part of it next year. >> And what time is the parade? >> The parade will be at 400 p.m. Um so it goes from down just down the length of Palisad. Uh most people tend to park here at either park or the um city hall parking lot and then watch it along um here right at Booster Park East. So, are you taking like any, you know, drop in spray things? And are the cards going to be in the >> the cars cars from the car show tend not to be in the parade. Uh, most of the drivers don't like idling their cars um on on a parade route. So, usually um we don't have the cars from the car show in it, but yes, there is always room for last minute dropins. They can always um fill out the form on our website uh the parade website um or east bethylboosterdays.com on the parade page. They can do that or they can drop myself an email um at coordinator eastbloosterdays.com. But yeah, we'll always take last minute parade editions and it is always free for participants to be a part of it. Um so in addition to Paula, we have um Bruce. Bruce is our treasurer. He works uh really hard to keep um all of our finances and accounting straight for us year round. His wife Nancy is an integral part of our Saturday. She helps with the vendor check-in. Um and I will tell you I work full-time. I have a part-time job and these two run circles around me usually at booster day is um they are so so helpful um not only uh year round but the day of there Bruce is always helping making sure everything's in place. Nancy keeps those vendors uh you know coming in and getting to where they need to go. Um in addition we have Ricky Snider. Ricky is our artisan market coordinator. A few years ago, she joined as and that was her idea was to kind of start bringing in more artists and crafters and she does a great job bringing in a wide variety of vendors with that. Uh Scott Snider is my entertainment and logistics guy. Uh Scott joined in 2021. I had put a call out for volunteers. Um, and that was the year that it we didn't know if we were going to be able to have an event because the governor had, you know, of course everything was shut down. And so we were kind of coming into July not into into 21 not knowing what exactly we could expect. Um, but Scott, Carrie, and I were the main three that pulled off the 2021 Party in the Park. And so Scott has stuck with us and he books our entertainment. He works uh very closely with Nate and public works to make sure everything's in place that we need. Um and so I this event wouldn't happen without um his dedication. And then of course, as if she needs any introduction, Carrie Frost um is our city uh liaison. I like to refer to her as she is valuable and uh she works um to make sure that any permits or licensing that anybody needs is taken care of throughout the year. She is also the one who writes the medallion hunt clues. So um if you know if it's too hard to find the medallion, that's who to turn to. Um the medallion hunt is back this year. It's a one-day only medallion hunt. The first clue will be posted at the City of East Bethl booth. Um, and then they'll be at 11 o'clock and then they'll be posted every hour until it's found. And the prize this year is a fourack of Minnesota Renaissance Festival tickets. So, that's a really fun thing to do. I have no idea where it's hidden. I usually don't know until it's found. So, um, but we switched it because sometimes we were ending up where we would have our Monday night meeting and the medallion was found the first day. So, we switched it up and we decided that we would make it a one-day hunt. So, if you're looking to search for that, be sure to be in the park at 11:00 a.m. for that first clue. Um, the rest of the things that are going on are the pancake breakfast starts at 8:00 a.m. here in the senior center. Um, that goes until 11:00 a.m. Then the car show is from 9 to 1. And then everything else really kicks off at 11:00 a.m. And that'll be the petting zoo, the inflatables, which are free. Um, we are going to be doing bingo this year. It's $1 a sheet. Kids under 18 can play with a parent present. Um, and our pots for the games. Um, because this is something that we're doing this year. It's our first year doing bingo ourselves as a committee. Um the pots for the games are $25 and then game 10 is going to be $50. So, um it's not high stakes bingo, but it's enough that especially for the kids who play uh should be happy if they win. There's also a cornhole tournament and I believe there's still openings for that. Um the cornhole tournament, the registration, you can see that on the website. Um that starts at um registration and warm-ups at 11:00. cornhole tournament kicks off at noon. Um the NOA County Sheriff's Department will be back with a K-9 uh demonstration. Um there's a variety of entertainment um right out away at 11:00. Um Harrison Daiko, which is a um drum group um Japanese drum group um plays at 11:00. that noon mariachi a mariachi band will be playing at 1. Um the chops Inc. is bringing um their p um steel drum duo will be playing and then at 3:00 we'll be um two local uh high schoolers um will be performing some dance. Their dancers out of Jam Hops and Ham Lake and so they had asked if they could have some stage time. at 6:30 p.m. will be the dance um with the express band. There's no entry fee for any of this. Some activities will have a low cost. Um and Route 65 will be on site uh with um food and beverages all day along with some other um food vendors. So, please, please, please tell your friends, tell your neighbors, tell your family members. We hope to get a really good turnout. Um we, you know, working hard to make this event um bigger and better each year. Um, and then I do want to encourage community members that going forward if you look at booster days and go, you know what, it could be more or they should do this, please consider stepping up and joining our committee. When I say this is our committee, this is our committee. It's a lot of work. Um, and uh, you know, we could use all the ideas, the skills, the talents that the community has to offer. Um, and in addition to that, one last little, um, if you are free on Saturday and would like to help out throughout the day, we do have some spots for volunteers. And again, on our volunteer page on our website, eastbloosterdays.com, you can see what's available and what we need. And >> what's going to end the night? >> Oh, sorry. And the night of course will end with fireworks prevent presented by the city of East Bethl. So, thank you. I know we were promised that it was going to be as good, if not better fireworks than last year. So, we hope to see everyone there. Thank you, Stephanie. Thank you, committee. [Applause] >> Item 4B, IUP 2021-74 hearing. Matt, you want to give the update? >> Sure, Mr. Mayor and Council. I'll kick this off. Um, the council first uh considered this IUP uh back on May 15th and at that time it was asked by the holder of the IUP if we could hold off on this until first meeting in July. Uh that was honored and uh this is now the first meeting in July and we're bringing this back uh to you now for consideration. Um, this is uh I want I want to clarify this is about uh an interim use permit and it's about conditions set forth in an interim use permit. Uh conditions that were agreed to by the by the applicant at the time and the city. It has nothing to do with care of animals. It has nothing to do with whether you like somebody or not, anything of that nature. It strictly has to do with these are the conditions. Have the conditions been followed? And uh and last time we we spoke a little bit about um uh conditions. There are three conditions or two in particular that were that were identified. Uh the first is that the city's designated inspector and all personnel under the direction and control of the city whom the inspector believes necessary must be allowed access for inspection purposes upon 12 hours notice to ensure compliance with all applicable conditions. Uh and then uh condition number nine uh I can go to the page here as well. Condition number nine is uh is that all dogs must be confined to the premises. And uh essentially what happened is we have included in the case here uh this is a public document from the nook county district court uh kind of detailing uh some of the charges right now uh that the IUP holder is is dealing with. Essentially, there were two dogs that were picked up from uh Lynwood and were brought to uh the location here uh in East Bethl. And there was a then a necessity for the county to do an investigation to determine the level to which these two dogs might have been abused and if there were going to be additional charges that would be um issued to the original dog holders, owner if you will. And uh and this kind this document you hear kind of goes through from January 31st um to to February 6th where Deputy Merritt was trying to get access to these dogs to take the pictures to do the necessary investigation uh for their end and was prevented from accessing seeing um uh prevented from gaining access to the property. It then required a search warrant to be obtained for that address and the search warrant. Uh they went in for the express purpose of um uh determining um the if the dogs were there, business records pertaining to the dogs conditions and their locations. Um the defendant cooperated with turning over his cell phone laptop, but the deputies search for the property was not able to locate the dogs. It goes further on then to identify that the dogs had been moved to other locations, but uh there was not a willingness to disclose where those locations were. And and I think that has led to, if I'm not mistaken, the obstruction of justice. Um uh that's the obstruction of legal process. Um that is the uh charge right now that's on this. But essentially, um, when we have a, um, we're a complaint based city. In other words, you're you you have a property, your neighbor has a lot of junk in their property, you file a complaint on your neighbor, the city then follows up on that. The city is not actively going out and saying, you know, trying to identify neighbors with junk so that we can we can um, uh, follow up with them. It's complaintbased. However, this is not that category of a of an offense. This is an IUP that is think of it like a contract between the IUP holder and the city. Conditions are set forth and um and if the if the applicant doesn't want to agree to those conditions, the city doesn't have to issue the IUP. There is a process through which um an IUP can be modified uh if some of those conditions aren't working. and uh and so there is that uh that ability for uh recourse if if there's an issue that comes about. Uh but at any rate um this is uh essentially again at the request of the council bringing this back here in in July and um and again as mentioned the first go around it's it's incumbent upon the council now to determine if one violations existed uh and two uh what sort of remedy um there should be for this. Um there is um you know there's been a lot of chatter on Facebook. There's been a lot of um I I think kind of confusing the issue. Um and I want to stick to strictly the conditions. These are the conditions. Were the conditions violated? That's it. And uh and again the spectrum on this is um you know can range from anywhere from don't do it again to you know rewriting conditions to to revocation. Um and uh and as always, the applicant has an ability to, you know, come back and reapply for another IUP and the council can can address that at that point if ultimately there's a revocation uh that's issued. So, uh bringing this back uh this evening and um like some direction from from council as to what staff should do on this. Okay. Okay, at this time we'll uh bring the public hearing to order. Um I'll let Tammy come up first. State her case. Good evening. Okay, so as Mr. look has stated this is this is about just the IEP right so those 12 conditions um I I can't speak on the rest of this is so ridiculous on the rest of the district court stuff that's in court it's district court so I'm I'm not even going to speak on that Um, I will defend the IUP and I will answer absolutely any questions on the IUP. Um, what I want to know is a a couple things here is that um it I want to know who filed the complaint because the this complaint that that was up there, the district court complaint is not the city vessel complaint. Here's the city vthyl complaint form. I've filled these out before. This is you guys have a form and there's nobody else that has a complaint in the city of East Bethl that can do anything other than this form. So why was this form not filled out? On top of that, it