You're good. >> No. >> One minute. >> This is our only meeting this weekend. only one game. >> No, we're good. >> Yeah. >> And actually, we could have this week because there's no more planning. >> Well, we could for Friday morning. >> These are all really bad ideas, guys. I don't know why. Valentine's >> noon November. There's a meeting on the calendar at noon for like Tuesday. >> Oh, it would be a work meeting of some type or something like that. >> All right, six o'clock. Everybody good? Can we get started? >> All right. like to open the meeting at 6 o'clock on September 9th and we'll start with the pledge of allegiance. >> Ready to go. I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all. >> All right, Miss Johnson, we need roll call, please. >> Mayor Don, >> here. >> Council member Brian >> here. Council member Glazer >> here. >> Council member Rainville >> present. >> Council member Swansson >> here. >> Planner Nash >> here. Lieutenant Egar >> here. >> Fire Chief Miller >> here. >> Financial assistant Jagger >> here. Consultant. Sorry. And myself Natalie Johnson. >> Roll call is >> Thank you very much. So we'll move on to approve the agenda. >> Mr. Mayor, >> council member Rainbow. >> I have two items for the agenda. Um, one is I would like to pull consent agenda item F. And in lie of that, um, I'm going to ask staff assist me with arranging conversations with Mary Leer, Sarah Johnson, Natalie, and any other staff if needed to discuss the 2026 market. So, >> just pull that. >> Miss Johnson, did you have a recommendation to remove five seats? I have one more. >> Oh, sorry. Go ahead. >> Thank you. Um and then I would ask council's consideration to move um item six, finance, the 2026 preliminary budget um to the consent agenda, letter H. Um council's had numerous meetings on the budget and we've made a commitment to come back and look at it when some additional uh expenditures are in closer to the end of the year. look at it again introductions, but we've already had the conversations. Um, and so I'd like to see that consent. >> Mr. Mayor, >> uh, council member, go ahead. >> I I I think the council should have the opportunity to to vote on that and to share any public comments in regards to proposed. >> Your recommendation is not put in the Senate. 68. >> Yes, sir. >> Miss Johnson, did you have a recommendation on consent agenda? >> We did. Um Mark, would you wanted to address a couple of the um contract changes that Bob wanted once we get to this? >> Yes. And sorry, just so I I could hear. Is this in with respect to um the recycling contract or is this with respect to the sewer uh agreement Bob was looking at the ordinance? >> Nope. The recycling center. >> Yeah, there are just a few things I'd like to talk about with respect to that. It will be brief. >> Okay. So, yes. >> So, removing the consent, but it needs to be its own item. What item should that become? >> Go down to old business. Senator from 13B. Okay. So, we got one conflicting motion on this and right now it was to uh put finance in to the consent and then we had a request to keep it separate. So, if that's the case, I would like to keep it separate. So, if there's additional discussion needs to happen on it, um does that meet your intent? Ma'am, >> that's my that's okay. Anything else for approving the agenda? No other discussion. Can I get a motion to approve the agenda? Some move. >> Second. >> Quick and easy. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Opposed. Motion carries. Okay. We will go into the pro uh proclamation for constitution week September 17th and the 23rd. So I get to read. So the proclam proclamation resolution whereas it's the privilege and duty of the American people to commemorate the 2 and 38th anniversary of drafting of the constitution of the United States of America with appropriate ceremonies and activities. And whereas public law 915 guarantees the issuing of a proclamation every year by the president of the United States of America uh designating September 17th through the 23rd as constitutional. Now therefore I chain heaven by virtue of authority vested in me as the mayor of the city of Nalden do hereby proclaim the week of September 17th through 23rd as Constitution Week. and urge all citizens to study the Constitution and reflect on the privileges privilege of being an American with all the rights and responsibilities which that privilege involves. In witness whereof, I here undue set my hand and cause the seal of the city to be affixed on the 9th of September on the year of our Lord 2025. Okay, next agenda item is proclamation for domestic violence awareness month. And I get to read again. Domestic violence awareness month. Whereas the community problem of domestic violence has become a critical public health and welfare concern in the Milka County. And whereas domestic violence is a crime, the commission on which will not be tolerated in Adulty County and perpetrators of said crime are subject to prosecution and conviction in accordance with the law. And whereas over thousands of women, men and children have and will continue to access assist assistance from Alexander House and Court domestic violence service provider. And whereas domestic violence will be eliminated through community partnership of concerned individuals and organizations working together to prevent abuse while at the same time affecting social and legal change. And whereas October is National Domestic Violence Awareness Month. And whereas during the National Domestic Violence Awareness Month, Mila County organization will inform area residents about domestic violence, its prevailence, consequences, and what we as a concerned community can do to eliminate its existence. Now therefore, be it resolved and all and known to all that the city of Naldam proclaims October to be domestic violence awareness month on September 9th, 2025. Okay, next thing up is a public forum. Did anybody sign up to speak today in the public forum? Okay, so we won't open up the public forum. We'll move on to the consent agenda. >> Mr. Mayor, >> Council Rainville, >> I would move the consent agenda as amended. >> Second. >> Okay. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> I. Opposed. Motion carries. Consent agenda is approved. We remove C and we also remove F. Okay. Next up is finance. Miss Jagger. >> Mr. Mayor, members of the council, uh this evening uh is a presentation um regarding the 2026 preliminary levy and budget. Um and I would just like to go through this uh presentation if that's okay. You >> Yes, please. You lead the presentation and we'll just question. So, um, in in, uh, the council adopts a preliminary levy every year prior to September 30th. This year, it's prior to September 30th of 2025. And then we also, this council also sets a public meeting date um for the final levy and budget. And that public meeting date will be Tuesday, December 9th at on 2025 at 6:00 p.m. in town hall here. And that's the night that that the council will adopt it final levy and budget. Um unless there's a a continuation meeting that that is required after that meeting. Um there there is an opportunity to lower the levy after this evening, but you cannot increase your your levy after this evening. So the council directed staff to come back with with the the needed changes to the levy to meet its debt and its capital and for its operations in 2026. Currently the the proposed levy or preliminary levy is set at 2 million 341432 which is $212,000 over the previous levy. And you can see there the breakdown is really in debt service is the primary u reason for that increase in the levy. There's $17,000 $17,515 that's attributed to the general fund and then $194,551 for um debt service. And that's for existing debt and new debt issued for road projects in both 24 and 25 and the fire rescue truck. So the the city is planning for its future by levering levying the appropriate amount to operate efficiently and effectively. And the city is also utilizing excess fund balance to um help pay for transfers to other funds. So currently the transfers out are uh or the use of fund balance is $352,000 and and the transfer will go $257,000 to debt service for previous um debt levies that were not levied because there were special assessments that were available to pay for some of that debt. And that helped the council at that time keep the levy bolder than it could have been. It could have been higher if we would have levied for the full debt amount. Um there's also debt paying for um for equipment which is 40,000 or the fund balances used for equipment $40,000 and $25,000 for turnout gear and $30,000 for weather silent. The the balance of the fund balance being used is $24,950. And that that'll cover a contingency budget of $10,000. And that and the 14,950 that is being used for fund balance is actually um paying for some of the operating expenditures in 2026. Um it still ends with 45% um of expenditures compared to fund balance at the end of 26, which is uh right in where the recommendation is from the state auditor's office. Pam, just for clarity, you're using the term fund balance, >> okay, >> and general fund as interchangeable. Is that correct? >> Um, the general fund is where you're using your fund balance out of. So that the general fund is your primary fund and you have special revenue fund, you have capital improvement funds, you have debt service funds, you have equipment funds. The general fund is where most of your your levy goes and also most of your your funding is coming from. >> And here's just a list of uh the changes over over last year. You can see here transfers out as the primary increase in the in the general fund budget. Um, it it it increased from I believe it was $7,500 in in 2025 to to it goes up $314,500 in 2026. And there there's a list there of all the other areas that are increasing or decreasing um as changes for 2026 in the proposed budget. And the proposed budget will be available on the the website um tomorrow. I'll send that information to that lady um right away tomorrow. Here's a more detailed look at the general fund. You can see there the changes in the revenues on the top part of that and then the changes in the the expenditures by category. In other words, general government, public safety, public works, and parks and liberation and capital outlay. You can see public safety is the largest increase. our sheriff's uh contract is going up, I believe, $37,000, which makes up the majority of that increase in the public safety costs. And it's also listing here the the differences in other financing sources and uses um and the changes thereof. We are transferring in money from the gambling fund and also from the capital improvement fund to help pay for um some items in in 2026. So with this new proposed levy um residential properties could see an increase between 7 and 8% in their city tax liability. Um and and that's a result of the the levy and also changes in fiscal disparity which the city really doesn't have a lot of control over. It's a formula that's that's done by the state and um for every city in in the county or in this house area market values of the average home only increased about 1.8% um for the 26 budget to $452,000. Um that equals about $1,64 in annual city taxes. And the increase is basically $6.40 a month that the that property will see in 2026. and the city tax rate goes up about 1% from from 22.3 to 23.5. And the the things that that affect that that uh city tax rate are are the increases in the residential property values or all property values. the increase in the fiscal disparities distribution, you know, what the city gets out of the pool and the debt and the decrease in the fiscal disparities contribution, what the city pays into the pool and then of course the increase in the city. And then just to briefly touch on on some other funds, um we have a recycling center and our expenditures are higher than our revenues. We normally get the additional funding from the county every year, but we cannot count on it. We can't budget for it. [Music] Um the the uh 26 levy increase is 194,000 for debt as I mentioned earlier. Um this includes a new debt levy of 145,000 for the the road improvements and the equipment bonds. The total debt service levy is $447,000 $842. So in capital projects um there's still uh $31,140 left in the in the the building fund to maybe do some improvements to the old town hall. Um, we are transferring $30,000 out of out of that fund to help u pay for some expenditures in the in the general fund. Um, but there are other funds available there for additional improvements. In the park improvement, we're looking at $5,000 for the 9hole disc trail improvements and then another $20,000 for Memorial Park. Um, we're increasing the amount of turnout gear budget for 2026 as the uh chief is hiring new firefighters and they all need um their own turn here in 2026. And then we of course we have the road improvement fund and and you can see there the the uh improvements that we're going to do are about $560,000 for um several uh roads in in the city of Nan and the county is starting a project which will pay $24,175 once every every three years um until we we pay our our share which is about $75,000. Um there is $50,000 for calcium chloride in 2026 and also $100,000 for the two minutes maintenance. Uh the equipment replacement fund um they're they're ordering a a rescue truck which that's what we're bonding for. Um with delivery expected in 2026 I believe >> what 28 >> 18 months >> 27 maybe 27. >> Okay. >> And then there's a a need for a new box on a dump truck and a replacement of the Bobcat in 2026. So here's just an example to to show you uh average monthly tax bill for a home. And I I do a monthly. So you can compare it to like your Comcast bill or your your phone bill or whatever you're paying like that. So for $89 a month, you get your police and your fire protection. You get your street maintenance, you get park maintenance, you get planning and inspections, you get street improvements, you get equipment, capital improvements, administration of city activities, and debt retirement. And that's it for the the presentation. So, what I'm asking is that the city council um pass the resolution that's in your packet um adopting the preliminary levy and preliminary budget at the amounts that were listed in >> which on page 106 Mr. Mayor, >> I would move that we adopt resolution 2025 number can be determined adopting the preliminary 2026 levy and budget with again the understanding that council has agreed to go back and look at expenditures closer to the end of the year to see if we can have uh implement any additional deductions >> based on the projections that we'll have a much better analysis. All right, we like to second and then we we've had discussion on the second. Any discussion at all? >> Um, Mr. Mayor, I I I've been outspoken about my position on this at the last meeting. Um, I I strongly feel that there's a couple of things in this budget um that weren't based on what I feel were sound decisions and and lacked actual data. Um, one being first the the $30,000 that we added last week for the emergency weather siren. Um, the data that we have is old. We have had ample opportunity in the last eight months to reach out to the manufacturer and set up a time for schedule a decel study. We haven't done that yet. Um, I firmly believe that we should have that decel study before we start to allocate any. We don't have an obligation to improve those systems. Um and the other again is is uh the new rescue vehicle that we are um bonding for. Um the I believe the it was sold on the fact that the uh reduced cost in residents homeowners insurance was going to offset what their monthly or annual obligation was going to