on, you know, waiting at stations ready to respond. I know we had um I think it was a car fire if I'm not mistaken. We had duty crew guys on there left the station within two minutes and uh were responding to the call. So arguably it is better better coverage um than what we've had before and um and that coverage of course response times impacts insurance rates. So that's a positive thing. And then also just wanted to say that um as we're transitioning over to this new Midco um online uh broadcasting um we had in the past a a server that kind of ran a carousel of pictures during nonbro times and right now we're getting reports that it's just a black screen that's out there. We're trying to investigate what options are available uh to try and get that carousel either back up and running or how we can kind of prevent the the dead time, maybe get some benefit out of that. Uh but uh currently right now there is a black screen so people shouldn't be concerned about that. But uh but we will be broadcasting when when the time is right. And so far that part's been working well. We're trying to work through the the um issue with uh the work session last time not recording for some reason. So, couple of little wrinkles in the new system here that we're trying to iron out. But um at any rate, um I think that is all that I have for updates unless there's any questions. >> All right, council reports. I'd like to thank the fire department fire department auxiliary. Um on October 5th, I joined them for the uh fall adopt the highway cleanup. Uh they sponsor the the road on Highway 65 from 221st to 237th. Uh it's estimated that uh picked up uh 20 to 25 bags of trash. So, I'd really like to thank them for their efforts to help keep the city clean and looking good. So, thank you, Fire Department auxiliary. I want to um talk about an email that we all got regarding um this address on Kissle Street and their septic not passing because it's four feet instead of two feet. And I am just wondering what is wrong with it being 4 feet. It seems like 4 feet would make better sense in Minnesota's cold winters to protect the a drainage field. And is what is the city going to do about it because the city obviously made a mistake. So >> Mr. Mayor and council, I can respond to that. We we did talk about this in the staff meeting. Um the the assumption is that the city made a mistake. What happens is it's supposed to be 2 ft down to keep it out of the water table. And when you introduce water to a drain field, you get a lot of settling. And at that point, you can have significant settling from what was originally um tested um by the inspector upon installation to what it actually settles to. and it depends a lot on the soil type that it's going into and that sort of thing. So, um I would not jump to the conclusion that the city made a mistake on that and this is quite common does happen quite common. The the the complication comes when you're when it settles and it gets closer to that water table. So, depending on whatever a water table is in in a respective area. um if you know if the water tables are too high, you have to do a mound system and then your um your drain field instead of costing 15,000 is 40,000 uh for a mound system. So they're very very expensive, but um uh it's not uncommon for septic systems to fail uh when tested today. Now, I won't say why that's the case, but um it seems like anyone that's selling a house, you can bet on the fact that your septic system may not pass, and you'll have to include that as part of your, you know, closing documents and escrow and that sort of thing to have that have that uh replaced. I um I don't know why that likelihood is is greater now, it seems, than it it ever has been in the past. But um I will trust that the that the analysis on these things is done correctly um to determine if the system is operating correctly. But um the the hesitation for uh coming from our um from our inspection department is you would if you essentially assume responsibility for this as a city, you'll have them lining up because you can always make that claim then. Um city can't control settling. >> Okay. With that, I'm going to um try to follow up a little bit more on that. Um I am also wondering when is our newsletter going to be published and mailed. That should be any time now, shouldn't it? >> Because I know our stuff had to be in in first week of September. >> Yeah, we did speak about that. I don't It might be November time frame. I'm trying to recall from memory when that's going to be coming out here, but um I can double check and email you on the uh newsletter time frame. >> All right, with that, I just want to say I attended a great chamber meeting, breakfast meeting at um Route 65 and I was very proud of our um chamber and their golf outing. They gave a lot of big checks to a lot of our nonprofits in East Bethl and that just warmed my heart. Nace and the auxiliary got a check and others and I was just very impressed with that. And the other thing I attend uh airport meetings every month. We're working on planning a big um grand open not a grand opening but a community get together the second week second Saturday in June. So that's going to be a big wind dig. And um yeah, and then the other monthly meetings, it just talks about the their comp plan and all that kind of goings on in the airport and airport users and airport complaints and that kind of thing. So if anybody has any airport questions, call me. That's all I got. Um, like to say thanks to the fire department for their open house on Monday. Uh, if you went up there, it was a nice event. A lot of people were up there, enjoyed it. Uh, Nate, we'll be seeing you tomorrow for parks here right here. Um, other than that, pretty much all we got going on. >> All right. Yeah, I too attended the chamber deal along with the circle and uh Mr. Look. And then later on that day, I tended over to aggressive hydraulics open house was very interesting. A tour through there and a heck of a nice facility. So with that, I'll entertain a motion to adjurnn. >> I'll make a motion to adjurnn. Second. >> A motion second. All in favor? I Thank you everyone.