says maybe violated. And then there's I I would like to know who actually wrote this. Was this you, Mr. Luck, that wrote that first whole page? I can't read what you have but I believe so. >> So in that um there's in this what you wrote about my IUP and then that complaint. So there's two things in here you say may be violated and then in the complaint those two things don't even they don't even match there. One has nothing to do with the other. Absolutely nothing to do with the other. Um, number five that you said may be a violation. The city's designated inspector, that is Nick, right? Is that still Nick? I don't even know. Is Nick the designated and city inspector still? >> I believe so. >> Okay. So, Nick and all the personnel under the direction and control of the city whom the inspector believes necessary must be allowed access to inspection purposes upon 12-hour notice to ensure compliance with all equitable conditions. So, it would be inspecting for the IUP. Correct. I mean, that's what the IEP is for, inspecting the IUP. I was never I would was never given a 12-hour notice about an inspection from anybody. I still haven't from nobody. I got a warrant served, which had nothing to do with the IUP, but I'd like to see the 12-hour notice inspection. If that is truly what someone is saying, which it looks like Matt Look is saying in this, that if it was violated, I should have I should have a 12-hour notice, right? I mean, that's we it's why we wrote the IUP, right? The city wrote it. Staff wrote it. And And it's here. It's So where's the 12-hour notice? >> Mr. Mayor, do you want me to answer that or do you want her to finish her comments? >> Just let her finish. >> Okay. >> Okay. Well, okay. And then all dogs must be confined to premises. All dogs that I get through animal control are confined to my premises. They're all they're all there. It's that's where they I bring them is to my facility. That's where they stay until they are either surrendered or the five or 10day hold is up. and that is where they stay. So, I don't know where that could have possibly been violated. I have statements and I have things I can say, but it helps if I can get because otherwise you're going to talk and then I'm going to go sit down and then I'm going to have to come back up here. So, I mean it's public it's not public forum. This is a public. You guys brought me here for this. So, it's a public hearing, right? You can talk to me. We We'll talk at the end during our discussion part of it. >> Okay. Do you have any questions for me? >> Not at this time. >> I I don't >> Do any of the council have questions? You must have a question if this was brought for you between for you this way. I I was part of the fire department obviously. So I was part of doing I shadowed a couple people doing inspections. I don't know about city inspections but I did fire department inspection shadowing. And when we would go in there, we'll pick any business, right? Gratitude Farms is a business. pick any business out there and you go in and you know the exit sign isn't lit, right? So, what did they do? They wrote it up on a form. If it wasn't correctable immediately, they would reschedu and come back. It's a violation, they'd come back and, you know, they tell you, "Here you go. Come back and reinspect and make sure that it was done." I don't understand why I am being brought here in front of you. I don't even This is a complete waste of my time and it's a waste of your time to have me come here instead of have this taken care of with staff the way it should be done. I know I've talked about policy here before and Mattlook doesn't seem to want to give me policy on how things are done, but is this how all IUPs IUPs in the city of East Bethl are handled if there's a violation? I can't imagine this is how they're handled. It's so much easier to do things without having someone come in front of council and berate them and invite other people to berate them when it's when it is nothing. I have never I have had this IEP from since 2009 and I have never violated the animal control contractual service IUP. I have proof of everything that if you need if you need to see anything I have proof of it. I do want to say just one thing. I I served the residents in the city of East Bethl for 17 years on the fire department. I know you guys know this. And I was I was an EMT and a captain and I was very good, very good. And I ended up getting multiple myoma cancer from being on the fire department, from being part of it. And I I mean I have a 38 page doctor's, you know, from Harvard, so it's proven. You again also probably know this if you're part of the lawsuit that went on. Instead of saying, "Tammy, what can we do for you?" I was brought here. I was fired. I was bered. I was called all kinds of things, told, you know, lies about how I didn't do my job. And so since then and having cancer and having to deal with it and doing what I do every single day, I don't want to deal with this anymore. I don't want to deal with this anymore. I want to live my life. I have some beautiful grandbabies and I just want to enjoy them. This is a complete waste of my time and I'm I'm ashamed of the city of East Bethl. I'm ashamed that this council is in charge of that gentleman and that you're allowing him to do this because that's where it started. That's where it's happening. That's where it starts. The craziness of Christine Dolman and Ham Lake and all her stuff is meaningless. It means nothing. She's been doing it for so long. It's it doesn't mean anything. But when she can talk somebody that >> Please wrap it up. >> Don't tell me to wrap it up, mayor. And all due respect, you brought me here. You brought me here. I shouldn't be here. >> Three minutes. >> No, it's not three minutes. This is a public hearing. This is a public hearing. This is not public forum. >> We can set the limits. >> Wow. If that doesn't say anything to the rest of you and you out there in YouTube world, how disrespectful. And you know, you know, one of the other reasons I was fired was because I came up here and I talked about your pay stubs. You remember that? >> Yep. >> No, trust me, that's probably still coming. I don't know what the statute of limitations is on, you know, fraud. They're >> all done. Isabelle Martin, >> that is public forum. What you're reading, this is a public hearing. >> No, it can pertain to a public hearing also. >> No, actually, you're supposed to call up people who want to speak in the public hearing separate from the public forum. >> That's fine. Anybody else want to talk at the public hearing here? But correct me if I'm wrong. Uh you can >> either >> it can be limited to three on the public hearing. Pardon >> Mr. Mayor Council um you are in charge of the meeting and therefore you are in charge of the public hearing. Now the rules need to be reasonable and applied equally to all participants. Typically um the city gives more deference to the applicant or you know however the posture is but the person at issue is usually allotted a time between five and 20 minutes depending on the the complaint or the time or what there is to talk about but the the comments need to be relevant to the action at hand and you are in control of the meeting and you can curtail comments when they uh drift off topic. >> All right, thank you. >> Okay, Renee Beckman. Um, he spelled the you said you'd never been in violation of your IUP. It says that a commercial kennel is any uh place where a person accepts dogs from the general public in which to be kept for the purpose of boarding. She has been boarding since I don't even know well over 15 years. She advertises for it. And then it later says that no commercial kennel license shall be issued in zoning districts other than commercial industrial. The city shall not approve variances on in or other uh zoning devices to allow commercial kennel licenses in zones other than commercial and industrial districts. That's it. She is not allowed to operate there. She is boarding. She is advertising boards. She has a long history or um history of Google reviews. Okay? So, it can be proven she's been operating illegally. And if we continue if the city continues to allow her to operate legal illegally, we are liable for it. If something happens, we can be sued for neg negligence and then we have to pay back. That's not just the residents of East Bethl. That's every person. She holds a contract with every residence. All it takes is six of those people to get together and you've got a class action suit on your hands. We have to pay it as residents. I don't want to stop it. >> Next. Anybody else? Can I speak? Thank you, mayor and council members, for the opportunity to speak at your forum. You observed directly that Tammy cannot follow animal related policies when you revoked her horse IEUP at the May 28th council meeting. You witnessed the concern from several community members then regarding Tammy's animal violations related to both horses and dogs during the IEP hearing and public forum. Tammy demonstrated her inability to follow the rules by violating her expired IEP. We agreed eight horses does not equal two horses and expired equals non-compliant. Why would you allow a person who cannot follow animal related policies to hold an animal related government position of authority in this community? Policies and procedures exist to protect animals such as number of fence stakers required per horse. But Tammy has demonstrated she cannot follow the policy nor procedures when it comes to her own animals. If Tammy can't follow animal related policy when it comes to her own animals, why would you give her authority and responsibility for other people's animals in East Bethl? Have you done your due diligence regarding the dog related allegations against Tammy and Gratitude Farms? I think it's only fair to ask that you do so if you're considering giving her this authority and putting your own community at risk. As council members, you represent the people and it's your duty to do right by your community. By allowing Tammy to continue as acco for East Bethl, you're putting trust in someone who simply put cannot be trusted as proven by her actions. Tammy obstructed justice by preventing ACSO from executing a formal animal cruelty investigation through veterinary evaluation of those dogs brought to Gratitude Farms. Tammy refused to allow the dogs to be seen for veterinary evaluation as requested by the Inoga County Sheriff's Office. Isn't what's best for those animals to see a veterinarian who can collect forensic evidence to carry out justice? Do you want pets in your community held hostage from critical veterinary care? Do you want animal cruelty investigations to be obstructed? Do you want someone who doesn't cooperate with law enforcement holding an acco title in this community? Would you want this for your own pets at home? Animal rescue organizations are typically nonprofit dedicated to providing shelter and care for animals in need. I've supported several reputable animal rescue organizations in the local community as a volunteer for 10 years. As humans, we have to advocate for animals. They're defenseless and they rely on us for protection. Animals in need should be brought to safe and reputable animal control organizations that truly seek to reunite people and their pets and have the best interest of animals, people, and the communities we live in at heart. You have the power here to do the right thing for the animals and people in this community. You can make a difference and what happens here today sets the tone for East Bethl and surrounding communities. Anybody else? Okay, I voted everybody. I've never been to one of these meetings. I'm here to support Tammy. She's been very helpful and I think her job's very difficult and I think she's good at it. I can tell right now just by listening who I would and wouldn't vote for again. And I hope you know who you are. Anyone else? My name is Christine Dolman and I'm here tonight to address Tammy's violations over IUP. I have seemed to be the target for Tammy. Everything she does is my fault. It is not. What I want to address here tonight is that I actually copied the resolution that you have here tonight and you only have the two that have to do with the pending charges for Manoka County Sheriff's Department. No other of the of her violations. We and I have filed multiple complaints over eight years against Tammy Gimple for her non-compliance with their IUP. Nobody's done anything. So, I'm going to address a few of them tonight. Renee hit on the boarding. She is definitely boarding. It's on her page. It's on Google reviews. It took a year and a half for the former city