be. Um as I stated in those meetings, I had plans to talk with my insurance agent. I did. He made multiple calls to multiple carriers. He's an independent. Um I think it's important to share with you what he learned. While some do use the ISO score when determining determining insurance rates in order to become to go for those that follow ISO, um you need to have a score of five or better to be put into the premium rate class. Uh I believe um Chief can correct me but we are somewhere between 9 and 10 on our ISO score. Is that correct? >> Uh I believe we're six and seven. >> Six and seven. So we need to get to a five to be in a premium class for some of those some of those carriers. The other carriers their their policy is they have three categories within five miles of of the fire station and less than a thousand ft from a hydrant. within five miles of the fire station and more greater than the thousand feet from the fire hydrant. The first being the best, the second being the next class. And then the third class is the class we're in. And that's because we don't have fire hydrants. And unless residents tell us that they want to be hooked up to city and water and bring the Met Council in here, that's not going to happen. So, I'm I'm fairly confident that the added cost of that uh new fire truck is not going to be outset by reduction in home owners insurance. Just wanted to share that so people knew why I was voting the way that >> did you want to put a recommendation in that we add a high volume well this year as part of the budget to help work on the water supply. >> I think we need to explore our options in regards to the water supply. We do have one option. Um I know that the in the past the fire department has been opposed to using that more economical option. I at this point I don't know if it's still available to us but I would like to see if that's possible. >> Any other discussion on the >> Yes. Thank you. >> Brian comments >> Mr. Mayor. Yeah, I just, you know, I with the um you know, we've got Yes, we have I agree we have gone through the budget several times, but there's been I I would agree that there's there's information that um come closer to the end of the year that we can revamp and and revisit this again. And and I'm I'm looking forward to that opportunity so that we can uh look into lower the costs to our residents for for our for this Good. That's it for December 9th. >> Yes, ma'am. So, that that's the evening of the um adoption. We we're going to have another work session >> prior to December. >> Yes. >> Thank you for the clarification on that. Have we set the date for that? >> No, we we talked about November um you know, early November or or later in November when people are available. We have not looked that date and this evening is preliminary. So, is plary but we need to you know adopt this to get it into the the the county too so that they can include it in there through the taxation process. >> I will state that as I do budgeting at work and I look budgeting is projection on what we think you're going to need. We don't spend the funding unless we have a reason to spend it. So to go back to like the emergency weather or weather siren if the data shows that we don't need it um then we certainly wouldn't make a motion to go forward. no budget for it. You can't you have no chance of this. >> Mr. Mayor, >> I feel that the comment that you just made contradicts what you said at the last meeting in regards to adding that $30,000 with the study that we're going to add as regardless. >> I don't feel it contradicts um anything that was stated. What I'm saying is this is the budget amount. Chief said he would get the survey done to say how many do we need? I believe the need is there, but it'll justify whether the need is there. But if it doesn't make sense, we certainly wouldn't push forward. That's what I may counsel. >> Yeah, I would just like to respond, I guess, to the ISO score. Um, you know, I don't think that uh any claim was made that it would be entirely offset by an ISO score improvement. The point was made that it will improve the ISO score and it is good to improve the ISO score because the overall improvement of the ISO score will improve the insurance rates. Um whether it offsets it entirely or partly, the fire department and the city still needs that fire truck. And I think the fire chief, he gave multiple presentations to the council and explained exactly why the need was there. Um and so I just I wanted to respond to that piece. And then on the the siren, um you know, as I explained uh last meeting while I was voting with you on that, mayor, um you know, we can't I I don't think we can wait until we have a perfect answer because that perfect answer might cost us $250,000 or something, you know, for multiple sirens or this or that. And so I don't think it's unreasonable to allow 30,000 for a single siren next year that we may or may not put in. um we're going to decide I think after we get the start and so you know as has been explained to us numerous times we can reduce the levy from here we can't increase it so we got to air on the side of I guess higher higher levy and then reassess come November >> December whenever that may hold on one second >> Mr. Mr. Mayor, members of the council, as as I demonstrated in the presentation, the majority of the levying is the further debt service and that's a legal obligation. And so there is not a lot of room for decreasing the the operating levy. There's only $17,515. The only other way is to to decrease that levy. and and there if you decrease expenditures, you could actually decrease the amount of fund balance. In other words, the amount of savings that you're using to pay for your expenditures. >> That's to council member Brian's >> to decrease the funds. >> Yes. >> Right. Um, as far as the sirens, um, I did a little bit of research and one of the things I found out that Oak doesn't have any sirens. They, um, take advantage of your phones. They have a text system that the I'm assuming it's the city sends out the texts. So, you have to have residents sign up. So once we get the study done and looking at what that tells us then we can look at addition we can look at if it says we need them then we can have that conversation but we also can have a conversation what are our other options so it's it's not a given we're going to spend the 30 but if it's not there you can't do it if it comes up to that any other conversation on the budget So, do we have a motion to approve it? We already did. Council Rainbow. We got a second from Council Swinson. Any other discussion? >> All points been brought up. Let's move to vote. All those in favor say I. >> I. I. >> Opposed? Nay. >> Okay. Motion carries. Budget complete. Thank you, Miss Jagger, for calling on this. Uh, next one is the building department. So, we're on number seven, review the ordinance 2025, ordinance repealing and replacing chapter 9, section three of the now city code. Is that uh what we have Mark on for, Natalie? >> Well, he'll be here. Mark will talk a little bit about it as well as Andy will. >> Okay. So, Dave, Andy, are you first, sir? >> Um, sure. Thank you, council. I appreciate the opportunity tonight. Carrie unfortunately was not able to be here this evening. Um so I'm pinched in. Um I've reviewed the information. I'm able to answer any questions that you might have. Um this was an opportunity we've had this opportunity a couple of times previously to talk about on-site septic systems which of course serve uh the entire population of Melon. Um so reading through the packet are there any addition or any questions to start with? >> This is very similar what we reviewed a couple months ago. It is what this really does is help clarify our roles and responsibilities for staff as well as us as your contracted building official. >> Mr. Mayor, please go ahead. >> A question that I had that as I was that kept coming up as one of the things I was looking for. Um and Andy, this may not be a question for you. This may be a city fees question. Um, we have a, you know, we're going to be paying um, remember we're consulting $90 an hour for any non-compliance situations. Do we have means to recover that $90 an hour um, from a resident that is out of compliance? >> We do not at this point, but Mark, maybe you can address that in the compliance with the fees and ordinances. Is that one of the things that we would be able to uh, retrieve some of the monies on? >> Yeah. So, anytime we're enforcing an ordinance, there are a couple of different statutes that we can rely upon to try and um collect some either unpaid service charges or special assessments. Kind of depends on which statute we would use based upon circumstance. U Minnesota statute 36066012 is the statute that would allow for the collection of unpaid service charges. Minnesota statute 429021 falls under the special assessment category. We use that one in particular to enforce nuisances. I believe it's subdivision 8, something to that effect. I don't recall directly off the top of my head, has a provision that allows for the special assessment of um any enforcement to abate nuisances. Um, so it would be something that I had spoken with Miss Johnson about previously in going through and kind of doing a comprehensive update of uh both zoning nuisance and other applicable ordinances wherein uh the city would include language uh that would require or rather allow the city um to pursue the recovery of costs of abasement abatement including attorneys fees and any enforcement action with respect to its ordinances. >> Mr. Mayor, the reason I ask my main concern is not the the individual that gets notice from the city that they have to make changes to their sewer system, but it's the one that doesn't follow through and requires consultant to make multiple contacts and takes multiple hours to to resolve issues. >> I appreciate your question. That's a very good question, >> Mr. Mayor. >> Council or go ahead, Miss Johnson. >> Um, Andy, would you like to address the one that we do have on compliance and how quickly does it come into compliance after your letter? >> Um, I don't have those details in front of me of which case that you're referring to >> the ship. >> Yeah, >> that one is getting drug out. >> So, they have it done to by May though. Um, and again, I don't want to speak too much on that. No, that's all right. Um, I don't have the details of that case in front of me. So, that one was one that, um, did require some context, you know, as far as communicating with the property owner about what the violations were and what it would take to get it back into compliance. Uh, but again, I don't have those details in front of me. >> So, >> Mr. Mayor, if I may. >> Yes, please. I was just going to ask you, can you uh, do we need to add something in here about non-compliance specifically to this resolution, sir? Yes, Mr. Mayor. I would recommend for any resolution um case law makes clear that an indication of collection of fees via ordinance should specifically site to the statutory provisions through which you're trying to collect a service charge, an unpaid service charge. I would also note and maybe um Andy could speak just a little bit to um provision 4 uh it's labeled number four on page 136 of the packet septic compliance and escrow amounts and how that could apply in this situation as well. Um I would propose a language change to 4 I which says an escrow may be required or may be allowed. Uh, I would propose that that language be changed to an escrow shall be required. Um, and possibly if Andy could talk a little bit about how that escro amount could possibly come into play, uh, as well. >> What section was that again, please? >> Uh, so it's section four. Uh, so let's go to C compliance inspections. Section four, septic compliance escore amount temporary alternative at sale transfer or is deemed appropriate. >> So thank go ahead >> please go ahead. >> So thank you mayor and council. So the escros really are per most pertinent when u uh weather conditions don't allow a septic system to be replaced or repaired due to Minnesota weather. which is six months out of the year, >> depends on the year. >> So, Mr. Mayor >> Councilman Rainbow. >> Um, do we need to ask the attorney to um add it in in a in the appropriate place within this document so that the city is covered um or any expenses um when a not septic system is when a septic system is determined not and then add that to the fee schedule and wherever else in city needs to go. Mark, you had mentioned yes, it should be added. Um, going back to what Councilman Randall just stated that, uh, is there a specific spot that should be probably added before we go to approve this? >> Um, specific spot I don't have in mind directly offand, but I would like to address one part of what council member Rainville said, um, which is that what I am speaking about is if there needs to be an enforcement of somebody who is non-compliant. Um, by no means just because you put in the provision that you can recollect attorney's fees and other associated fees and enforcing your ordinance, that does not mean you are guaranteed to collect those fees. It is simply a vehicle by which we can get into district court and make an argument before the court that we have the authority via ordinance and statute to collect those fees. What case law makes clear is if your ordinance does not contain a provision by which you statutoily can collect attorneys fees and costs associated with enforcing your ordinance, uh the court is hesitant and will not allow you to make such a request. Um so I I would put it um somewhere where I I I I'm trying to peruse it as fast as I can, but I would put it in any sort of enforcement section or provision. Maybe a section could be added um close to the end as maybe section 19 and bump effective date down to section 20. Um but that that would be my advice is to include that language for purposes of enforcement if you need to bring an action to enforce it uh that it allows us to ask the court to award fees underneath those statutory provisions. So, question for the council. Could we move forward with approving it today pending uh the attorney's additional recommendations so we don't delay the full month? >> Yes. Would that be acceptable to you guys? Okay. Do we have any other questions for Andy or for for our attorney? Thank you for bringing up that very good point, Mark. I appreciate you uh getting a hold of us and getting this fixed before it's uh before it's signed. All right. Any other discussion? Well, then we will move to vote. The page is the final resolution on page >> CPRCA resolution >> or is it just where we're adopting on page 147? >> It's an ordinance. So, >> I believe 125. >> It is 125. Okay. I'm sorry. I was thinking it was the RCA which was earlier. So, it's on page 125. Okay. All those in favor say I. >> We need a motion. >> We didn't have a motion yet. >> I'm a little jumpy today. I >> go ahead, Council Member Bryant. I would make a motion to approve the ordinance repealing and replacing chapter 9 section 3 of the city code of ordinances related to the subsurface sewage treatment system as um presented with the amendment for um providing the ability for the city to uh recoup its costs for non-compliant systems. >> Second second from council member Randle. All right, are we ready to vote this time? All right. All those in favor say I. >> I oppose. Okay. Motion carries. >> Okay. We also have a 7D on here. Approve first amendment to agreement for building official service. I'm assuming you're going to talk about that also. >> Can I answer questions about that? Again, I'm sorry that Carrie wasn't able to be here this evening, but I believe that's primarily about the uh the fees that are going