administrator to even get her to take it down from her Facebook page and from her web page. Contracts on on file. They're supposed to be on file. She takes the dogs out of anywhere. Recently, she had one from Cass County. I didn't even know where Cass County was. I had to look it up. That's way up north. Pine County, Cass County, out of Wisconsin. She takes dogs from anywhere. She's acting as a rescue. She says it all the time. You guys have documents that are submitted in your files for her surrender papers or whatever it is, the impound slips where she calls herself a rescue. She has yet to bring come back to the city to modify her IUP. The site will be inspected annually and those inspection papers from the board of animal health are supposed to be on file with the city. You have one and the only one that you have is because Aaron Burr, your former city employee, actually he himself contacted the board of animal health. Tammy Gimple never did submit those to the city because I've got a copy of those. What she submitted to you was her license. That is not a board of animal health inspection. This needs to be done. She continues to sell dogs. She was taken off the reservation as a rescue saying that the money was going back onto the reservation to spay and neuter dogs. Did that happen? We've only found three and she's had 20, 30 puppies. So my question is, if not for Tammy being charged by the sheriff's department, were you ever going to look at these other complaints? Anyone else? >> Um, I think the hatred of that one lady shouldn't dictate what happens here. Um, Tammy does amazing things with the animals. Um, this is one of the dogs that I've gotten from her. She does amazing rescue. She cares for those animals. I would trust her dearly with any animal. I go to her for any questions that I have. She's always available. Um the hatred of that group over there is insane. She just admitted that she's been harassing that lady for eight years. Like get a job. >> Get a job. >> Order. >> Freaking. [Music] >> Mayor, do you mind? Tammy Gimple, you had me in court twice trying to get an HRO harassment on me. Both of them were dismissed. So for you to sit there and slander, liel, and defamate my name, saying that I harassed you, you're dead ass wrong. What I do is I bring >> Christine, address the council or sit down. >> Yep. >> I do not harass Tammy Gimple. It has been proven twice in court already. Both of her harassment petitions have been dismissed. What I do is I take the documentations that are on her page and I post them publicly. Everything that's on that DUP page, trust me, Tammy Gimple has threatened to sue me for slander, liel, we've got cease and desist orders in the mail. She's never done anything. >> The same pertaining to the between you two. Let's >> That's right. My point is, mayor, if what I had posted and said were untrue, she would have had me in court cuz she already tried twice and lost. >> Let's move on. >> I think we just need to put aside the feelings. I got involved in this with um when with when she failed to return Duke. Okay. Then the continued violations over and over again. I didn't want to be involved, but she just continues to do it. So, let's not put the ceiling feelings aside and just look at the facts. She's in violation just with the boarding alone. It says in your ordinance that no device or instrument can be um created in order to get around that commercial boarding has to be done in a commercial or industrial zoning. That's it. She lives in a residential. So, that IUP should be pulled. Period. So, and that has nothing to do with any feelings, anything. That's just what it says on paper. That's what that's the law. follow it. >> Any others? >> Hello. Um, my name is Katie and I am a volunteer with the local lost dog group and I would encourage the city and Gratitude Farms to sit down and figure out a way for them to become compliant. Um, animal control is a thankless job and if Gratitude Farms is unable to continue operating, the cities and counties who contract with them will have no animal control officer. Thank you. >> Hey, no comments from She's got the podium. >> Thank you. When I'm asked to step in and trap a stray dog, I can't do that until I find I have lined up a place for that dog to go. So, um, humane societies are full, rescues are full, it's very difficult to find a place for a stray dog to go. And while I've never had to bring a dog to Gratitude Farms, I have reached out to Tammy numerous times when I've been looking for a place to go, and she's always said yes. Um, like I said, I've never had to bring one there, but she's always available for to let me do that. Um, and it's, um, a really important service that she provides. So, um, it's my hope that the city and gratitude farms can kind of come together, work together to find out, um, some kind of resolution that would allow her to continue to, um, help save animals. So, thank you. >> Anybody else? just to address something that is um false. I I'm being taxed commercially. I've got my taxes right here. It's they're commercially taxing that portion of my kennel. >> So that's that is >> no comments from the audience, please. >> So I am being taxed commercially. Am I a commercial building? know am I in a residential I mean we all knew this in 2009 when I did the IUP but I am being taxed commercially on that section. So anybody else? >> Good evening. My name is Nicole and I'm talking on behalf of Tammy. I recently donated about 8 to 10 kennels to Gratitude Farms because we have an overabundance at our house for that. I didn't know Tammy personally at the time. I had just been following the Hamley community page and had seen her posts about the great things that she does with helping animals get rehomed or lost dogs get, you know, getting found and reunited with their families. What I'd like to say and what I'd like to see is as the last woman um said, it would be great if everybody instead of arguing, having this ruckus going on, which is by the way disrespectful in a city council meeting, but it would be great if everybody could sit down with Tammy and or come up with some kind of mediation so that both parties are happy with what the end result is. But I can tell you personally just with my small interactions that I've had with her, she has been very helpful and I was at her house. I saw her facility. It's great. Um, so I just wanted to mention that. I know it's very little interacting. Um, but I feel like I feel like from what I've seen, it's very one-sided. And I think obviously, um, with legal things like this, um, there has to be one side story and another side story to be able to come to a final agreement. Um, but I think an agreement should be um, you know, made instead of this back and forth craziness. Like she said, it's a waste of your time. It's a waste of her time. It's a waste of the community's time. Um, and so I just wanted to put that out there. So, thank you very much for my opportunity. I just want to get it on record that she's not our acco, right? >> No, she is not. >> No, we chose to get a different acco and we found one just like other communities can. Thank you. >> Anybody else? Seeing none, this part of the public hearing is closed. >> Staff is looking for directions. Council discussion. >> Mayor, do you do you want me to follow up on some of those? >> Yep. >> Issues. Is it all right if I go at this point or do you want to >> Yep. Go ahead. I just wanted to address kind of the um maybe the attacks that we're seeing here. The allowing this gentleman tack while she was pointing at me. I think it needs to be maybe reminded of folks that I serve at the will of the council. This council asked that we bring this back in July. We're bringing it back in July. Uh my job is to protect the interests of the city in every agreement that we have to make sure that all agreements are followed and that's the purpose of doing this. Now, there's a question that was raised about a 12-hour notice. If you read the um uh if you read the report from the deputy, it contacted um uh the defendant, in this case, Ms. Gimple, on the 31st of January. Had the dogs been there on the 31st of January per the 10 days required to be on hold, there would have been no issue. There would have been no court case whatsoever. They would have come in, they would have conducted their investigation, and would have taken their photos, and that would have been the end of the issue. But they tried till February 6th. Again, if the dogs were held there at a 10-day hold, they still would have been there on on February 6th. They needed to be there till February 9th. And the and the um the IUP is very clear that after a quarantine period of 10 days, the dogs will be required to move to an offsite facility. They were not there. Matter of fact, they were moved about three times from what we can estimate as they were identifying certain veter veterinarians that they were at. They were moved around and and it was not disclosed where they were at. This is not about um the quality of care has nothing to do with whether she's a good person or not. Um it has nothing to do with whether she served the city as a firefighter in the past. That's all well and good. uh has nothing to do with the trust that people have with her and caring for animals. That's great. That's wonderful. Um commercial taxing that is standard. That's what happens when you run a business out of home. Uh they will tax you on a commercial basis. Um and that's what this IUP is is a is a home occupation on the property located at 22359 Baton Street Northeast. So again, um why why did we not bring up all the other complaints and some of the questionable facts and maybe there was evidence, maybe there wasn't? Um this one here rose to the level of gross misdemeanor and misdemeanor. Uh and that's what the charges are. So now we're going now we're going to respond and uh and that's where we're at today. So again, has nothing to do with place anyone else's name in it. John Smith has an IUP. John Smith potentially violated his IUP conditions. John Smith would come before this council to to have those conditions addressed. So, um I think at the very least if we if we don't hold our IUP um holders accountable to the conditions that they agreed to, then why would anyone follow any of the conditions? Any discussions? >> Jacob, you heard this. What do you think? What are your feelings? >> Mr. Mayor, council, I think that Mr. Lucas summarized the procedure in front of you very succinctly. At the end of the day, this is a public hearing related to the compliance of the conditions of the interim use permit. And so your task is to give staff direction or to take action as to what to do with regard to the alleged non-compliance. Well, I'll start. I'll make a motion to revoke the IUP. >> We have a motion. We got a second. I'll make the second just for discussion. I have a motion second. All in favor or discussion? All in favor, I should say. >> All in favor? I >> I. >> No, there's we're we're in discussion right now. Not >> Oh, okay. >> Yeah, that's right. Um, I'm I'm just going to say I think Tammy does have a heart for animals and I can appreciate that. I think um but I also think that through the years she's not taken the heart of the animals owners into consideration. um which led to multiple violations which led to this gross misdemeanor of a violation and we just people have to follow the rules. I am I I think this is a hard thing for me to have done, but I am um in favor of following the rules and following the IUPs. And I think it's extremely important that um the stipulations and IUPs be adhered to. And I'm also going to say in the past I've taken dogs, stray dogs in from that have wandered onto my property and I've called the owners and they've given me their address. I've taken them to the owners. I have um posted it on Facebook and next door. I have um walked around, knocked door to door, asked people if they knew who the dog was and found the owners to dogs. So, I think that's something all community people should be doing, trying to find the owners of dogs and not charge the owners either. Uh, Jacob or Mr. a look. Um, these the potential violations that are put in here are based upon the sheriff's investigation and the current court case is correct. >> On this sheet here, yes. >> Yes. Uh, so and as it is right now, it's currently in court. >> That's correct. So my my question is depending on how the court case works out if we pull the IUP but it's been found that these counts are dis are dismissed and these core cases are dismissed what does that do to the basis of this evidence? Mr. Mr. Mayor and Council, as I as I indicated on the back on May 15th, I do not believe the two are related in the sense that this is not going to impact a court decision. The court is about obstruction of legal process. I I'm not an attorney, but um theft and obstruction of legal process. So essentially saying, I'm going to hide evidence that you need is an obstruction of legal process. I'm not saying she did that. I'm just just using that as a hypothetical. Okay. Um if they determine that that's accurate or not or if she's guilty of that or not. I mean that's that has nothing to do with uh conditions five and nine. >> But we're based in >> this investigation, the sheriff's investigation for >> right because the sheriff was not able to identify any dogs on the property. So they had been removed in violation of five uh in the violation of nine ini in item number five. It says the city's designated inspector which would be Nick. >> Okay. And all other personnel please please no comments. It says the city's designated inspector and all other personnel under the direction and control of the city. That is the sheriff. We have a contract with the sheriff. We're We have control of what they do within our city. We pay them for it handsomely. We just looked at the budget tonight. Um so yes, they have they have certainly our our blessing to go in and inspect if inspection is necessary. And in the case of uh of prosecution uh or an investigation, it's absolutely necessary for them to conduct their work. And to obstruct that is probably not something I would do or anyone else should do, but um it's certainly a breaking of the law if they if found guilty in doing so. But that has nothing to do with whether the dogs were there or not. We know they're not they weren't there cuz they they couldn't find them. And there's seven days, not 12-hour nose, there's seven days of trying to get a hold of this individual and get in there and gain access. had to go get a warrant at the expense of the taxpayers. So, I don't know how else to Yes, it's based off the the findings which is a public document. Um, yeah. Jacob, do you have anything to add? >> Uh, Mr. Mayor, Council, uh, I really don't. I'll just reiterate that the standard of review for a criminal charge is different than the standard of review here for the municipal decision. And so you really are looking at whether or not there have been any violations of the conditions of the IUP that can be satisfied uh by the findings that have been put forward. Uh but you have within your discretion to evaluate whether or not the IUP has been violated. You know, I apologize for sounding technocratic in my response, but I don't want to make a decision for you or push you one way or the other. Simply to say that the statement of probable cause included in the staff report uh does appear to include findings that may or may not have in indicated whether a violation of the IUP occurred. And the decision as to whether it occurred or not is yours alone. And that has no bearing on whether or not a court will find criminal conviction for the same behavior. >> Okay. Thank you, Jacob. >> Any other discussion? So, we got five and nine which actually turned into 4B. the there is a non-compliance of the I conditions for permit will be expired. So if we accept five and nine permit can be expired for the non-compliance under 4B >> and revocation would be that vehicle to remove it. >> Right. Sheriff is considered an inspector through the city. Any further discussions? We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? >> I >> I >> opposed. Motion passes. immediately. >> There's generally 30 days to >> 30 days. public forum. >> Uh Isabelle Martin Now, she's going to reapply for an IUP. It needs to be addressed. There cannot be any boarding there. If she's boarding, she's operating illegally. It's not down there as one of the violations. It's the biggest violation. It says in the ordinances that you can there is no way around that. If she's going to be boarding, it's considered a commercial panel. Period. No instrument or device can be pinned to change that. So that needs to be brought into consideration when you go to reissue the IUP. The boarding has got to stop. >> Is there anybody else on this list of the public form that still wants stock? >> You said it's usually 30 days. Um her other actually had in their 30 days. This one does not. This IP does not say that there's a time limit once it's revoked. If it's revoked, it's revoked. This should be revoked immediately, not 30 days from now. And remember, if she does reapply, you have planning and zoning meetings where she actually said that she got her Bed boarding permit in 2009. You need to keep that in mind. You know, to say, I get why you went with the sheriff's department. What I don't understand is how you all can sit there and have ignored all the complaints over the last eight years. Some of you are new, some of you are not. Anybody else on the public forum list? Um, I'm here to talk about um, Councilwoman Urkel's comments following the tragic June 14th shooting. Um, they were factually incorrect and deeply callous. To imply that Melissa Hortman and John Hoffman were attacked because of a vote they made is danger dangerously misleading. To claim they were attacked because of these actions is irresponsible and inflammatory. >> I'm sorry. Can you can you identify yourself? >> I'm sorry. Katie, last name is T E R H E L L. Sorry. >> And your address? I'm sorry. >> Yep. 13418 Crooked Lake Boulevard Northwest. Um >> that's a city band. >> Yes. Sorry. Yep. Andover. Um so during the council woman's comments online and during the over five minute public statement at the last council meeting, she never actually said she was sorry or apologized. Um you shifted the blame to other people. Um you never took accountability for your words. Um and it's super important that you do. Um, you failed to directly acknowledge how your comments may have hurt others or contribute to misinformation or fear. Your words can create fear, especially for those who knew the victims personally. My own parents had dinner with the Hoffman's that night. The Hortman's had also attended that same event. My parents dropped the Hoffmans off at their home that evening, and as a result, the Noa County Sheriff placed two units at my parents home. The fear we felt was real. And while I don't believe that you intended to hurt or intended to cause harm, words like that can inspire others, violence on others. Um the f so after that meeting um you shared a um the counciloman Urkl shared a video to her Facebook page that was very disturbing as well. Um among other things that were mentioned it accused Governor Walls of pedophilia and called for his execution. By sharing this you contributed to the same toxic ecosystem that radicalized the man who carried out the attacks on June 14th. Sharing this type of content isn't harmless. It's it normalizes violence and turns conspiracy into moral obligation for unstable individuals. A true apology doesn't come with justification. It's very simple. I'm sorry. I was wrong. I hurt people and I take responsibility. Um, you there hasn't been no accountability shown. She's been defended by fellow council members, had her words minimized, and been shielded from criticism, even by the city administrator, who falsely claimed that this was all orchestrated by known DFL operatives. That kind of gaslighting is an insult to every concerned resident and makes the entire council look like a bunch of partisan hacks, which I don't believe that you are. Um, the words were the comments were harmful. The follow-up was worse and the Facebook activity revealed that this wasn't being taken seriously. To be very clear, public politically motivated violence is real. Spreading conspiracies creating creates real danger and elected officials should be held to a higher standard. As someone whose family is deeply connected to the victims, I urge this council to stop dismissing our pain, our fear, and our very real concerns. And also, I I apologize if for the threats that you received. That shouldn't happen either. Um I'm sorry that that happened to you. So, thank you. All right, moving on. Uh, consent agenda. >> Make a motion to approve the consent agenda as presented. >> Anybody pull in anything? I want to pull seat. Do we have to do something with those minutes that was on our table? This >> which meeting was uh June 23rd work meeting. So that be item B. >> Okay. So item B and C are being pulled. Is this submitted by you or by city attorney? Okay, >> I submitted that, Mr. Mundle. Just um upon review and looking back at the the record, I wanted to make clear um while I said too many words that uh it left the door open to the full point of discussion I made. >> Okay, I'll I'll pull item B for that correction. So, we have a motion >> and I'd like to I'll make a sec second, but I'd like to pull D, E, F, and H. >> D, F. All right, I have a motion and a second with the rest of them. All All in favor? >> I opposed. None. >> Item B. Make a motion to approve item B with the changes that were submitted by the city attorney Jacobs. Hopefully second. >> We have a motion second. Any discussion? None being heard. All in favor? >> I >> I >> opposed. None. Motion passes. Item C. >> On a table the minutes for item C. I went through the minutes. There's a lot of corrections that need to be there and I didn't have time to label every one of them. So, I will do that. So, I want to make a motion to table item C. >> Second. >> Have a motion. Second, discussion. None being heard. All in favor? >> I opposed. None heard. Item D. >> Item D. I got a call on this and there's a misunderstanding. So, I just want to clarify. This is um pretty much a promotion of a public works position, not a new a whole new position. That's correct. Right. >> Right. >> Okay. >> So, going moving from grade six to grade seven. >> Correct. So, it's not a new position. It's a promotion of a current employee, which is welld deserved. With that, I'll make a motion to approve item D of the consent agenda. >> Second. Motion second. Any discussion? >> None being heard. All those in favor? >> I opposed. None. Motion passes. A E. Item E is I just want to bring it to everybody's attention because I know everybody doesn't read what's on all the consent agenda items, but this is for a um zipline at Booster Park that's going to come sooner than later. They're moving it up to 2025 instead of 2026. So, I'm excited for the zipline on um at Booster Park and I just want all of our public people to know about it because it's exciting. With that, I'll make a motion to approve item E. >> Second. >> We have a motion. Second. Any discussion? None being heard. All in favor? >> I. >> Item F. Item F is for a lift gate and um I just wanted to know what it takes to put it from one vehicle to another because I think this said you can flip it from vehicle to vehicle. How is that an electronic procedure or is it uh manual? I It's something I kind of wish there were pictures for this one. Good evening again, council. Um, so this is a sometimes called a Tommy gate. It's a tailgate lift to help save the backs of employees lifting heavy objects into the back of the tailgate. It bolts onto the back of the truck. You take the tailgate off, it replaces the tailgate. Um, there's some wiring to run for the electronics to run the hydraulic cylinders and stuff on there, but it can be removed from truck to truck. We're paying for the initial installation by the company, and then if we change it to a different vehicle, we we'll do that ourselves. And I mean, how long would it take to transfer it? I is it uh complicated or is it just something that kind of snaps off, snaps back on? >> Bolted on some wiring. They could probably do in a day. >> A day. Okay. >> Our staff, >> I was just curious how this whole thing worked because I don't think I've seen them before. With that, I'll make a motion to approve item F on the consent agenda. >> I second. >> Have a motion. Second. Any discussion? None being here. heard. All those in favor? >> I opposed. Motion passes. >> And item H is for approval of a application for a raffle permit. And is this because it's considered gambling that we need to do this? And what does TVF stand for? >> Be a good question for Carrie. I'm not sure what that exactly stands for. >> Oh, okay. Well, maybe she could get back to me because it's probably not important, but it's a nonprofit, but I just wanted to know which nonprofit it was. With that, I'll >> I can get that back. I can get that for you. >> Item H with a consent agenda. >> Second. >> I have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? >> None being heard. All those in favor? I >> motion passes. Okay. Item 7 A1 variance Elvage commercial. Good evening, Mayor Council. This is a variance request for a development monument sign at the Elvage EB second edition subdivision outlaw A. Alec Jensen of Elage Development Group is the applicant for this variance request. This variance is for the location of a development monument sign within 20 ft of public rightway on Outlaw A in the Elage subdivision uh for the Sand Hill Parkway town homes. Uh this lot is located east of Sand Hill Parkway and north of 189th Lane. This property is zoned and guided mixed use. The surrounding properties are guided and zoned the same. Uh for some greater context here, this is uh west of Highway 65 and uh the Viking or this is east of Highway 65 and the Viking Meadow subdivision is to the north of this property. Uh this lot is 5.61 acres. Uh and it is an outlot. As a reminder, an outlot is a parcel of land that is part of a subdivision but is yet to be subdivided into lots and blocks. So it will need to be platted in order to be developed. According to section 12-1C of the code, outlots are unbuildable. Um so a condition of approval of this variance would be that city council is authorizing the applicant to build this development monument sign on this lot. Uh outlaw A has been identified as a place for commercial development in the future, but staff is unaware of any current plans to plat and develop this site at the moment. The request is to allow the placement of a development monument sign 3 feet from the property line along Sand Hill Parkway Northeast and 4T 10 in from the property line along 189th Lane. Um, this variance is necessary because the city code requires that development monument signs be placed at least 20 ft from the public ride. That's the justification for this variance request. Um, as seen on the site plan below, um, this monument sign is situated behind the property line. The property line itself is about 20 ft from the curb. Um, so the development monument sign would have to be 40 ft from the curb to comply with the zoning code. Um, this is an encroachment of approximately 17 ft uh to Sandhill Parkway and 15 ft to 189th Lane. It is worth noting that this sign is outside of the 30-foot traffic visibility triangle that staff uses to assess whether uh a item near the corner of an intersection will be in the way of drivers looking to turn or uh move at that intersection. Uh so this is outside of that site visibility triangle and should not impede visibility. Um also not pictured on the site plan is that there that there is a utility easement 10 ft west uh and extending 10 ft west and 10 ft east of the fire hydrant. um towards and away from Sand Hill Parkway. The city engineer has stated that the proposed location of this sign will be out of that easement. A condition of approval of this variance is that this easement or if this easement or right ofway were needed to be extended at some point in the future and the sign were need to be removed or moved, um that cost would be charged to the applicant and not the city. Uh staff has worked with the applicant to look at the possibility of reorienting the sign to possibly reduce this encroachment. Uh but the applicant has stated that the position of the sign will allow it to be seen by drivers going north and south on Sand Hill Parkway and that is the applicant's preferred position. Uh they did not submit alternate plans. This is a quick look at the sign. It is quite standard for development of the scale um that this one is. It meets all the sign standards established in our sign ordinance. Uh it would be double-sided for visibility again for drivers going both north and south on Sand Hill Parkway. When reviewing a variance, the burden of proof is on the applicant to show that they have a practical difficulty that can only be remedied by the granting of a variance. Staff uses three standards to review a variance request. Uh these are known as the practical difficulties test. Uh the first is that the request is reasonable. So the applicant is uh proposing to use the property in a way that is sensible but just not authorized by the code. The second is that the circumstances are unique to the property and not caused by the land owner that are requiring this variance application. This is often things like sloping topography, the pres presence of a wetland or the sighting of a septic system um that limit the applicant's ability to use their property. The third is that the variance if granted will not have a negative impact on negative on on neighborhood character. um you know the variance won't make something look out of place or out of scale in the area. Uh the finding of findings of fact have been included for each of the three standards um within your packet. Planning commission reviewed this item at a public hearing on June 24th. A member of the development team was able to speak to the item and no other public comments were received. The planning commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the variance request. At the recommendation of the planning commission, uh the recommendation is for the city council to move to adopt the resolution approving the variance for the location of a development monument signed on outlaw A of Elvage EB second edition. Council may modify the draft resolution uh with any conditions that you see fit. I'm happy to answer questions. >> See, I do have one question, Grace. I'm looking at the uh page 70 of the packet that shows the placement. >> Yes. One moment. >> Okay. I'm not sure if I'm able to switch that over, but I see it. >> Okay. Um so we have from 189th lane we have uh shows a 20ft marker from the curb then 4T 10 to the monument uh to sandill we have 20 ft from the curb and 3 ft to the monument. So would that total 23 ft and 24 ft 10 in? >> Yes, those are the distances from the curb. The property line is set back about 20 ft from the curb. Okay, so that's the difference. >> Okay, thank you, Grace. >> So I have a question. So, because we don't have actual photographs of what this would look like um in real time, if it gets put up and it's not it's impeding some vision or it's um just one of us finds something wrong with it, are they going to relocate it so that it would fit or is this set in stone once we approve it. >> So, the variance would grant the applicant permission to locate the sign um where it is noted in the resolution. Um I correct me if I'm wrong um city attorney, but I don't believe that um we can move the sign based on direction from the council after a variance has been granted. Um but we have mechanisms in place to review um whether something would be out of place or cause cause harm, impede visibility, anything like that. One of these things is that 30foot sight visibility triangle that we use when we uh look at uh visibility around intersections. The sign is well outside of that triangle. So we can pretty safely say it's not going to um impair how drivers see that that intersection. Mr. Mayor, council, I'll step in just quick to clarify that when you grant a variance, you are granting that variance without regard to what the item actually looks like. And so, um, depending upon the way the variance resolution is drafted, you might be determining a specific location for the item or you might be considering a general range of where that item could be located. And so it it does depend on the the specific language of the resolution as to whether you're looking for an alignment that goes perpendicular or parallel with Highway 65. Um with regard to what does the sign look like, uh you certainly could you when we look at site plan, you might request elevations of proposed signage um facing. Um that's not provided here that I know of, but that's part of the toolbox that that is available. I was out to the site the other day and I looked at it where they're going to place it. I think it's fine. It's going to be in a great place for people can see both ways. That's all I got. >> So there's no uh vision impairment? >> Not at all that I could see. They don't have a lot of choices. What about considering the people's homes there? Is it going to I mean if somebody looks out their window, is that going to be all they see once all the homes are built? >> It it shouldn't be because the way they they're placing it there. It's out by the road by Sand Hill Crane big time. So the the houses that are being built or the town houses set back quite a ways. So, they shouldn't be able to really see it. They'll see the end end of it. Actually, unless they're on the very south side, they might be able to see the sign possibly. >> Is this where those big rocks are? >> No, that's where uh Mikey Meadows sign. This is south of there. >> Grace, can you pull up the image of the the sign? Um, on the layout it shows the sign is 15 ft by 2 feet 8 in. So rounded up to 3 ft. Is that what uh the dimensions show on this? >> Um yeah, staff during our review we um did do the math to make sure that the site plan and the sign um that was submitted um are consistent. So the the sign will only be call it 3 ft tall. >> Uh the height of the sign >> my apologies. I cannot see my screen very well. Um >> way out to the left there. >> Yeah, it's way out to the left there. >> It's way out to the left. >> You got to zoom in on it or something. >> One moment. My apologies. I'm having some trouble pulling that up. Um, >> there we go. >> There we go. Sorry about that. Um >> say 6' 7 in on that side. Um yes the the sign itself so our code is written in a way where we consider um this middle part to be the sign. Um these are not a part of the sign according to our code. Um >> okay. >> Yes. >> Plus you have a brick pier on each side also. sign will fit in between. >> So, it's not a huge huge flashing sign out there that should distract from >> No. >> No. Yeah. It's only 6' uh 7 in tall. So, >> okay. >> And it's how far off the ground? I can't see those numbers. >> It is. Let's zoom in further. It's about two feet off the ground according to this. Okay. All right. I'm good with it. >> Is it illuminated in any way? Is there a light single light on it or anything? >> Uh there is not. Um it's noted in the site plan and the uh developers noting that there's not. >> So, do we have a motion on this yet? No. >> All right. I'll make a motion to approve the variance. Let's bring it up. Second that. Uh so approve the variance for placement of development sign within 20 ft of public right away for property located out outlot a Elvage East Bethl second edition. >> Second. >> Have a motion. Second. Any further discussion? >> Hearing none. All those in favor? >> I >> opposed. None. Motion passes. Item uh 7 A2. Tom or Pino. Uh this is a uh variance request for front yard setback reduction at 239 Aspen Road Northeast. Uh Tom Babino is the applicant for this variance request. Uh this uh variance is to reduce the front yard setback for a new home construction at 239 Aspen Road. This property is zoned and guided Lake within the Shorland Overlay District. Um this property is the western edge of this property is approximately 45 ft from the shore of Lake. So it is quite close to that shoreline. Uh the surrounding properties are guided and zoned the same. This is a 4.2 acre through lot with frontage along Aspen Road and Lakeshore Drive. Uh the home would face Aspen Road. The applicant is proposing to demolish an existing home and accessory structures which are in poor condition to build a new single family home on this property. The request is to allow a front yard setback of 15 feet along Aspen Road. This variance request um is uh was applied for because our code requires a front setback of 25 ft within the shoreland overlay district for pro properties zoned Lake. Uh the survey for this site and the site plan is provided below. Um, for some greater context or a greater view at that, um, the garage portion of the home would be 15 feet from that property line along Aspen Road, while the rest of the structure would be 23 ft from Aspen Road, which is more in line with that 25 ft uh, standard that the code establishes. Uh, the well is located in the northeast corner of the lot and the septic site is located to the south of the proposed home. The applicant has been working with our building official to resolve concerns about soil compaction around the septic site. Uh the lot does have a significant slope towards the lake. Staff has found that there's an approximate grade of 30% um going towards that lake. Uh the proposed structure does meet all of the other setback requirements within the zoning district. For example, it is 35.7 ft from that rear property line where 25 ft is required and it is 77.3 ft from the ordinary