with that administration. Is that correct? >> That is correct. So the hourly fee for really what this pertains to is the um administration if you uh in addition to the um actual uh inspections and permits that come along with the septic administration as it relates to the maintenance compliance and also the annual reporting. Since this is in front of us all day every day we're very well suited to perform those duties as far as the annual reporting for the MPCA. They require certain aspects of the installations and the overall health if you will of the community as far as the number of the tanks that are being installed, the number of compliance inspections that have been received, the number of non-compliant inspections that have been received. Also asking for a breakdown in that which ones are imminent health threats which are really bad and then the ones that are failing to protect groundwater. So that breakdown again through the MPCA u we're pretty well suited to do that because we do that with our other jurisdictions. So, in our opinion, it would be most efficient for us to do that report. >> I definitely agree with that. >> Any other discussion for any on this one? >> Miss Johnson, what page would I find the 70 on? >> 148, Mr. Mayor. Counc make a motion to approve the first amendment to the Minute for giving official services to the subject. >> Anybody second? >> I'll second. Second from council member Glazer. Any other discussion? >> Okay. Move to vote. All those in favor say I. >> I. Oppos. >> Motion carries. >> Thank you, sir. >> Mr. Mayor, >> may I also ask Mark if he will put together the summary summary of publication that we now know needs to be done. so that we may get this published and have it in effect after it goes through. >> Give me a yes, please. >> Get a motion to >> I think we got a nod. Is that a Is that a yes, Mark? >> No problem, Mr. Mayor. >> All right, thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. All right, we'll move on to Chief Miller Fire Department report. I missed my motion. >> Mr. Mr. Council members uh just given our monthly report for uh month of August. Um August was another busy month for our department. We had a total of 23 responses with one of them looking structure fire. Uh the resident was able to control the fire with water until our units arrive in order to fully extinguish that that fire. Um damage was held to a minimum as the fire was discovered early. cause of the fire was from operating equipment that was overheated was in a garage. >> Um during August, uh our new tanker was delivered and has fully been put into service for response. Um we also performed a badging ceremony for six firefighters, five of which um and one who was unable to attend a prior badging ceremony. We also participated in a drill with the city of Ramsey that consisted of water supply and first company tactics. With that, I stand for any questions. >> Your new fire truck is >> it's beautiful. It'll be on display for heritage days. So, we'll have that out there and also for >> Mr. Mayor to see. >> Yeah. Yeah, I was just wondering if you uh have gotten any applications. I know you started advertising for >> Yep. If you haven't if you haven't seen the uh the hiring signs out there. We've um pretty much papered the entire city and surrounding communities with hiring signs. Um we have gotten several applications. Uh we're making a big push during heritage days or heritage festival. I very confident that we're going to get some quality candidates on it. Can you remind me what is the goal? How many >> the goal is is five to 10 is where we'd like to be. U I think that I think in this community and from past hiring um what we've done in the past for hiring um a solid five is probably um going to be our submission goal >> for 2025 or 2026 for the next year. >> Yes, for the next year. So, um, and and really the capacity for us to take on 10 firefighters would be that would be pretty hard for us to do. Five for sure. Um, if we get really good quality candidates, we'll put in extra effort to >> Thank you. >> Thank you, >> sir. Sheriff Department next. All right, Mr. Mayor, members members of the council, the following is the sheriff's office report for the month of August 2025. Sheriff's office responded to 152 calls for service. Of those calls, eight were to bar none. Three alarm calls, 19 medicals, and 15 animal calls. Diving into our bar none calls, I'll give you the kind of shortened version. On the first, we had a juvenile runaway call. On the 6th, another juvenile runaway call. On the 10th, we responded for two juveniles who had run away after assaulting staff. Uh there was one minor injury to staff. The juveniles were located in a returning facility. Both of them were taken to the hospital by staff of Barnab for evaluation and one of them was charged with assault in that incident. On the 19th, we responded for a mental health call. We were able to mediate that and the juvenile stayed on site. On the 19th, we responded for another mental health call. Uh that juvenile was transported to the hospital by ambulance. On the 22nd, another mental health call. That one, we mediated the situation. The juvenile stayed at the facility. On the 23rd, we responded for an assault report. On that one, one juvenile was arrested for assaulting staff and transported to the juvenile facility charged with fifth degree assault. Moving on to other calls for service within the community. On the 1st at 12:00 p.m. in the 8300 block of Viking, deputy made a traffic stop on a vehicle due to the male driver having federal arrest warrants for narcotics and weapons related charges. That male was taken into custody without incident during an inventory search of his vehicle. Deputies yielded additional narcotics. and that was transported to the jail on the warrant and will be charged by our drug task force for the additional narcotics for those located in the vehicle. On the 2nd in the 22800 block of Jarvis Street, a deputy responded to a single vehicle crash. Female driver there failed field sobriety test and was arrested for DWI and transported to jail. On the fourth, again in the 8,300 block of Viking Boulevard, deputies assisted our drug task force along with out of county drug task forces in executing a search warrant there. Two people were taken into custody on that warrant. One who was the subject of the warrant and another who had unrelated warrants uh stemming from the department of corrections. On the 15th in the 18600 block of Burns Parkway, deputies responded with fire lineup for an 83y old male who was not breathing. Life-saving efforts were attempted, but the male was declared deceased at the scene. Our criminal investigation division and medical examiner responded and that death was determined via natural causes. On the 31st in the 8100 block of 181st Avenue, a deputy responded for a burglary report at a residence under construction. Uh some tools were stolen out of a storage unit that was on that site. Uh deputies were able to identify two suspects and recover some of the tools that were stolen. Uh those tools were turned back over to the owner and both sus suspects are currently being charged for burglary and theft. With that, I can stand for any questions. >> Mr. Mayor Rainbow. >> Um Lieutenant Lieutenant, I have a question on that 831 on 198. Were those suspects now residents or >> I don't believe so, but don't hold me on another sentence because I don't have it in front of me. I read through the reports, but I can't say with certainty where >> any questions for hearing none. Thank you very much, sir. Appreciate it. >> Thank you. >> All right, we'll move on to planning and zoning. So, Miss Nash, would you cover the monthly report on this? >> I'm happy to, but I'll just instead stand for questions on any items that were in the report. >> I think your report was a good update question. >> I personally have any questions. Did anybody have any questions on page 163 or 164? >> No questions. Let's move on to 10B then. the review and approval of the proposed ordinance 2025 XX repealing and replacing cannabis cylinders. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So, we do not get many of these types of requests, but this is a property owner driven application for an amendment to your ordinances. So, the typical kind of way you see that would be a reszoning where somebody's reszoning, changing the zoning map. In this case, it's changing the zoning text. Um, so Matt and Rand and Paradise are here today. They've submitted an application for an amendment to your zoning ordinance to permit cannabis cultivation in the Rural Residential Agricultural Zoning District. A copy of all the information that they submitted supporting that is included in your packet. Um, you previously adopted your cannabis ordinance back in the fall of 2024. At that time, cultivation was limited to the industrial zoning district. um they have received preliminary approval for a license to cultivate cannabis from the state office of cannabis management. If this ordinance amendments adopted, they would then still need to apply for an interim use permit where it would go through a public hearing. Everybody, the planning commission and the council would look at exactly their proposal for how they would manage and operate the site, where where on the property it would be located, etc., etc. and you if approved, you would issue an interim use permit for cannabis cultivation. Um, so there is a step two for them if they're successful tonight in getting through step one. So the draft amendment before you tonight would accomplish a few things. It would list cannabis cultivation as an inter a possible interim use in the RA zoning district. That zoning district does occupy the vast majority of your city. Um, so we did in working with the planning commission, um, another provision in there is that the IUP can only be granted on property that's at least 20 acres in size or greater and that is owner occupied and owner operated. Um, and then also includes the same buffers that would be in your industrial district. >> Mr. Nash, we got a question from Mash. How can I ask how we determined uh came to the determination 20 acre? So that was largely driven by the planning and zoning commission members in their discussion at the meeting um the other week. Um the draft ordinance went to them as I originally drafted with a 10acre minimum, but many of them felt like they were more comfortable with a larger minimum. you have a lot of um residences that are kind of in some are in platted neighborhoods, some are in kind of I'm going to call them kind of quasi neighborhoods that are on about 10 acre parcels. So going down to a 10 acre size that the planning commission wasn't comfortable with. So they recommended 20 acres. >> So really a kind of a public safety possibly looking ahead. Yeah, they were trying to look at it as they wanted people who were legitimately um possibly in agricultural to begin with or the potential to do that rather than somebody in a in a neighborhood coming up with that idea and then having that operation in what's otherwise a residential neighborhood. You're kind of unique in that your RR district encompasses again most of the city and kind of blends those agricultural focuses along with those residential focuses. there. >> Wisconsin, please. >> Under section 4, um you have uh all cultivation shall occur not less than 500 ft from any property line. That seemed like a long ways from the property line. So, I just I I did some math. Not did some math. I Googled it. I Googled how many feet across 20 acres if it were a square would be and it's less than 1,000 ft. And so if you just have a 20 acre plot, you couldn't even possibly cultivate it because there is no 500 ft from the edge of property. Is that something else that the planning zoning sort of stuck in there or is that like a common thing? >> No, that was something they also stuck in there. And you're right, depending on the shape of the property, it might be difficult for somebody to be able to find a suitable location at 500 ft. >> Well, I think I don't think there's any configuration of a 20 acre or less that would allow that if you had 40 acres and only used 40 acres then maybe but there is no configuration of 20 acre property that could comply with this ordinance. Am I wrong in that? >> No, I think you're I think you're probably correct. >> Seems decreasing that might make sense or altering that slightly to be say 500 ft from a residence or something like that. Yeah, I mean that I I certainly get the the idea. Like I don't want someone with 20 acres sticking it right in a corner right next to some family house or something doesn't want to smell it or be around it. But I you know 500 ft seems prohib prohibitively excessive. It's definitely not. But in this particular case you guys own 20 acres. So that 28 would not >> I still not a fan of writing something into an ordinance that's not even writable. >> Yes. Should be >> so Mr. Mayor Council Rel. >> So question would be then under 12h we increase the 20 to a larger acre acreage which then would allow you to have 500. >> What page you want? Oh, page 169. >> Council member Blazer. Um, >> I would I think I would air towards the side where council member Spencer is leaving where we still allow for parcels, but change those setbacks to a reasonable and realistic number that >> Mr. Mayor, >> go ahead. >> May I make suggestions? that um condition within that section be changed to all cultivation shall occur not less than 200 feet from any property line. >> Those would be my recommendations >> and not less than 500 ft from any residents any opposite residents in case somebody's property is unusually close. >> Yeah. Because you got 500 ft for public parks, 500 ft for daycarees. So 200 feet would make more sense to property land. Now if you had 200 feet within a 20 acre parcel, how many acres would be cultivable? That is a really hard question. >> Well, Mr. Mayor, >> hold that one thought. I think you were alluding to the possible cultivation of actual ground in regards to cannabis and um I think what you're going to find and I I have a little bit more background on this because um Paula has my wife as a commercial investor at the connect serves the cannabis cultivation market and all of that is going to be done within typically a structure that um is conditioned where they're farming 247. So >> indoor >> Yes. Maybe that's perhaps Mr. >> Mr. Mayor that is actually not where I was going. Um what I was going to say is that the way that the uh OCM rules are the emulus area that can be under cultivation is actually really small. So, we're talking depending on the type of license, as small as half an acre of outdoor cultivation, which is what the applicants would be able to do under the license that they've applied for. Um, and given that the microrocessing, I think I got that one right. Is that's what you're applying for? >> Micro business. >> Micro business is um less intensive of an application process. You could see more of those than you would the larger operations propos. I'm not gonna stand by this math, but I just did some math. I believe if uh if it were a perfect square of 20 acres and there's 200 property line offset would still be uh 284,000 square ft that are able to be cultivated in a uh acre is 43,000. What is that? That's five six seven acres. Yeah, I'm at about six and a half if it's a perfect square. >> Thank you, sir. So, that would be enough given so that 200 feet probably makes a lot of sense. So, this should be changed from 500 ft. No proper line to that. >> Mr. Mayor, I will say that is assuming that it is a perfect square, which would maximize the amount of area. If the shape is a long rectangle, for example, uh that 200 