high water level where 75 ft is required. The structure also meets the 25% or it's below the 25% threshold for imperous surface within that shoreland overlay district. Uh since this property is within that overlay district and so close to the lake, it has been sent to the DNR for comment. Uh to which the DNR replied stating that they did not have comments on this site. Similar to the previous variance, the burden of proof is on the applicant to show that they have a practical difficulty that can only be remedied through the granting of a variance. Those three standards for practical diff difficulties are first that the request is reasonable. Second that the request is due to unique circumstances on the property that are not caused by the landowner. And the third is that the variance if granted will not have a negative impact on neighborhood character. Findings of fact for each of the three standards have been provided within your packet. This variance request was reviewed at the June 24th planning commission meeting and a public hearing was held. Uh during the public hearing, uh one neighbor spoke um um one neighbor spoke uh with a comment from another uh neighboring property owner with a concern about the sideyard setback for this property. As noted before, um this home does meet that sideyard setback and the applicant was present to have that discussion with the uh with the neighbor at that public hearing. uh the public or the planning commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the variance request as uh written or variance uh resolution as written. Uh therefore uh the city council recommendation is to move to adopt the resolution approving the variance for a front sub setback reduction for a principal structure at 239 Aspen Road Northeast as recommended by the planning commission. Uh this resolution may be modified as the council sees fit. I'm happy to answer any questions. I will make a motion to approve resolution number 2025-43 granting a variance from section 51-7 subdivision B of the city zoning ordin ordinance for the location of a principal structure within 25 ft of a front property line on a property located at 239 Aspen Road northeast pin 36-33-23-22-000093 Three. >> Have a motion. Do you have a second? >> Second. >> Further discussion. >> I just got one question, Grace. The house, the garage, and then that little shed, they're all going to go, right? They're taking all of it out over there. >> Uh, yes, I believe. Um, there is one existing building that will be remaining, but that is a um that's a legal non-conforming structure, so that is allowed to remain on the site. So, that little shed's going to stay. >> Um, I believe last I talked with the applicant. Yes, >> cuz I was out there and there was a garage and a house and a little shed. >> Yes, the um the existing building towards the uh towards the lake will remain, but the garage, the house, and then the uh building to the north, I believe, will be will be gone. >> That's it. >> Any further discussion? Have a motion and a second. All those in favor? >> I I >> opposed. Motion passes. Item 73, zoning text amendment. >> Good evening, mayor, council. Uh this is the zoning text amendment for the barnaminiums. Earlier this year, we met three times to work through the ordinance and develop an ordinance that the council was comfortable with. You then directed us to send it back to or down to the planning commission to hold the public hearing. The planning commission at their June meeting held the public hearing, had a robust discussion on this item. They made one change to the draft that the planning commission or excuse me that the council had sent them and that was to uh include ai a condition that would allow uh 16 ft sidewall height for barnaminiums on parcels of 5 acres or more. And their feeling was that people who are building these are building them because they have either large uh um RVs or equipment or uh home occupation and that rather than coming in with a variance, they felt that that should be built into the ordinance itself. Uh there was significant discussion about the minimum lot size as part of that and ultimately they uh settled on the 5 acre minimum lot size for that larger sidewall height. No other changes to the draft that you saw at your uh March last March meeting. And this draft ordinance or number 25-03 uh was recommended approval uh by the planning commission unanimously with that one change. because you've looked at it so many times, I'm not doing the full review, but happy to talk more about any specific items that you um prepared for the draft. >> So, the 16 foot's just for the garage part or the whole building. >> It's a 16 foot sidewall height for the whole building as currently uh drafted as recommended by the the planning commission. It allows uh under the code everyone is allowed a 14 foot sidewall height and they just felt that the nature of the type of things that would happen if someone wanted to build a barnaminium. They felt like that was a way to avoid a variance process. So if somebody with who bought three acres and wanted to build a twostory barn dominium, they couldn't do it. >> You could not. >> Oh, >> in terms of the sidewall height, I mean, there's certain >> This is intended for the sidewall of the garage. The if if you did a twotory house, yes, you could do that. So that you need a taller sidewall to allow for a larger garage door so that you can fit an RV in. Right now in our code, they're maxed at 14 ft. >> I understand that. But when I'm thinking of the pictures that we saw barn dominiums and some some of them look like they had two stories to them um >> and that would be more than 14 feet. And I would think somebody with three acres should be able to build a four a twotory barnaminium if they want to have a loft or something like that. >> You you would. This is just for the garage. >> No, it's for the whole thing. Any part of it is what she's saying. >> Yeah, I think we should probably That's a great point that did not come up at the planning commission while we were doing this. and and so I think um >> to just clarify that to your point in the packet there are twostory homes and those um uh homes are going to exceed a 14t sidewall height. So I think um what I I'm just trying to think of this >> this would just be a variance then on a three acre if they wanted to do that. Uh correct. On anything less than five acres, the taller sidewall height would be a variance. But in terms of the >> depending on depending on the numbers that would come through, that may not be that many, but we could certainly accommodate a request. >> We could simply put in uh 16t garage sidewall height. >> Uh building sidewall heights are fine for two stories or whatever. >> I don't agree with that. You can come in, you could have two acres and you could have 16 foot sidewalls. It doesn't matter. >> It'll fit right on there perfectly. I don't want to limit our residents for coming in and have to get a variance for something that you don't need. If they want to build 16 foot sidewalls, I have no issues with that. >> Yeah, just to be clear, right now it's 14, >> right? But I don't want to limit it to five acres. Then we're going to have people coming in. I mean, those barnominiums are really cool. The way they build them, they're super looking. So, I don't want to have our residents to have to put up with comfort varants for this or that. >> And our rural residential lots are around 2 acres. So, it's not right. >> Exactly. Question for the attorney. Can they make that change right here without going back through planning? >> We're holding a public hearing. >> I can defer to Kendra, but happy to answer if uh I was just going to say I don't it doesn't have to go back to planning commission, but I'm a little nervous about doing it on the fly because I want to think about unintended consequences. I think, you know, initially I was thinking we could modify just the footnote in the in the table, but I feel like we should probably get the direction. And as much as I hesitate to do this, revise it and bring it back to you. I I'm just not I think do we all want 16 ft sidewall heights for barnaminiums? because then I think I might not change the table and I might take the asterisk off and uh put it somewhere under the general regulations for barnaminiums maybe on page 95 or something if it's all barnaminiums can have a 16 foot sidewall height that is a little bit different than this table I think >> I have no problem >> I think they should be able to be two stories if somebody wants an upstairs they should be to have an upstairs a loft or whatever. >> I agree. And it should be >> two acres at least, not not five. >> Right. >> So, the uh we had some just so I'm hearing you, we had discussion in the past at the council and again at the planning commission about our barnaminiums allowed on any size property and we didn't put a minimum lot size for barnaminiums. So, right now we're just talking about allowing that larger sidewall height for a barnaminium if it's at least two acres is what I think I'm hearing. I just want to make sure the whole council's >> No. >> Well, if if some if this people who just bought this lot on Lake and they're going to build a two-story house, why can't they have a two-story barnaminium? I mean, if we approved that before, it we should be consistent and continuous. So, just to clarify, the intent of this is the sidewall height for the garage portion of the barnaminium, not the the home portion. >> That's what the point I was trying to make. >> Yeah. So, if you look at page 10 >> wrong >> six >> 16t wall doesn't matter, not just the garage. I don't want to limit it to to that. >> Yeah. I'm not being very clear. I guess the code right now only limits sidewall height for the accessory building portion, the garage portion. There's no limit to the sidewall house height on a living space. You have a building height for living space, but you have for accessory buildings, a sidewall height, whether detached or attached. >> Let's just make it 16 ft then. If it has to be a sidewall for the garage 16 >> Y to 16 feet two acres or if that's what you want. >> Yeah. >> Right. That's what I thought I was hearing from some of you was. >> Yeah. I was misunderstanding you. >> Yeah. The sidewall height for the garage portion you want to be 16 feet >> up to up to 16 feet. >> Yeah. Up to 16 feet as opposed to 14 which it is now. on I'm this is where I'm kind of losing you guys. On all lot any lot size >> what >> on two acres or more >> planning commission said five but >> under two acres even it's like I got 1.84 need four. I could put one of them on there easy. Tear my house down, redo the whole thing. I think we're making a big deal out of nothing. We're having restrictions on our residents that we don't need to do in my opinion. So, I mean, it could be >> could be any come to any development, they're all different, so it doesn't matter. That's my opinion of it. >> I don't have a problem with that. any. >> So the question is Kendra, do you want to write something up and bring it back to us so that it clarifies the language? >> Okay. >> Or can we modify it right here? >> Let's just do it now. >> Yeah. You're >> ridiculous. >> When you do things on the fly, sometimes you have unintended consequences. So I'm the >> thing is if I did >> stuff had to think about it 50 times I would never get nothing done. So I mean you can ask for forgiveness if you need to. But it's like this is ridiculous. It's like two years of working on this. If it would have been done with Mr. Miller's first thing we would have been done already. But Aaron Berg stuck his nose in there and he kept changing stuff. So it's like enough is enough. Um, okay. So, if you want to do something tonight, here's what I'd suggest you do. On page 97, again, God bless. I I think this will work. Uh, the two asterisks I would change to say for barn miniums on 2 acres or more, 16t sidewall is permitted for the accessory building portion of the structure. >> We don't want it to be two acres or more. We want it Oh, you don't want any acreage. >> Yeah. No, because >> for barnaminiums, a 16 foot sidewall height is permitted for the accessory building portion of the structure. >> There you go. >> Is that the direction? >> Yes. >> Make a motion. Then I would recommend approval of ordinance 253. With that change uh on page 97 of the staff report, >> like to make a motion that we approve uh 253 with the changes on page 97 as discussed. >> Second. >> We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? None being heard. All those in favor? >> I I opposed. Motion passes. >> Done. Done. >> Item 8E. Looks like we're