foot setback would have a disperate impact on the cultivatable area of those properties. Um just just to make the council aware of that. >> That is true. >> All I can say is 200 feet is probably a lot more makes a lot more sense than 500 feet. >> So is that exactly where we want to go? I think it would be a good interimm solution. It could be adjusted. >> Mr. Mayor >> Counc >> I think that's a good point. I mean it if if someone really wants to cultivate some something they can come in here and tell us why two isn't fair but just on the face of it I think it's fair but there are >> away from the property that intent >> I certainly can see circumstances where it's not fair if somebody has a long rectangular property of even 80 acres. So, but I think it's I think it's just >> back to you, Miss Nash. Is there any more that needs to be discussed on we're currently on 10? >> Mr. Mayor, I don't have anything else unless you have any questions for the paradise here this evening. >> Mr. Mayor, Council Member Grant, >> before we're changing the the setbacks and knowing, could um Miss Nash, could you explain is there more specifics regarding the Minnesota rules as far as under security and the required security measures, what lighting would be and how that would affect our ordinance regarding um lighting up the property so that it's not that the light is not affecting neighboring properties and getting into the street and all that kind of Mr. Mayor, >> ma'am, go ahead. >> Um, I'll defer a little bit to our city attorney who is the expert of all things cannabis at the moment. But, um, but I think that's something that we would look at during the intersection and see what they're proposing to do, how they're proposing to do their lighting, and place appropriate conditions surrounding that in that situation. Um, but I invite the city attorney to jump in if he knows anything more. >> Yes, thank you. Uh, so just to address this issue, this is governed by the Minnesota administrative rules that were put in place uh and approved by an administrative law judge with respect to the office of cannabis management and regulation of cannabis businesses. Uh, particularly 9810.1500 subpart 10 deals with lighting within the context of security. It says a cannabis business and that phrase in the rules means any cannabis business could be cultivation, retail, whatever, must maintain all lighting in good working order inside and outside the business's premises and any tempor temporary cannabis event. Lighting must deter nuisance and criminal activity by allowing observers to see and cameras to record any activity within a radius of at least 20 ft around all entrances and exits. So that is the requirement is 20 ft of lighting. Um, I think that planner Nash's recommendation of having uh a requirement of where that lighting stops uh as a part of a condition um so as to not cause nuisances for neighboring properties would make sense, especially considering we do have 200 ft setbacks. If we think about where the crop cultivation line would be on a property, considering you would have that large setback, really anything short of that setback amount in theory should make it uh so that you're not creating a nuisance to any neighboring property. Um so that that's my answer with respect to lighting. While I have the floor, if I may, Mr. Mayor, just bring up one other thing to the council's attention. >> Yes, please. Um, with respect to cannabis cultivation, uh, Planner Nash is correct that there are a couple of different ways to go about cultivating. Uh, the two main licenses that would be considered would be a cultiv cultivator's license, which for outdoors would allow for up to 2 acres of cannabis uh, flowering p plant cultivation. Uh the other would be the micro business license which sounds like that is what the applicants in this case uh have um preliminary approval from the office of cannabis management. That license allows for um a smaller use. I kind of call it the one-stop shop because you can do a little bit of everything. It's the jack of all trades license. Uh and so it's generally reduced capacity but you get to do a lot more. that reduced capacity with respect to flowering outdoor cultivation uh would be one half acre. So the council, if it so wanted, um if it's trying to limit the amount of area that could be cultivated within these 20 plus acre parcels, um could limit it either to cultivators licenses, which would be 2 acres, or limit it down to your micro business, uh which would allow for 1/2 acre, and then place conditions that you could not do retail or any other uses. In this zoning district, it could just be for cultivation. The caveat there is that the council needs to remember uh pursuant to 34213 Minnesota statute, you do have to allow for the full use of all cannabis businesses at least somewhere, which sounds like you're doing an industrial. So, you're good. So, you kind of have some control over what you would like to do in your RRA district with respect to cultivation because you're allowing the full spo scope of cultivation to occur in your industrial district. You don't have to allow it in the RA and you can allow it in a limited fashion if you so desire because you allow it in the full scope in the industrial. >> Hey, did you get all that? >> Mr. Mayor, please go ahead. >> Mr. All sites, what are what are the containment requirements for outdoor cultivation when you're talking about essentially a controlled substance? You've got miners that could get access to that. Yeah, it's a great question and I've actually had this question come up in the context of um if it could trigger police calls and excessive use of law enforcement services. I know that's an ordinance that you all uh have contemplated and addressed in the past. There are pretty stringent security requirements with alarm systems and security cameras that are outlined in that 9810.1500 administrative rule. And there were a lot of fail safes built into the statute. Um how they'll play out practically is yet to be seen obviously as this is all relatively new. Um but one of those fail safes even includes that um if there is a trip of an alarm it creates an automatic trigger uh dispatch out to law enforcement for response. Uh there are there are required backups for the alarm should there be power outages. Um, so the full details I I could go through and read them, but I think it would be somewhat painstaking at this point, but it would be in uh 9810.1500, which kind of has all of those fencing, lighting, security, camera, alarm requirements for the property. >> Did that answer your question? It's got a pretty good write up on what is required and I I was I think it's pretty extensive. From when I heard this, I didn't know it was that extensive. >> And Mr. Mayor, >> House member um >> to Attorney Al. So, it's up to the state though to do all of the inspections. We're not encumbered by anything. Correct. >> Correct. This is distinct from, you know, the only way that you get drawn into a cannabis inspection is if you are as the city administering your own retail registration and compliance checks, which is distinct from cultivation. Uh the rest of the enforcement is done by the office of cannabis management. What I would recommend, however, um is that you create a uh condition for the IUP or CUP that gets issued depending upon how you're doing it. uh that you comply with all administrative uh rules uh for that are put forth for cannabis businesses in the office of cannabis management. That way if you're found to not be in compliance by the city, you could always do a revocation of the IUP if the state is dragging their feet. Um so that is just one condition I would recommend the city put in place. >> Thank you. the clarify my my statement also is that we will be responsible for the sheriff's office calls >> if if there are calls along >> excessive calls. >> Yeah. >> But it would also fall under the news nuisance thing if that's the case. >> Um asking one more question. So, uh, Mark, as you recommended for the IEP, does that mean the city would would do inspections or has the ability to do inspections? >> It it could be drafted that way. I mean, you could make that a condition of the IUP is that the city is able to send out an individual. Um, we we have that zoning authority, right? We cannot revoke their state license, but we can revoke an IUP. So, we could say that the city is able to spend send out an employee uh or representative thereof or law enforcement and if they determine that there is not an alarm system installed, if there is not proper lighting, etc., um that the city could unilaterally without the state putting aside the whole state license issue, uh that the city would be able to act by revoking the IUP which would be required for the underlying use. So that would be my my position on on how I would want to address it for the city. >> Thank you for the clarification. M counc mayor Mr. Mayor attorney also. So a question I have is is the city able to review any reports that the state has. if I have this business and I've got 15 calls and there's this or that, is the city able to look at those discretions or or violations? Um because otherwise we wouldn't know of them in order to go back and revoke an IUP or C because we can only revoke an IEP or CU based on violations of that IUP or CU. >> Understood. I think to state records. >> Understood. And I think that's a great question, council member. Um the clarity that we have from OCM, every correspondence with them is clear as mud. There is no indication in the administrative rules that municipalities um may request records of the state. Um and again, my position is not that we rely upon the state records. We can have that as an avenue for revocation. Obviously, if the state revokes their license uh or suspends their license, um that is something that will hinder their ability to continue the operation as the license is required by statute for operation. Um my point is that if we take the um in essence adopt by reference the state administrative rules and indicate that uh an employee of the city or law enforcement is able to make its own determination based upon the rules and whether the state rules have been violated um that the municipality or the city would be able to then revoke the IUP which it has the zoning authority to do. Mr. Mayor, >> Swanson. >> Yeah, I think that makes a lot of sense. I mean, it doesn't mean that we have to act on it or oversee this cannabis farm if it if it does go in place. It just gives us the ability if the state is dragging its feet. Like a specific example, if whoever is running this thing, not necessarily you guys, but anyone else, you know, refuses to put up a light and we're in a fight with you about putting up a light, they don't have to go crying to the state to go do our enforcing. We could just revoke the IEP. And so I think it makes a lot of sense to have that ability. I'm not overly concerned about how we would go about finding all the violations because if we were to use that, I think it would be used due to some violation that the city is getting complaints about and that necessarily the public. And then just further speaking, I guess in support of this motion, you know, I I had a I guess a concern about, you know, stupid teenage kids sneaking on the farm and stealing wheat because that's something we would have done, >> but alarm system security surveillance. So, I I did actually have that concern and then I read this rule and I would encourage anyone from the city who's watching or listening to this to go and look at that rule in our packet. Like the the requirements here are extensive. I mean, this looks like more secure than a prison. So, this satisfied any concerns that I had and I'm actually shocked that anyone would open cannabis forms with all these requirements because it seems super expensive. But I, you know, it's alleviated any concerns that I had. Um, yeah. Any other discussion on this? >> Mr. Mayor, >> I I'm not I understand marijuana is not legal in the state of Minnesota. Um I'm not in favor of this. Um I see it as we're doing spot zoning. We're we're giving it to all RA 20 acres or above, but then we need to have them come in and do an IEP or a CP. And we're spot zoning something that initially was designated to just the industrial areas. Um, and so I I you know, >> Mr. Mayor, >> hold on. Councilman, >> that's right. I'm going to wait for council member Swanson because he may bring up the research that he councilman Glazer just referenced. I did do sort of a lot of research on this and one additional benefit that I found of reszoning or not well yeah reszoning I guess allowing an IEP or C is that the property the portion of the property that's used for cannabis cultivation turns into industrial and commercial property and that's taxed differently than agricultural and their tax burden for those acres increases. So, the more property we get cultivating cannabis within the city of Neland increases the amount of taxes those property uh owners are paying and theoretically decreases the amount that the rest of residents are paying. I mean, unless we increase our rev levy, but I mean there's there's other there are numerous benefits tax benefits from allowing the cannabis cultivation. Um, so I don't know if is it Yeah. I'm referring to the email that you sent out in regards to the research did and I think I'm not counc I believe the answer is we're on I I lost my page I flipped to one of you we were talking about security anybody help Can you find what? >> 166 is the first vote. >> There we go. 166 is the first vote we have and that's review and approve the proposed ordinance 2025 repealing replacing cannabis zoning. So this is all about zoning. It's not approving anything but the zoning side. So the one recommended change was to go from um 500 ft from a property only to 200. Other than that, was there any other recommended changes or any other discussion? >> Mr. about Miss Nash. >> As part of that previous discussion, I had also suggested that you could do 500 ft from an off-site residence as well. >> From an offsite residence, a neighbor >> a neighbor >> a neighbor's house. >> Yes, please. >> Okay. So, there were the two changes that any other >> And Mr. there. >> I think the last possible consideration is the scope of if the council wants it to be a full 2 acres of cultivation, allowing it via a cultivator's license, or if the council wants to limit it to a halfacre of cultivation, which would come via a um micro business license with conditions that you may only do cultivation and none of the other uses such as manufacturing, uh retail sale, etc. [Music] >> Okay. duly noted. Council member Swanson. >> Yeah, I would just like to speak in favor of not putting a limitation of just a half acre on it due to what I had already pointed about the security in that rule. I I don't think >> on the micro side as what Mark was saying. >> Maybe I misunderstood what you said. >> There was two different things >> limiting it to just a half acre and not allowing two acre cultivation. Is that what you were comparing? Yeah, the the distinction is that your um cultivator's license allows for uh up to 30,000 ft² of indoor or 2 acres of outdoor flowering. U your micro business license, if you did the interim use permit for the micro business license, it would in effect limit it to 5,000 foot indoor or half an acre outdoor. And so, um, my point here is for consideration of don't just say we want to allow cultivation as a use. Uh, I would tie the the interim use permit to the license type. Um, either having it be a halfacre in a micro business with conditions is all you can do is cultivate or having it tied to a uh cultivator's license which gives you the full two acres outdoor. So two different distinctions is what he was trying to >> I think his recommendation makes sense. I think it should be included in that >> and it's determined in the on which direction they would select that. >> So it's not something we have to >> it's not part of the ordinance part of the question. All right Mark would it be part of the IUP or the ordinance? That's a good question. >> It it would be a part of the ordinance. So you would amend it to allow new interim use as follows. And you you have three options. You can do just the cultivator's license 2 acres. You can do just the micro business license limited to cultivation which is half an acre. or if you're going to shoot for allowing the cultivator's license, which is 2 acres, you might as well allow the micro businesses with the condition that they um only can do cultivation to also come in because that halfacre is less than the two. So, in the instance that, you know, we we have the applicants before us today, they've applied for and received a micro business license is my understanding. If you tied the use just to a cultivator's license, yes, the amount of area they want to use is less than two acres, but the license they have received is distinct from the interim use that you would allow. So my advice is if you want to allow up to two acres and that's the policy decision you want, the practical way to make that happen is amend section 4 uh of this ordinance which amends section 11-3-5D to allow two interim uses which is cultivator's license and micro business license limited to cultivation. >> Basic recommendation >> Mr. Mayor >> Mash. >> Um, this is directed to the city attorney. Under that recommendation, I think we would also have to um I'll forget that. I'm thinking of a different part of the ordinance that doesn't matter anymore. But would an alternative be to where it's 12 I say that the owner of the property shall have the shall have a cultivator license or have a micro business license or list both of them there. Would that be possible instead? >> I would be okay with that with the caveat that there is a condition that says if you have a micro business license one of the conditions is you are limited to only cultivation. Um, I don't want retailers popping up in the middle of the RA district, and I'm sure the council doesn't. Um, and I know that's not the intent of the applicants. I think I see them shaking their heads. Um, but, um, you know, I just want to make sure we don't create a technical loophole for a future applicant to come through and to open up a business that you all are, the city council is not envisioning whatsoever. So make sure that that caveat is carved out and there is a condition on the IUP that if you got the micro license, you're only cultivating with that micro license. And then wherever else you've got it in industrial or wherever, you get the full gambit of what you get in a micro license, your one-stop shop. You get to do it elsewhere. >> Mr. Spencer, um, do we need to include in this uh, ordinance change what we're doing here, what we're talking about right now, the sort of uh, duplicating the state's authority to, you know, uh, comply, it was rule, whatever that was. Um, as part Well, no, that'd be a condition of the IEP, right? That wouldn't go in the ordinance. >> I'm sorry. >> Either or. >> There >> either or. I wouldn't hate to see it in the ordinance. Um just so it's in there clear that the um the city incorporates by reference uh administrative rule it's 9810.1500 uh and I'll see if there's any other applicable rules too. Uh and I can communicate with planner Nash about that. uh and then say that the city reserves the right to um have an employee or um law enforcement contracted with the city uh to make a determination if such provisions have been violated uh for purposes of revoking the IEP. But I would definitely want to see it in ordinance and as a condition. Let's just hammer him over the head with it so it's it's very clear that we're not relying upon the state. It's been made clear to everyone. It's in the ordinance. It's a in the condition it's crystal clear. >> So we've got 200 feet, 500 feet from a neighbor, the two different types of licenses and then mirroring stair changes. >> Yes. With the caveat and I want to make sure this makes it in there that your micro business is limited to cultivation for the two license types. >> Happy. >> Okay. >> All right. Counc. I just have a question. So, um, on page 176, it talks about the canopy. Um, so paragraph 4, um, B for outdoor mixed light facilities, outdoor cultivation, they occur in a greenhouse or a food house. So, what are the requirements for that? I understand the requirements for a building. What are the security requirements for external rowing of it? Am I missing what those what those security requirements are? >> My understanding that the security requirements council member are kind of blanket across the business types. If you remember, I indicated previously that the language in the security requirements refers to cannabis businesses, which both in the administrative rule and chapter 342, the cannabis statutes refi refers to the 13 or so different um business license types. >> Thank you. >> So, I believe the answer is on page 182. It's the same requirements. Um it still needs an alarm system. It still needs video surveillance locks. >> That'd be correct, Mr. Mayor. Thank you. >> Any other questions at all? >> Mr. Mayor, >> ma'am, >> um the city attorney had given that language for the end of section 4, paragraph 12, the whole city shifer, adding role number, blah blah blah that he's going to provide us some language for. I would like to add that as well to the end of uh the section on section two and section three. change to section two that we're talking about. >> Um that is section two is your commercial district. Section three is your industrial district. If we have that language, Mr. Attorney betting now into the RA, we should put it in those other ones. >> Agreed. Well, I would um move >> on page 166. Is that where you're at right now? >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Would you make a motion, please? >> Yes. I'll make a motion to approve an ordinance amending the city now zoning ordinance for canvas with uh as is laid out here and the changes we have discussed. Um should I list them? >> It would be great if you can remember all five of them or where? >> Sure. We've decided to eliminate the 500 ft from any property rule line and replace that with 200 feet from property line, adding also 500 ft from any neighboring uh house. Um also uh putting in there the two distinct types of uh cultivator's license, growers license, um and the requirements uh for each and then uh the uh language adopting the Minnesota rules regarding the security requirements and other requirements. Um, >> I think so. >> And then also that that a person holding a micro business license shall only utilize the property for cultation. >> Yes. >> All right. City attorney, did that cover everything that you believe uh for changes? Did we miss anything? >> Sounds like it to me. That sounds good. >> Okay. So, with that, we've got a motion. Does anybody want to do a second? I'll do the second. So I will do uh I will second your motion for an ordinance amending the city's now been zoning ordinance related to cannabis. >> Mayor council member question for council member. We might as well just include can we just include the approval of the publication of the ordinance in the motion? >> Sure. >> Yes. Any other discussion before they vote? Any other discussion? All right. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Opposed. >> Motion carries. Okay. So, we are to moving to 10 C at this time. >> Miss Nash, what do we need to know in Tennessee? >> You covered that. >> Replace. So, it's all covered. ENC. >> Yep. >> To hand out. You really didn't know. I didn't learn anything. It's two separate books. Do we have a summary for publication uh drafted planner Nash? Have I done that already? Have you done that? Does it need to be done? >> I already did that. >> Excellent. >> Okay, ma'am. Uh Miss Johnson, city cler updates, please. >> Mr. Mayor and members, we have the receptionist position has been posted. We've got I think eight or nine applications as of today. It closes on Friday. Um the lieutenant and I had a meeting with bar none along with uh attorney groupy um and planner Nash. We were having some discussions about what type of IUP CDC that they need. You guys can jump in anytime if you'd like either. But I think it went really well and I feel like they're going to go with the paperwork. Um Cindy or Planner Nash has now gotten over the requirements of what they needed, what type of espro that they were going to need to get started. Um so I'm hoping to follow up with them by Monday if they if I haven't heard anything. >> That's great news. >> Um same with the ordinance reviews. Um you guys are seeing a lot of emails coming through with different things. Um, Dileia has been working pretty diligently with attorney all sites trying to get the ordinances all current and up to date with what is a state statute or different rules that had changed and as they're coming through we will get those to you for approval. Your recycling day is the 20th. 7:30 to 12 7:30 a.m. Um, I know we ask that you can be there to help volunteer if you're able. I had a question about the heritage festival, whether or not you want the city represent represented there as a booth or just visiting or how you'd like that done as a council this time this year. >> So, you're looking for feedback right now? >> I am. Does there any recommendations for the city on how we want to represent? >> Mr. Mayor Council, >> I believe in the past we've done we've done it both ways. We've had a booth and we've had people uh tables set up and we've had staff that means it was staffed and we had like water testing kits that they could check out and then other times we just >> Any recommendation from yourself on how you see? Um, I don't necessarily want to. I mean, I think right now the staff is being involved as far as participating and moving moving things around and helping out. I would think and there I believe they're recognized on the banner that the city of Elden's been helping out. I don't necessarily want to um if I would say if city staff wanted to volunteer their time at a booth, they certainly could, but I don't want to necessarily go pay the expense of a One question. >> Um, do M. Johnson, do we have any type of formal name tag for council members and mayor so that while we're attending city sponsor functions like the heritage festival, they wear those so people see us wearing maybe they don't know us by face. Um, >> we do not, but we can certainly make one. >> We're a sash, >> Mr. Mr. Mayor. Well, Miss Congeniality wear the sash. I'm not going to wear the sash. Mr. Mayor, >> follow up in that. In the past, we have had some sort of badges made at um council and stuff. >> If they wanted a badge, a badge, we there was at least a template and there was some place down in Columbia Heights or something that >> had a way to do it. So, >> Mr. Mayor, >> in previous years, um I've had them made and paid for them for the newer council members. I haven't done it recently and I don't mean just last fall. Um, and I did it through Sterling at um in a note across when I was a old badge, but it has a I I don't think it doesn't have the new logo on it because I did it when I was first elected. So, um, but that's where I went and I off the wagon on that one. >> Miss Johnson, is that something you could look into and if they want the council members pay for their own badges, they pay for their own badges. >> Yes, we will get pricing and then send it out. Let me know. I'll make sure that we can get them by the 20th as well. >> I certainly do not know everyone by name. So, I think it would be a great >> You can have a sash. >> Thank you. I didn't mean to cut out. I don't Did you have any more to add? I just had that showcase. >> Oh, no. I'm trying to pick a Sandra Bullet's character. Anyways, uh I do have a question for the uh longer term council people here. When we were present, have been Heritage Festival. Has it served, you know, as a benefit to the to the residents? Do they like come up and engage us where they might not otherwise? I mean, is there some measurable thing in your memory where there's there's a a like a distinct positive that comes from that or is it just sort of standing there handing stuff out? >> Uh, Mr. Mayor, if Council Member Swanson, um, I believe there is a benefit. The people residents like to be able to see you there and have conversations with you. Um, you know, I don't know if we would agree to have it um for just certain hours and and we could try to go in and and each take an hour or two, something like that. Um, the other thing is is that this the city was it last year or the year before now that staff did it and and had um the giveaways and everything? >> That was two years ago. >> Two years ago. Okay. Um I I I think the residents like it. Um we could ask Natalie with with advanced notice that we could do some um depending on staffing is that we could do some um hour switches, you know, come in a little bit late, work so many hours on the day, you know, for the festival. Um if we do have a booth, one of the things I would like to ask is that we I can work with staff. Um, so we've worked on the veterans memorial and part of it is advertising to the residents to get information about residents from residents about residents that served in the military and um their history and things like that so that we can collect that and that would be a good opportunity to do that. >> Are you recommending to to use staff time to do that or council members time >> as far as staffing? Well, um I I'd like to see staff. I think it's important that residents also see our staff. Um if council can um give a couple hours. I in the past I've never been able to staff it because I'm co-chair the event. This would be my first opportunity to sit in the booth and talk to residents and not a full day but couple hours. >> So is there a sign up for council members if they want to sit in the booth? Do we have set said set? >> We well at this point for the 25 we don't have anything set. So that's going to be up council to decide tonight what they want to do. Do they want to have something there where we we have our staff there and and it's by staff it's our administrative staff. >> Um we either choose to compensate them with overtime or we um ask them to adjust their hours. um that might not be possible with training that's upcoming training and we're down to just the down person. So um and then for council we can put together a schedule of how many who wants to work what hours. Um Natalie has always posted um the event that it's there's a possibility there is a form. Um there's never you have an individual conversation with the residents about something. You're not typically standing next to each other, three of us at a time talking to a resident. So >> it hasn't been an issue, but it would be >> we need to avoid that. >> Correct. And if you post it, then it if it happens, it happens, but it's posted. So >> would everybody okay from the council side be willing to do like two hours to sit in a chair? Is there a sign that says city and now city council something like that? >> Yeah. Um but if everybody's willing to do two hours um something like that and select your times and then I would just take whatever my plan is to be here so I >> Mr. Okay. >> So, yes, council member Marie will not know. Um, I may or may not be adher. That's usually my anniversary. So, >> I mean, it depends on how things work out, but