emergency backup generator. >> I'll be abstaining from this item. Item 8.01. This is an emergency backup generator and transfer switch for wells one and two. Um, right now the city has emergency backup power for wells three and four. It's been identified in a few emergency management plans and our department of health review that we have emergency backup power for wells one and two which serve the northern portion of the city. Um, if we were to lose power there, it's just kind of like your home with a pressure tank. You you have whatever's left in that pressure tank and then the water supplies is gone. So, we applied for a $10,000 source water protection grant and and we're awarded that. The issue we have up up there, though, is that there's two services that run the water portion. There's a 480 volt service that runs the actual wells and then there's a 120 volt service that runs some of the auxiliary stuff, the chemical pumps, the um fluoride chlorine pumps that are required in order to treat the water before we can deliver it. So, we looked at a couple different options. We got two quotes. One was to put in one single transfer switch with a transformer um to to scale it down from 480 to 120. We'd run everything with one transfer switch and one one generator. That cost came in at $40,000. So with the $10,000 grant, we'd still be on the hook for $30,000. Another option we found was to maybe just do two transfer switches with two smaller generators. Um so the transfer switch for that for both of them was around $12,000. $12,279. So, with the grant money, we would be on the hook for $2,279 to get that first portion set up. Um, I guess what I'm looking for tonight is a approval to go ahead with that portion of it. Once that part is done, we can apply for the actual grants that cover the generator themselves. with the um cheaper two two transfer switch opt option. Um the generator total cost was uh $52,680. So if we were to get those other two grants for 20,000, we'd have to pay 42 uh $32,000 on top of that for the grant. >> And that's coming out of our general fund. >> This is coming out of the water fund. So this is the fund that's enterprise fund from sack wack or wack charges and water users. >> So the users are actually paying for it. >> Yes. Yeah. >> It's the cheapest option we found. We we've looked at this before trying to funding it ourselves. If we're able to get $30,000 um to help help pay for it, I think it's a good idea if if we want to go that route. >> Yeah. I appreciate you're finding grants because that's a >> and we're not guaranteed the 20,000 but it sounds like once we're in the pipeline they don't they want to see the product the um project finished. So we get we'll score highly for the competitive process and from people we've talked to it's not guaranteed but it's almost guaranteed. So >> So this is just at the community building. >> This is run wells one and two on the north part. Correct. >> Do we have something there now? >> There's there's no backup power there now. And we wouldn't be able to power the whole building. This is just to run the well system of it with these generators. They would have to move a couple items over to a different panel in there. That's included in their quote, too. So, so we'd get a out the door. We'd have a $64,000 project. We'd get 30,000 undercover with grants. Hopefully cost the city $34,000. We'd have a little bit of cost running some gas line. And we have to run natural gas lines to the to the generators and then our staff would do the cement pad work ourselves. >> The generators just sit outside then >> they're outside generators. Yep. It'd be two two different size gener. But um the negative is we have two generators to take care of and going down and you know in the future we have to change oil on two generators. But it's uh what $70,000 cheaper to go that route up front. Worst case scenario, we do the transfer switch cost us $2,000. We don't get the grants and we just the project installed right there. So, we we come back to the council with the generator portion later once we apply for those grants if we're successful. So, there's still a chance to pull a plug on the project at that point, too. So, How many homes does Wells one and two serve? >> Uh there are >> you know off the top of your head up there >> right now. It's also going to have 21 acres will have more homes and possibly the capacity of those wells is equal to what we have on the south end. So you could you could have the whole area could be developed at some point based on those two wells. >> Do these wells cover the trailer court too or not? >> They have their own private well in there still. >> Okay. >> We do have a connection to them. They had some issues in the past with their well. We can turn that on for them. We charged them for a while whether they used our water while they were fixing their well, but they're on their own private well still right now. >> So, how long have we been doing this without generators? >> 200 >> four >> well four back in 1985. >> If you go back to the original wells Yeah. Really? So, I guess my question is what brought it up now that we need them? >> Uh, the emergency management plan and the Department of Health review of our of our water supply >> state. Is that state stuff? >> Yeah. Yeah. We've been looking at it for a couple years. We got quotes back in 2023, but we didn't have any grant money at that time. So, was too expensive to handle all. >> So, if we approve this and we don't get the grant money, then we just wait on the generator part, >> right? So, we'd have the transfer switch in place. we'd be out whatever $2,279, but the transfer switches would be in there ready to go. Well, I'll make a motion to in uh approve the installation of a transfer switch along the with the acceptance of the grant. Do I need to add the and the purchase of a generator? Authorized to apply for the remaining grants would be fine for now. >> And authorized to apply for the remaining grants. >> Second that. >> Have a motion and a second. Any discussion? So, we're approving the second option. >> Cheaper option. >> Yeah. Second option with uh >> uh go ahead with to go for the grants. Okay. All right. No further discussion. All those in favor? >> I I opposed. Motion passes. Thank you. >> I heard the fire station floor is on board. >> Yeah. Mr. Mayor and council members, we would ask that you um make a motion to postpone the discussion on the fire station project until the date certain, which would be the 28th. We'll have information back. There was some question as to the um uh warranty. We've had some issues in the past with cracking and so we want to make sure we get a accurate warranty on what this is going to be. Um >> that's what I say because the three contractors only one that's given a warranty. It's 25 years. >> Yeah, they all have a warranty one or twoear warranty. The other one was 25. Turns out it's >> uh 25 for residential, >> not commercial. So there was some miscommunication there and they're we're going back to them to say okay if you're not you know we'd like you to honor that but if you're not going to what you know what are you going to do and and we may consider other options. So >> good idea. >> Okay I'll make a motion to table this till further >> second. Have a motion second. Any further discussion? None being heard. All those in favor I >> I opposed passes. city administrator. >> Uh Mr. Mayor and council members, we have been talking a little bit about this uh digitizing of information in our in our files. Uh I know staff is very excited about trying to get a lot of this secured into a format that will preserve it for many years to come. Um I was approached by uh Anoka County um regional economic development and they had a request from two individuals uh that needed to complete internships um for their four-year degree. Uh we met with one gentleman and um did not hear back from the other one. Uh George Angala Angaga sorry um is uh very very interested in this project. Um the project of course is learning kind of all documents you know for properties whether it's septics or whatever the case may be. Um he's going to be processing that and and and digitizing it and and format formatting it into files for us and um he comes with a a strong background in computers. So he's um he's actually very interested in hitting the ground running. Um, we have an interest to have somebody come in on an temporary basis or an internship basis of less than 6 months so that we're not required to provide uh benefits. And um and we're proposing a recommended $15 an hour for this person. This person would help uh coordinate volunteers if there were some that would become available. um they would kind of be over managing the project and then Carrie Frost would oversee them as well. And we kind of it's that um you know you know it takes the first step of a journey of a thousand miles. I mean you got to you got to get this thing started. You have to um you have to start getting this information um in a usable format. And um and this gentleman seems very excited. He lives in Fidley, I believe. So not not too far away from us. Uh he goes to school in St. Cloud. So um this will be a project that would help help him complete his requirement uh for his schooling and um and help us in a kind of a special project need that we have. So bring this before you if that's um if that's uh something you guys would like to consider. We just look for a motion on that. I'll make a motion to approve the hire of this intern. >> Second. >> Have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? >> Yes. Um, what are his is he going to be working Monday through Friday, eight hours a day, or is it flexible? How how is this going to be? Is he in school during the summer or is he off in the summer? I have a lot of questions. >> Yeah. So my understanding um um is that uh he has a summers off and that um he has to finish this project as the final piece of his four-year degree. So um I'm I'm going to somewhat leave it up to him to decide how many what sort of schedule he wants. Obviously it has to be during office hours so that he can have some oversight. Um but um but I I would assume that he's probably gonna work as many hours as he can to get this done and uh and meet that requirement. Um we haven't nailed it down specifically of you know you know do you just want to work Monday, Wednesday, Friday? Do you want to work you know Monday through through Friday type of thing. But um I think I think we'll we'll be able to once he gets started and once we get that process and understand the timing, we have estimates right now what we think it'll take for time, but we haven't done it yet. So, uh once we start actually digging into this project, we'll be able to understand how efficient he can be, what systems can be set up, um and um and that'll help dictate, I think, the hours that he he'll need to put in. Do you think he'll complete it in the this summer or do you think it's going to be something that because I know there's a few files? >> This is our hope, right? I mean, we're setting that as the goal. Um, and if we can get volunteers coming in, I know u one of the the um the newest planning commission member had indicated an interest in in volunteering. So, we'll reach out to her as well. Um, but there may be other people too that that are, you know, want to want to contribute to the community and help in this special project getting this done. Um, but yes, it's um it's not a small task. Um, evidenced by everyone who's kind of kicked the can down the road over the years. So, uh, it is, you know, I hate to use the term grabbing the bull by the horns, but it is somewhat, you know, similar to that in terms of undertaking this. So, we're I'm I'm excited that he's excited because um because that's somebody somebody that we need with a lot of energy in there to get this done. So, >> not to mention this is pretty important for bringing this up to speed. >> Yeah. With everything from >> imperative. >> Well, this will help us um as we start getting into uh meta meta tags and metadata and and being able to search um having people search information online. Again, this is kind of the steps we're taking as we're updating the website. Um, the more we can get people to do their own re research on properties, the less calls come in, the less disruption, you know. So, it's a goal we're working towards. It's going to take a little while to get there, but I think um um I think it's the right step, you know, a good step in the right direction. So >> my thought is you want Carrie to be in charge of this, but I'd like to have you in charge of it as well or to