I'm, you know, I'm just saying I may or may not be available to take a shift. >> And we would certainly understand. >> It's a volunteer. If I can't do it, we can't do it. >> So, is that um, Miss Johnson, could you form a list for the council members and send it out and we would select a time of two two hours. Does that work for everybody if you are here? If you're not that >> Yes, sir. >> two hours. >> Okay, I can do that. I would like a little bit of clarification. Can it be one booth then? >> Yes. >> Between the city and the council meeting that they could be done, >> we did one booth like I don't know if there's a business expo. There was a Okay. At one point in time, there was a business expo and we were just part of that. We just had a table that for the city. >> Okay. and Elon is just waiting for me to get back to her as to what we want to do. >> So, >> so council rainbow had a recommendation to have city staff there. So, would that be Saturday and Sunday meeting? >> It's just Saturday. >> Just Saturday. >> So, our public works staff works works throughout the week little by little to clean the park and have it and then move bleachers and things like that. um the administrative staff, it would just be that Saturday. Sure. And we could limit, you know, so the breakfast is 8:30 to 10:30. Um and then from 10:30 on the food vendors and all of the other um activities and then there will not be a a dinner under the 10th this year. They're going to go food vendors um and then the fireworks. So we can decide to do it starting after the breakfast. So 10:30 to 4 and and if we fill it if we fill a council member during that slot, if there is a time period in there, there isn't one, there isn't one, but staff would be there. Um I would um I would ask that we allow Natalie to determine whether or not it can they they're able to adjust hours and if not then that they be compensated with overtime. N would not get overtime, but whatever other two are. and if they're even available. >> Well, being that we're short on staff, >> we're there's so much that we're not using. Correct. >> Correct. >> So, one, you'd have to ask once they're available. if they're available and are interested and we can't ask you can't ask them to volunteer time >> that that's >> I think we could say we're going to pay them >> and then because we're short finish your statement on that would overtime be acceptable >> you have a concern on that >> then overtime would be available I know you're trying to make ends meet as a little bit short >> um and just so you all know I will be available after noon. So I would ask that girls do it earlier in the morning. >> And you may find that and Mary you can maybe talk about this, but would it be beneficial to have somebody in the city uh booth at 8:00 in the morning to help give information and guide people along? >> No. Uh the staff, the Heritage Festival staff does a good job of te telling everybody all the vendors and you know where where they should. >> So city staff starting after breakfast and then they would carry out till what 5 o'clock. Is that >> I I don't know if we need to go that. I would say four. >> And then with that, you'll work a schedule out where the city council members can sit in there for an hour and a half, two hours, whatever makes sense. Okay. >> Okay. >> Any other >> uh Yep. My next update was the overlay and you each got an email from um engineer Nelson kind of giving you the update on that and kind of the process as to how it's going to go. just to let the public know is that the once the work is completed and we tabulate all the costs um the council will then consider the adoption of the assessments and that would get a letter to each property owner will it'll say what the final assessment amount is and the instructions for paying it off if they choose to do so before it's certified to the county. Um and it's got to be to the county I think early to mid November is what this says. So, we've had a couple of calls about the assessment. So, I just wanted to make sure you all understood um what the process is. So, if you get calls from any residents, you know when it's going to be coming into play. Um the humane society, I believe I also sent you out a letter uh from the humane society saying at the end of the year they will not be taking any more at large animals. Um, Lieutenant Bangader has been working trying to find different places because it's affecting all of the or all the cities that they >> all on Ela County, right? >> All eight of our contract cities. I know for sure. I can't say about the PDS in the southern half of the county, but all eight of our contract cities were with >> So, does that mean you get to just keep all the animals in? Well, it means that we would probably tell people if there's not a new contract in place for each city that sorry, we have nothing that we can do with your found because there's no contract in place. So, >> but as a city, are we at are we looking or is as a sheriff's department we're looking? >> I sent one possibility and I don't know if you've reached out to them. Um, our patrol division only so far has been able to look at one possibility is replacement. Um, and off the top of my head, I don't even remember what it's called, but I remember forwarding it. >> Yeah, we do have it. I know uh Julio's working at contacting them and then there were also to contact a couple other cities to see what they're doing that are not under contract with the county. >> So, we're looking at looking at options. >> Yes. And then the last thing was um the uh resolution that I dropped on your desk is today that I sent to you because I received an email today from a uh person who would like to donate some ball field improvements. Um I we just need to accept the donation. Um what they were doing is some grading, some raking, some leveling out of the field and just kind of making sure that things get updated. um make the ball field a little bit better. >> Mr. Mayor, >> Brian, the um both ends we haven't probably haven't ever been rebuilt. So, you're basically there large drop off. So, there's no place in there. As well as in the um the um bedding cage that it just there's there's just it hasn't been maintained. It hasn't been worked through. So, it's just filling in and repacking just like we last last year. We basically rebuilt the entire infield. So, um by there just some more spots to do. Plus, if there's time, it's fill in some of the the um animal holes that are decided to mounds that they decided to make um by having a wide open large grassy area. So, um we had I would say last year's project was very successful and they've offered to do it again. Um as well as um taking care of some weeds and and um digging up and putting down some more dirt so that the field can be used as was mentioned in the email that the both the BFW and the American Legion had teams that played um at used our field in addition to our town balls team. So, and the works being donated. So I would make a motion to accept that donation for improvements. >> Second. >> Second from Council Rainbow. Any other discussion? Let's move to vote. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Oppos. Not a motion carries. Okay. Donations accepted. We move on to number 12, which is new business. Mr. Mayor, council member, before we move on to new business since we just did the clerk's update. I would like to and I might get reading on this, but I would like to thank Natalie and probably Dia who work really hard, but it seems like our sound system and um video uh is much improved over previous years and hopefully the residents see the benefit to it as well. So, thank you very much. I would give most of the credit to Dia. She worked very very hard with this to get this working. >> So tonight is a huge improvement. >> Much appreciated. >> Excellent. Thank you, >> Mr. Mayor. I I agree with Council Blazer. I mean, we used to record them on cassette tapes. So, we've come a long way. Yeah. Thank you, fortunate she had that background. She's done a lot of hard work and we have failed multiple times to get to here. But I got to tell you, we continue to encourage her. We continue to look at I know we had upset residents. I got I I can't tell you the number of phone calls I've got on it and to say the sound quality is bad. So I I I certainly appreciate all the work in our work. It sounds like we're there and you said next week they will come in or the end of this week they're going to come in and put the >> They're trying for Friday. Um if not early next week. >> So great point. Thank you for bringing that up. All right, so we're on number 12, um, which is 12A, approval over, uh, revision of city council policy. Miss Johnson, you want to take the lead on this one? >> This is the next thing that was on our list after we finished the administrative personnel policies. Um, so pretty much I'm going to let attorney Alikes uh run through it. It was a policy that as far as I know hasn't been touched and I'm not sure how long. Um, and some things needed to be adopted and um, he suggested some changes. So, uh, attorney, would you like to take it over? >> Yes, please. >> Would be happy to. And this one is much more brief than the, uh, personnel policy, so that is good. Um I I just want to make clear that uh under section 1-1-1 which is uh page 198 of the council policy packet that you all are aware that when you adopt this policy um the policy is binding. You must abide by that policy. So this is one of those situations where I always like to advise clients. If you don't want to do something or you're up in the air about it, maybe it's best practice, but you're not inclined to abide by it, you know, every single time or there's reasons not to, don't put it in the policy. Um, because you are going to be required to abide by it. So, just keep that in mind when we, you know, have conversations about certain provisions here is that if something is included, uh, that means that it must be followed. Um, speaking of things that must be followed, I just wanted to include in uh it's page 199, section 1-1-3, the open meeting law. Uh, just a reminder here, and this is a requirement of statute. So, it's not putting any additional burden on you, uh, that you are not allowed to engage in serial communication, meaning, you know, council member A talks to the clerk, the clerk talks to council member B, relays that to council member A, etc. Um, so I thought it was um pertinent to put into the council policy. Uh, the other this one is a bit more of a policy call. It's not a statutory requirement, but I believe in speaking with um, Miss Johnson and kind of reading through the policy. Uh, it seems you all have your individual uh, email accounts. Uh, just requiring that email accounts are conducted through those email accounts and they're not for personal use. It just helps keep everything neat and tidy for purposes of data practices, requests, etc. Uh, it also allows for the municipality to know where all of their records are at any given time. Um, we've had situations with municipalities where a million email accounts are used and trying to track down where the town records are is always difficult in that instance because our emails can be full of those records. So, that is just >> Yep. We're on pause for a second. Uh, sorry to interrupt. So, just give give you an example. So, I'm at work. Um, I've asked Miss Johnson to send it to my work email so I see it come in. So, number one, if she needs response, I can get it. This would be a violation of using my work emails to respond to Miss Miss Johnson. Is that correct? >> What is Miss Johnson sending you in the first place, Mr. Mayor? >> Um, this the donation. So, she's sending it to my mayor account, but also my work account. Um, so one, >> ah, >> I see it and then if I respond I, you know, it would be a thanks or something like that, but probably be the first person to be in violation of not using the mayor email everything. >> Yeah, as drafted that >> as drafted, that could be a technical violation. And if that's something that you all do in practice, I just want to make you aware that your private emails then will be the subject of a data practices request if applicable. Um, so just to safeguard your personal email accounts, I would, you know, say tend on the air you're on the side of just using your municipal accounts, your city accounts. Um, but of having that email account open and this email account >> I can send an email that says check your email if it's something I need to see today. >> Thank you. >> That that great idea >> because my goal is not to be in violation. It's just sometimes you're trying to balance a lot of different things and that and that's why I bring it up to the whole council because I I yeah I'm not great at that. So we'll change we'll put directions. Thank you. Keep proceed please. >> Okay. And again that would be what we would call kind of like a directory policy. There's not a specific sanction for you know not abiding by it. So if there is a violation it does not undo any permit that's being discussed or anything like that. It simply just means that your emails become subject to that data practices request and that you know more email accounts than just the city email accounts are containing town records. The next section I resolved the issue on page 202 page 203. >> Rules of order and procedure. I want to talk about this one for just a little bit. >> Hold on a second. Council Rainbow's got a question. >> So M Mr. Mayor um and the council. So on page 2011 G is in Georgeformational meetings. The council sh will conduct anformational slashorientation meeting with newly elected officials in the second the second Thursday of December of each year. So we've not done that. Is it something we want to do? Because we have it's been in there. We've never done it. Frank uh first time Frank was here he started to try to work on that. Um, but now they're because they're not elected or they're not in office yet, we can't mandate make it mandatory that a newly elected official do it. Um, so an incentive would be that we pay them a stipen to attend. >> Could we just remove it? >> Well, or we can remove it. I that's I mean does council see value in doing that. Now this year um or last year Natalie met with an incoming council members. Maybe that is sufficient, but we need to decide if we want to do it. If we don't, take it out. If we do, what's the process? >> I'd like to refer to council member Blazer on that. You think what we did was sufficient? >> I do. Unless unless the uh the meeting with for new council members with current council members would cover anything on procedural type of things. Is that you know, for me the the the hardest part of this job was the first couple meetings. So otherwise, I think the the orientation day that you and I experienced was >> was good. So, what I I would suggest then that we remove it, but put on Natalie's to-do list down the road um because we won't have an election till next fall that um maybe she tried to develop something for new council members and council and then come back to us with this is what I'd suggest based on what we she did last year with the new council members. And if we unless we just decide not to move it up, I don't think we need to formalize it. I mean, if we're saying that it's an information meeting that we go into picking a specific time, second Thursday of December is December can get kind of busy as far as holidays, etc. So, I would just assume remove it and then we can work around it however we need to and it's not policy. Great. >> Yeah. Delete it. >> Is everybody good? Delete. >> All right. So, I don't even want to call that. 1-1-5-g would be delete. >> Sir, >> thank you, Mr. Mayor. So, um, on page 202, just a very minor tweak that I've included. Uh, it's, you know, the presiding officer shall determine which member has the right to speak and may move matters to a vote once the officer has determined all members have spoken. just a minor clarification or have had the opportunity to speak. Um all members don't need to speak, just be given the opportunity. Um page 203, uh 1-1-7, rules of order and procedure. Um the Minnesota Mayor's Association and League of Minnesota Rules of Order. It makes it sound like it's too different, so I've changed it to the official title. um and making clear that it is one mayor's handbook produced by the league and that we're adopting the version that's dated October 2024. So, it's excluding past versions. It's just clear and succinct. Um with respect to that, um the only issue I have with adopting that handbook arises on page uh 204. I've pulled this language from there. It's the language in red on page 204, which is when a council member violates the terms of this policy, the presiding officer can not recognize until that person comes into decorum, uh, declares the council member's actions as out of order or move to a formal vote to censure, which again, censuring really doesn't do anything. It's just a public reprimand essentially with getting multiple people behind it. Um, the mayor's handbook also recommends a possibility for an order of removal from the council chambers by law enforcement until a council member agrees to abide by council rules of decorum. I would highly caution against that. Um there's a good amount of first amendment case law that deals with uh even trying to limit disturbances in an audience um and removal of an individual who um could be per se quote unquote disturbing the peace or disturbing peaceful assembly. Uh there has been a first amendment case law that has come down in the state of Minnesota uh that indicates that um that the the language has essentially changed in that statute because of its chilling effect on First Amendment. Uh so I would highly um discourage uh using that method that is included in this Minnesota mayor's handbook uh for risk of a possible 1983 constitutionality claim uh for violating First Amendment. >> Where did you see it listed in here? What page was that specific? >> Ah thank you. So, if you if you go to the mayor's handbook, uh, chapter 1-9, >> and it appears to be referenced in appendix A as well of the mayor's handbook. >> So, it's not it's not >> perfect. I have to tell you, I think not including it in our handbook would be appropriate. >> I think we're we're all equals. If you look at this and the goal is to keep each other in check, there shouldn't be anybody voting while off the island. That's next. So I have to wait. I think I believe it should any other discussion >> sir attorney all sites. Are we bound by that though by um the the statement that uh rules of order procedure these proceedings in city council shall be conducted in accordance with the Minnesota mayor's handbook. So are we bound by that? >> And that's that's what I'm indicating. I've spoken with the two partners Mike and Bob about the language and how this is drafted. um it is the presiding officer is authorized to. So if we do have specific concerns about it, we could create a caveat and adopt by reference the entirety of this handbook with the exception of removing this particular language. Um, the other way to do it is just adopt it and technically the mayor would have discretion to do it, but I would caution as the city attorney for the mayor or pres whoever whomever may be appointed as the presiding officer for a hearing to not do that uh given the liability it could um put the the city under. >> I can just tell you guys I would not do that. I would not do that to anybody. That's not the goal. The goal is how we get along and make things get it done by the city. >> So I think it's a good recommendation. >> Mr. Mayor, >> council rainbow >> on on page 203 where the attorneys say has removed under one 1-18 he's uh removed the aspirational statement prior to the thing on on ABC. >> So should we then delete the uh under D to effectuate these aspirational goals because We've taken that that verbiage out of AB and C. So, we just start out with city council members shall conduct themselves. >> I've got no problem with that. >> Move 1-18 D aspirational language. Okay. >> Again, page 206 now. Yes, >> Mr. Mayor. We got 124. We got Council Brian talks about voting that that the votes of the city council will be taken by voice vote. That's obviously not the case anymore as we have meetings that we're allowed to attend remotely. Well, they're all they are voice typically covered in another section. >> All right. So, we go down to 204. We go to >> 2061-1-13 minutes. Um so if you look to Minnesota statute 412 uh 151 uh it does indicate that and let me control a minutes here. The clerk shall keep one a minute book noting therein all proceedings of the council. That's the statutory requirement. So I see a comment from someone that uh a meeting book is not be a minute book is not being kept. Um so I would keep a minute book. Um what I will indicate here though is um having wrote the language the minutes shall contain at a minimum is again placing a very high burden on whomever takes the minutes uh and means that your minutes need to include all of those things and if they don't it could subject you to potential liability if the minutes are ever brought up in litigation. So again, I would advise um changing the language here to the minutes may include um and not have it be a shallow or not not be the shallow language in essence. Um and then you could consider pairing this down if you want well as well. But I I think that we should make this more aspirational uh in in nature instead of a requirement that goes far above what is required by statute. I think nobody's going to argue that. That sounds good. >> Mr. Attorney Alsightes. >> Yes. >> It was Dia because she and I talked about this that we no longer keep up like a three room binder with all of the meeting minutes in it that they're all hosted online either on the website or in an electronic by year and date. Is that sufficient? We don't really have to have like a book, do we? >> Statute is not clear on that. I'll see if there's case law that's come up or if there are any um oftentimes statutes will have kind of a um notes section in WLAW, uh which is our legal research um engine. So, I will put that on my list of to-dos to see if electronic minute books satisfy um because I know there are some requirements like keeping an ordinance book at the the library that's generally done on paper. U so I do want to um take take a look at this one and get an answer back to you. It shouldn't take long at all. book, paper, or >> thank you. >> Let's keep scrolling. I'm down at compensation now. Page 211. I think that um maybe Natalie, did you want to adjust this? >> Yeah, the salaries needed to be adjusted and you and I can talk about that. two two changes. >> Uh Mr. Mayor, >> ma'am, what do does it even need to be there? >> Are we better off to just say it can be a amended per your policy and just kind of remove the dollar amounts in it? >> Yes. >> Or so Mr. Mayor. >> So we have um in our city code, >> right? Chapter one um administ and then administration section three is city council salaries. So can we just compensation is based on city code and then >> and this has to be fixed too because it talks about pdium salaries which we don't do pdeium salaries >> that way though >> right so we need to that is something to put on the to-do list um to to work on that and I started doing a draft one of it um which I'll work with Natalie on that so we get that um corrected >> change the policy to reference the ordinance and And when it changes, the ordinance will change, >> right? Yeah. It's just one spot. >> Council member, could I get that um or the city code number again that you were referencing? Compensation set per city code >> chapter one administration section three city council salaries. >> Thank you. >> Um also too on that same page 21 um city council meetings. It says 7:00 we now use six. Um, can we make that more generic as or does it have to have a time? >> Um, it doesn't need to have a time. I don't believe. Again, this is something I can look at. I know that you do need to post uh there's a requirement of notice of when your meetings are going to be. Um, I I would just do a default of my advice would just be do a default of six o'clock and include language unless otherwise noticed. Okay, that sounds good. >> That just covers all bases best. >> Keep going here. >> I think that's it. >> So, Mr. Mayor >> Council Rainbow. >> Um I move that we approve the city of Melbourne city council policy with the changes that we've um discussed with attorneys. >> Second. >> Second from Council Member O'Brien. Any other discussion? Hearing none. Let's move to vote. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> I. Opposed. Motion carries. Complete. >> Can I just ask a quick question? Sure. Page 213. perform or delegate the duties of official lead inspector state >> really really important not inspector >> so I'm still studying figure out what are good weeds and bad >> lack of every council member >> you know product >> all right so we're up to 218 >> Mr. Mayor to also um page 217 um city council leaison to certain city advisory committees that also needs to be updated and I'll work with Natalie on that um because we we um also have the stipen involved in that now and so I'll work with Natalie who then can work with Mark since we just approved it. >> Do we need to vote again on it? Well, can we approve it as is and that one section can come back? >> Okay, done. We're going to go with your recommendation. Thank you. Can we move on to uh the next one which on page 218 approval of ordinance 2025 or replacing the fee schedule >> and Miss Johnson? >> There really isn't. It's a lot of the things that um both Mary and Dia worked really hard on to find the prices compared to other other recycling centers. Um like a few of you know trying to change some vendors around it all. Um looking at our rentals, looking at our driveway access permits. Um the planning and zoning, we've uh already discussed those application fees. um the rightway management that is basically clarifying some language and adding the excessive use of law enforcement services. Um attorneys, do you have anything else that you kind of want to do you want to go through your comments on it or her comments? Yeah. So my comments that are um more substantive than just you know changing cost incurred to costs incurred just for consistency so we can capture all cost and it doesn't just refer to one cost. Uh would start on page 230 bottom of the page professional fees and escrow amounts. Uh you can kind of see the according red lines here. Um there was reference to section 1-2-3 of the city code which does not exist. Um, so I removed any references to that. Um, I included language that escro amounts for applications instead of setting it at flat 1500 shall be set and amended by resolution of the city city council. Um, so you all can um set an escro schedule for uh different fees at different amounts. Obviously, somebody who wants to open up a wood shop uh IUP making cabinets is different than somebody who wants to do a massive mining operation that will require EIW, EIS, etc. Um that's going to cost a lot more. The escro should probably be reflected to be different. So, that is uh something that you all may may consider. And then the last thing is >> we hold on a second. Uh, Miss Ner, >> uh, Attorney Alsites, I hate to interrupt you. You probably are not aware that a year ago the city adopted a, um, ordinance directly pertaining to escros that has considerable more language than this section. >> Ah, okay. I was not aware of that in my conversations with Dia because I asked if, you know, she was able to chase down this 1-2-3 and she said, "I don't see anything either." Uh with that in mind, I think that this language upon my review of that ordinance, uh I should look and look at and retool this language to be consistent with that ordinance. >> I would concur, but it it does allow us to set um for staff basically to set the escro amounts depending on the complexity of a project. >> Exactly. And and that's all I'm looking for here, right? Just just for the example that I gave for that reason. So very good. Um the only thing that I didn't see in the escrow language here and it could be in that other ordinance is there was no uh return of unused funds uh in the escrow language. That's just something that's common practice. Uh city doesn't need to use all the funds of the escrow. It should be returned. So I've added that language on 231. And then the last thing I want to talk about is administrative fines. So page 232, administrative enforcement penalties. There was a class A and class B labeled here. Again, in speaking with Dia, we weren't able to find any class schedules that uh categorized violations as class A or class B. So I'll relay to you uh what I told uh and advised Dileia, which is um we should set a schedule and speaking with um one of the partners, Bob Rupy at the office. Um Bob per his personal recommendation and preference is if we're going to take the time to do it to do it as ordinance instead of resolution as I've suggested here. Um really the only reason to do that is because administrative fines in the first place are kind of on um some degree of shaky legal ground. Uh the statutory authority to impose them um is not super clear. we have the power to enact ordinances and ordinances act is local law. Um but you know it could just be a little bit clearer if we said it directly by ordinance. That would be Mr. Rupy's recommendation. Um so with that being said, when we think about structuring administrative penalties, the way that we've seen it done most effectively is having your class A be zoning. For example, all zoning infractions get you this administrative penalty. That's your class A's. Your class B's are then you know what injures public health and safety, your nuisances, right-of-way ordinances, etc. Uh that could be set at a flat dollar amount as well. And then having a class C, which would be a catch-all for all ordinances not included in class A and class B, uh you would be subject to a class C administrative penalty or fine. Um we generally don't advise going beyond uh three administrative penalties. Uh once we get to that point, uh the next step, we've given notice, we've given them the administrative penalties, is um bringing an action in district court to get compliance. Uh I'll use a zoning violation or a nuisance as an example. Um our statutory ability to enter onto somebody's property without court order uh could subject us to possible trespass claims. It could also subject us to possible takings claims if we are going to remove a pile of junk from somebody's property that had all of their antique collectible goods that are worth so much money. Um really before we do any taking of property, uh we want to go through uh process. Uh you've probably heard the phrase due process and we want to go through process when we do our enforcement actions as well. That process is through a district court order. And when we bring that district court um lawsuit, we want to make sure our ordinances, and we talked about this a little earlier in the night, contains the language for collection of costs incurred in enforcing our ordinances pursuant to Minnesota statutes 366012, 429021. And I like to include the language as well. Any other relevant authority uh because if I do get fees awarded um a court, you know, gives us a court order saying that we're getting attorneys