be in charge, but >> because Carrie's got a lot of stuff going and I mean truthfully, we can't even get a bulletin done and we've been waiting a long time. So I just have you be in charge of it. >> Okay. I can oversee it as well. I know she's working council member on the on the website. So having her involved is going to be critical. >> Sure. >> Making sure it's done right. But um but yes, I can oversee that as well. >> Okay. >> Happy to do so. >> That's all I got. >> Any other discussion? >> I have a motion and a second. All those in favor? >> I >> opposed. Motion passes. Staff report. >> Uh Mr. Mayor, just have a couple of items um to touch on. I wanted to give an update back here. There was a request for um um the senior center and the ability to sell alcohol at senior center events. And uh we did we checked with um all the controlling agencies on this. Um we estimated around $3,000 it'll take to change the ordinances to accommodate this. Um, one of the specifications would need to be that you that the seniors would contract with a caterer permit and we have two caterer permits in the city. That would be Smokies and Route 65. So, they can chat with either one of those and determine who they want. >> It's already been determined Route 65. >> Okay. And there's a just a requirement that food is provided at every event that they're selling alcohol as well. Um, so that's a requirement of the state. Does it have to be from the caterer that or >> Yeah, the the the the permit the caterer permit that's selling the alcohol has to provide the food as well. Um and uh and so the only question we have on this, we can certainly if you give us direction to proceed with this, the only question we have is the $3,000. Would it be a city born expense or would it be an expense that we would uh ask to recoup from the sales of alcohol over doesn't have to be all in one year, it can be over a couple years or whatever the deal is. That would be my only question on that one. >> Um >> so we still got to spend $3,000 if we use Route 65, >> right? In other words, in order to change the ordinance and go through all that uh planning and zoning and everything else, >> we have to do that. >> Can't we just use road? We just can't. >> No, because we have our our ordinance says we cannot >> we our ordinance says we can sell alcohol on s such as booster days, you know, on a specific day specific event. >> And so we'd have to literally come through council every single time the seniors wanted to sell something to give a specific permit for a specific day on a specific event. um on city property. So um so this would be just kind of going through and making sure the um the attorney is certainly comfortable with the language and changing the the um uh the ordinances. So staff time, attorney time, we're estimating 3,000. It could be a little less, but >> unless we have Jacob do it on a meeting night like this, >> unless we have him do it while we're in council. Okay. >> Um I >> plan on staying late one night. wanted to give you an update on uh road repair. Uh Jackson Street, we had a culvert fail and uh had to shut the the street down. Um Nate's been working on it tirelessly to uh to get us back online. We were getting estimates. I think it was 180,000 or 160,000 183. >> Enormous. We were getting prices for $60,000 pipes the cost for the piping alone. and uh one of our local companies um >> Classic Construction, thank you, uh is uh doing it for us. We're at about $61,000. So, he's helped the city out tremendously. It is gravel right now. The road is open. We will be paving it after the um curb and gutter uh gets replaced. So, if anyone asks, they can still drive over that, but it's work in progress, and it'll probably take at least another week or so to get that completed. >> Another how long? >> A week or so. Oh, >> yep. Uh, TVF is Traditional Values Foundation. >> Uh, they are a nonprofit that helps applicants uh with their filings and that sort of thing for those type of those type of uh events that they have. So, wanted to get back with you on that. Uh and then finally, we just uh the mayor and myself uh met with um uh the school district had a good meeting about the project we're looking at uh for Cedar Creek Elementary and um and East Belt Elementary. They they want to get hooked up to City Sewer and Water. We kind of discussed the the age of their infrastructure over there, some of the challenges that they're having. We have a game plan moving forward. I think they probably will be sharing some cost and trying to get this through the legislature as well. Uh we've had two very unique disappointing unique legislative sessions. Um and uh and I think everybody I was just I was reading John Jazinski. He's a senator who's heavily involved in roads saying he was very disappointed the amount of dollars that were put into roads this year. Um so everybody's kind of reasonably unhappy you might say with with the outcome of the of the last legislature session. Uh so this next year may be although it's a policy year and typically not a year for bonding uh may be a year where there's some bonding as well. So we're going to try to hit the ground running if not successful this year. The following year will be a a bonding year. So we're getting our ducks in a row and trying to get uh these folks hooked up. And as you know, that would go right past the new proposed uh industrial park uh which we would then be able to feed any uh industrial commercial development that that would happen there. Uh aside aside from that, those are my updates unless you have any questions. >> Council reports. Jacob, I got a question for you on the IUP that we took away tonight when Christine came up there and said that there's not a 30-day. Do we know is that true? >> Mr. Mayor, council, um, off the top of my head, I I do not recall, but in enforcement actions, there's usually a windown period that you can work through administratively to make sure that everything just gets smoothed out. Um, you you could decide that it happens tomorrow. you could decide to give them 30 or 60 days. You could defer to staff to just work it out. Um I think flexibility and um >> what would you >> let me let me back that up and say keep in mind just the practical realities of any decision you make whenever you revoke something and how long it may or may not take to wind down an activity. You know, it might require a few days. >> What would you suggest? >> I think that's a policy decision, Mr. Smith. Um >> yeah, but you're the attorney. At the end of the day, you know, from here on out, the activities uh would be the IP is revoked tonight. An absent language that would say, you know, give it 30 days, say with the the horse IEP. Um, anything that takes place after today is conceivably unlawful and in violation of the city code. Um, that said, you know, policy decisions about enforcement are really up to the council to make. >> Mr. Mr. Mayor and Council, I I will say that the horse IUP does give 30 days. This one does not speak to that at all. Um the applicant may have animals there that she needs to, you know, find a home for. I would I would suspect some time would be reasonable to allow her to to wrap that up. Again, I don't know what that time frame is, but we would also generate a letter, make sure it's certified and sent out, and so maybe it's a week or two weeks. I It's uh it's up to you guys. Whatever. Whatever you want to do. >> She still has another IUP, right? For >> for dog food sales. >> Oh, but I thought she had one for breeding or something. >> Uh for for Yes. For um puppies. Yeah. Yeah. So, I think there's two two IUPs. >> Yes. >> Not including the mysterious six horse that we can't seem to locate. >> Okay. So, should we just leave it for staff then to do their thing >> to send a letter to her? >> Yes. >> End it. >> Yep. They can come back to us next month and inform us of update us that it's all closed out or not. >> Sure, we can do that. >> Next meeting. >> Oh, the horse one's passed 30 days already. Nothing's >> happened. The horse ones. Right. >> Right. the the the options now are enforcement, you know, which um which gets a little bit more tricky. So, >> anybody else? >> Okay, I have a couple of things I want to bring up. My first thing has to do with I I really didn't want to bring this up during the consent agenda on the budget on the expenses, but I think that we spend too much on for ACE garbage. I I just see all these huge fees for all these different buildings. And I'm just wondering if you guys if we have a contract, if it's something that we can go get quotes from one of the other five or six garbage people we have out here because I I just feel like I feel like we're being nickeled and dime by all these different things. So, I'm nitpicking on that one this month. Um, the other thing is when is the next newsletter going out? Because I feel like it should have gone out for booster days and and the booster days agenda should have been in it and it didn't go out in July. So, I'm really disappointed. >> The newsletter is either at the printer or at the mailhouse right now. So, I'm not sure the exact um stage in which it's at right now. I will confirm that and I'll email everybody on that. >> Okay. Is booster day stuff in there? Because if it comes out next week, it's too late. >> I will clarify that. >> Um my next thing is for the attorney. When I was on the council before, every June we would do a annual evaluation of the city administrator. And I don't think he's had one done yet. And I think that should be coming up. I think he needs to have goals and um be evaluated on the different things that he's supposed to be doing. >> Okay. Uh noted. >> Okay. So, you'll get back to us on that. Um my next question is, is the city council going to be in that parade? Are we has that been discussed? because I know in the past we've they've done it and they've all been together except for you know >> I I know that the mayor will be riding in a car and traditionally uh council if they so choose uh the city provides one of the public work trucks for council to ride in. So, are we doing that or I mean it's this coming Saturday, so we should decide. It would be nice to be have a unified front, you know. I don't know. No comment. We're not doing it. Okay. I don't know. >> Actually, I can I can comment on that. prior cities that I've been in, if if council members choose to be in the parade, you know, and they bring their supporters or people wearing their shirts or whatever the case is, um, you know, they would they would just have to work with the parade coordinator to get a slot for that. I don't know if there's a fee or not. Um, but um, >> fee. >> Yeah. So, so I'm sure they can accommodate you for that. I know in other instances they've ridden on firet trucks or in firet trucks, you know, in other instances someone brings a convertible, you know, I mean, it's just it's really kind of across the board >> on what you may want to do or participate in. >> Okay. >> It sounds to me that they have plenty enough to do, so we don't have to burden them with that part of it. I mean, the mayor can just ride around and wave at everybody. >> All right, >> that's fine with me. Have fun, mayor. >> Bring your call. >> Um, and my last well, my second to last thing is I'm feeling like we should be done with land form right now and Grace should be on her own to do her extended period before her to her what is it? three months, six months of successful completion of uh probation by herself without land form. So I am wondering what we need to do to just use landform as a last resort emergency. Hey, what do we do in this unique case kind of thing. Okay, we can look at that. >> And I I expect the rest of the council to input on this because I don't want to be the only one that thinks this. So, I don't know. What do you guys think? Should we continue or should we >> I agree? >> Because it's expensive. >> I agree. I think Grace, what I've seen that she's done so far and I've watched planning meetings as well, I think she's a smart gal. >> I think you're doing an awesome job. I think you can handle it. I really do. And I I just think we can have landform as a consulting if we need them, if they're willing to do that. That's my opinion. >> I do believe that was the goal we had set up originally, wasn't it? >> It is. And there's been a wind down. >> Yep. >> Maybe not to that extent, but >> And finally, I'll be at the pancake breakfast Saturday, so and bake sale. So come and buy some cookies and breads and have pancakes and sausage. That's it. >> Anybody else? I entertain a motion. >> Make a motion to journ. >> Second. >> Have a motion. Second. All in favor? I