fees. Uh there's a then hearing that comes after for how much of the fees should be awarded. And I like to point back to the court order is authority as well and say ordinance has any other authority in court. You've just issued an order saying we're entitled to fees. So independent of statute at this point, we're operating under a court order as well. that gives us an entitlement to fees and the only question left is how much can we recover. So, um that's kind of my take here. Um so, I would turn it over. It's completely a policy call for you all how you structure your administrative fines and penalties. That is just what we've seen as best practice kind of how I broke it down between class A, B, and C. >> MS. >> Um Mark, just to have some clarification then you want to do an administrative fine ordinance and we can work on that and that's kind of would take over this place. >> That sounds great. I think that's the cleanest way to do it. So, we can move forward with the fee schedule. Let's move this administrative fine ordinance to a different ordinance. That way, we're not holding up the show on on the fee schedule. >> Mr. Mayor, >> I have two corrections on page 224. Um the recycling tigers um about little Halfway down is loader. $55. That's should be deleted. And then underneath that is skid steer off rim, skid steer on rim. That should be a skid steer for a Bobcat. And Gilly is aware of that. Just so that one misses. >> A bobcat is a skid steer. >> No, they're they're different manufacturers, but cases. >> Skid steer. A skid steer is a skid steer. A Bobcat's a brand. When you say skid steer, it's all inclusive. It's >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Yeah, we can take >> Well, the problem is is if if our administrative staff doesn't know the difference, they know. So, >> okay. >> Train them to know what's good. >> Perfect. >> Is there any other corrections on that? >> Mr. Mayor, council member, >> I'm just curious. Do we police ch the usage of chairs and the rentals of chairs? Are you taking the chairs and walking them up? If somebody rents this if somebody rents this space out and then >> No, it's the other chairs that we have when they take them off site. So, we've got a a couple of rows of the metal chairs in the shop and we do have a few people that will rent those chairs and those are the only ones we rent up. We don't rent these offsite and if they're here they can use them. >> Okay. Just it wasn't clear what that meant with given where this section was. >> No, I was just >> And Mr. Mayor, one additional thing that I've just thought of. So, we also don't have the fee in here for the excessive use of law enforcement services. I think that we I can't recall if the council left it as we're still going to conduct some research and talk to the sheriff about the price per hour or price per call. Um, I know that we had received a memo from the sheriff. I'm not sure where we're at with council action on that. Um, but I do think that wherever we have landed and if we have not landed anywhere, council should make a decision and include that fee in the administrative and not in the administrative but in the fee schedule. >> Mr. Mayor, >> I I believe that is addressed on page 232. >> Oh, it is. I missed it. Thank you, Council Member Rainbow. [Music] Okay. So, Mr. Mayor, >> Councilman, >> make a motion to approve the ordinance uh repealing and replacing the fee schedule and including the publication of the updated >> to include uh going to the AB and C that'll be separated out. Is that correct? fee schedule didn't >> administrative fine schedule >> with with whatever with with whatever changes that we discussed tonight. >> Yes, sir. Your honor, >> I might thank you for seconding that second time. M Johnson, >> can we add accepting the ordinance summary so that it can get >> catch? >> He's pretty good. >> I'm trying to get him to use his outside voice. >> The microphones are for any other discussion on it. >> Move to vote. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> I. >> Oppose. Motion carries. Anybody didn't catch it? Council member Brian did say I was very low. >> All right. So, that takes care of 12B. Does that take care of 12 C also then? >> Yes. >> Yes, sir. >> Yes, sir. >> Much better. >> Outstanding. Thank you, >> Mr. Mayor. Since it's kind of old new business, do we want to add the dates to review the budget and just get that on calendars now or do we want to do that at another time? >> We we certainly can. If you're because we're on old business, you would like to add the date. I just think we're kind of in that general vicinity. >> You could either do it I don't necessarily think you want to do two backtoback meetings. So I would look at November 5th or November 19th. >> Can I recommend something? >> Sure. >> Could we do December 2nd, one week before the city council meeting? >> Would that be possible? Instead of pushing it into November, ask someone if we're going to talk about city budget. It'll give us a little bit of time to process and then we would do our our final board of adopting on the 9th if that one week earlier will work. >> Mr. Mayor, >> could I ask for staff um that we do it on the 8th on Monday night um only because the second we won't have all of our invoices ready for the claims on the 9th. So, they won't be posted yet. Our deadline is not really until the 4th. I try to get them we try to get them all in. >> Maybe the maybe we could do the fourth instead. I'd prefer to not put it the day before the city council meeting. >> The fourth would we can make sure we cut off by then >> because then at that point we would have all projections in >> available. Okay. Fourth is >> so that third could work. >> We'll just cut off our check run sooner then. >> Okay. Would it would that work for everybody else? December 30. Yes. Yes. Yes. If everybody's good with it, I'm putting it in right now. >> Um I will verify that Miss Edgar is available. >> Yes, please. We will do six o'clock on Wednesday, December 3rd. >> Thank you for bringing that up. Thank u I would like to uh move on to old business, which is the internet update. Uh we did meet with Comcast again. Get up here. Um, can we put the map? Can we project that up on the screen? >> All right. So, you're going to see some, it's on your very back page. You're going to see multiple different colors. Um, purple areas are areas that uh they're completed. Um, magenta is Kexus is completed, but Comcast is in progress. Pink is where Kexus is in progress and Comcast would come and follow them. White is the permanent design and then light blue is uh is Kexus designed for permitted. So the one thing he said is they are a couple weeks behind uh due to Kexus uh having to deal with some I'll say unplanned weather which caused a few weeks delay. Uh but they're cautiously optimistic and that's probably the best term I can use to say that everybody will be complete by the end of 2025. Um, currently right now they have 333 homes that are released for service and another 600 targeted by the end of October. So they are working diligently and they've got a very good sync plan with Kexus and and Comcast working together on this. The one area that would be last on the list and it's in the light blue. It's really in the southwest corner of now. If the map is up there, I'll just point to it. So somewhere in this where Burns Parkway was tough map to look at. Right in here is going to be the last area that they're going to finish up. A lot of this was serviced by our big uh where they service about 83 houses. Uh but we've got one little section here that we're hoping we can get done and have it will be the last connection piece and it'll probably be in in November before it gets done. So, any questions on the on the update from Comcast? I can say we got everybody working in the same direction trying to get this done. Um, so be really excited. Every uh every couple weeks more and more get done, more houses are getting turned off, but just the struggle is going to be can we get it all completed this year. Worst case scenario is that particular area uh it doesn't get turned on until April of 2026. Nobody wants to do that. >> Mr. Mayor, do they not already have Aravic though? >> No, there's a couple houses there. >> They went short on ARVIC and then they're last in the compass plan. >> Okay. >> Okay. Uh recycle center. So, last on the agenda is 13B recycle center. Um who is leading that one? >> Uh attorneys. They have some comments on the contract that they want us to change before um intent to leave opening to sign it and get moving. >> Okay. Sir, it's back up to you for uh all sides. >> Thank you, M. All sides. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So, no major red flags here. I'll kind of jump to my biggest concern, which is, you know, the first borderline red flag, which is section 11. It's the indemnification provision. My concern is that the existing language uh in section 11 which I can tell you here is on page 37. Nope 30 35. So it's page 35 of the city council packet paragraph 9 indemnification. It doesn't provide a limit on what you're indemnifying. So the language that I have drafted that's appearing on the screen here um says that it you know it you're indemnified from to the extent that such claims arise from the municipality or the county's negligence or willful misconduct in connection with activities performed under the agreement and then clarifying neither party shall be responsible for another party's you know routine ad routine administrative mistakes delays or minor procedural oversightes except to the extent that it actually rises to the level of gross negligence which is reckless disregard um for the agreement. I just think that that limitation is important so you don't get drawn in over small nitty-gritty things that you then have to agree to um you don't have to agree to um hold harmless and then um just making sure that those obligations set forth in the section survive termination of the agreement or expiration of the agreement as well. Um so that's kind of the language that I would suggest with respect to indemnification. One other thing given um this agreement does ex involve an exchange of funds through a grant program um what happens to partially funded projects or equipment that the city has purchased and is used for recycling purposes pursuant to the agreement. Um but you know we now have a terminated agreement. What happens to that property? what happens to eligible expenses that are incurred prior to the date of expiration. Um, these are the things that I don't want the city to have to be out of pocket for, but rather I think that this agreement should contain a provision that, you know, allows for things in motion to get to disposition um, prior to the determination. And just clarifying that what is city property used for purposes of this agreement will remain as such so long as it's for use used for recycling purposes. and that any and all eligible expenses that you incur up to the date of termination um is subject to the agreement as well and that unspent funds go back. Um the other stuff above is more minor. Um for example, section 4 paragraph 2 um the county reserves the right to re uh assess reimbursement reporting status for each municipality. Um there's no written notice requirement for this. It's very similar. Section 4, paragraph 3, um the right to withdraw reimbursement by the county. Again, there's no opportunity to cure a defect. So, it doesn't hurt to throw language in and see if they'll give you 30 days to cure that instead of just being able to um withdraw the reimbursement immediately. Section five, paragraph A, is just a practical concern. Um this is kind of the notice requirements about the recycling programs. It gives three options for the municipality. The first two include what reads to be um kind of paper versions. Uh I wasn't sure if the city would want to inquire if they would be okay with an electronic version just as a cost-saving measure and also just for administrative ease. Um section six adding in language that the city shall not be financially penalized for errors resulting in a misscheduled deadline. Again, just giving an opportunity to cure. So there's no penalty there. Uh and then section 6J was a little bit interesting. Um the language in this section uh makes it seem like the county is asking the city or almost requiring by provisions of the the agreement uh requiring that the city agree to support the county in its efforts obtaining hauler reports by ensuring compliance through ordinance contractor license requirements and ability to exercise punitive actions if needed. Um, that if needed language is a bit weird. It sounds like county discretion. And does that mean that the county gets to boss us around and tell us that we need to bring an enforcement action in district court via contract? Um, under our ordinances, uh, it it it's unclear what that language means to me. I would like to see it scrapped in its entirety and just, hey, I mean, the city's going to work with you guys on this, but we don't need to get dragged into anything um at the will of the county. Um, attorney all sank. Uh, hold on just a moment. Council rainbow attorney. So that this is so we do two reports to the year. One is a reimbursement reports getting our money back um or getting reimbured. The other is this tenants report. And what Jay refers to is we have our curbside haulers Ace Leage Republic. every month they're supposed to re um provide us the tonnage of recycling that they pick up at at the in the res for a total for the city. Um there are some cities that have that license their hollows and part of that license they can require that as part of a license. We don't license our hollows. Um, >> that's just so it's it's but we get it from them >> because they're doing it for everybody else and they know that it's part of the county contract that they send us on a monthly basis what tonnage they picked up for recycling. >> Okay, that gives me a little more context and kind of explains the hauler reports a little bit. >> Yeah, it's a hauler report. It's how much recycling they picked up, you know, a certain for the city or a lot. May maybe adding a little nomenclature of like recycling hall would be very helpful. >> But that that encompasses the totality of of my thoughts on this. I I think if there are two to push for it would be the revisions to the indemnification language as well as the proposed additional section 12 that I drafted. um that is with respect to uh disposition of partially funded projects. The rest is would be nice but I don't have strong feelings about >> so all these added sign Mr. Mayor, >> I would move that we um ask attorneys sets to work with with Miss Johnson to provide those updates to the county and um see if they're agreeable and then sign off. Second. >> Second. >> That was a second. I missed. >> Sorry, that was me. Second. >> Thank you for using our titles. Is there any other discussion on this? >> All right, let's move to vote. All those in favor say I. >> I opposed. None. Motion carries. Mr. Council member, just to clarify, council member Marino, you just said something that if if we if our recycling haulers are licensed, we can we can require that they submit the tonnage reports. Can Okay. So, does would that solve our problem of of the whole city thing where if it says an NOA, we're not getting it? Um, I would I would assume not because they are going by Yeah, I don't know. I I'd have to ask them that. >> I just I'm just curious if that's the case. Charge them five bucks and then they're they're responsible for figuring out not what who's in >> where where Yeah. if it's done or not. I we can try that. >> Okay. It was just >> the thought. So, okay. customer.