All right, it's 6 o'clock. 6 o'clock we'll call a meeting order. We'll start with the pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, liberty and justice for all. >> All right. Thank you everybody for coming out tonight. Um, is there any additions or deletions or corrections to the agenda? >> I do have one ad under uh my report would be uh I5 and it's uh related to the election lecture we talked about. >> Anybody else? Not take a motion to approve. >> Make the motion to approve. >> Thank you, Ryan. Do we have a second? >> I'll second. >> Thank you, Sheldon. All in favor? I >> oppos. Thank you. >> Consent agenda. Is there any item on there you'd like to discuss? If not, I'll take a motion to approve. >> The motion to approve. Thank you, Ryan. Do we have a second? >> I'll second. >> Thank you, Mel. All in favor? >> I. >> Okay. Up next is visitors to the council. Right. We have no visitors. Um, we'll go to the mayor's report. I just got one quick item on that. School's going to be starting soon. Please be patient with the buses out there. Please be patient with the students out there crossing. They're not always going to push crosswalk button. Just watch out for them. You know, sometimes they get in a hurry and forget. So, just be patient, work with them, know that traffic's going to get a little slow. They're in front of the school before you start, before you leave. Just just a little public service so you don't forget. Um that's it. Public forum. We have one card. Shannon Peters. If you like come up to the podium with name, address. >> Hi, good evening everyone. Um my name is Shannon Peters. I live at 603 Street Northwest. I'm here today to voice my strong objection to the placement of the new ground loaned solar array on the Cassen public lawn and library. This public utility footprint is 125 ft away from my front door, completely destroying my neighborhood view, impacting my property value, and threatening I don't know if you've done a solar glare um reflective gr glare study. What makes this situation even completely more accept unacceptable is the double standard. If I, as a taxpaying person, wanted to put ground mounted solar system in my yard, the city's zoning ordinance outright bans me from doing so to protect the neighborhood character. Yet, the library roof couldn't structurally support these panels. So, the city gave itself a pass, deciding it's perfectly fine to dump an industrial ugly footprint on the public lawn right in front of my living room. I do support green energy, absolutely, but I do not support discriminatory discriminatory zoning. This is an R1. The library is in residential one. And the total lack of transparency that led to this layout, I don't know where it came from. The city should hold its residents, The city should not hold its residents to a standard of community harmony that it refuses to practice itself. You've already laid the um concrete. You've put the post in. You've got the stands there. Now, um it's ugly. Um you've left 25 ft from the curb to the first post or I'm sorry, you've left 16 ft from the first post to the curb. Um it's just ugly. Um I would like um you to make public for all three that you have put up um that I'm that I'm aware of. I would like to make um see the glint and glare assessment for all three of those in the neighborhood. I would like the city to commit um commit to a binding cityf funed mitigated plan that includes a highquality privacy fence or a dense row of mature trees on that property so that I do not have to look at your ugly solar system. My other concern is the safety of the community and children that play there. The kids that do their cartwheels there, play hideand go seek there. If you're not putting a fence up around there, shame on you. Um, also this permit that was given to me by Ian the other day, $10,000. Is that for the total project for that public library project? That's the assessed value. That is fraud. I took this to three electricians today. They said the electrical alone would cost probably 8 to10 grand. So what are you doing? You got $103,000 grant money, which by the way is my taxpayer money and everyone in this room's taxpayer money. Ridiculous. What are you doing with the rest of it? Um, you have failed your community. I'm just saying you have failed me. You have failed the community with putting this in a neighborhood right in the front of somebody's living room. If you want, I can show you pictures if you'd like them, but I'm sure you're you know what you've done. just disgusting. You should be ashamed of yourselves. I would like a written response to my questions and how you're going to deal with this within 10 days. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> We'll put that under staff to >> Okay. Um that's the only card I had for public forum. There's no public hearing committee report EDA. >> All right. So, the first item that I have for you this evening is the uh draft subordination agreement that was presented to the EDA at our meeting earlier this month. Um so it has to do with um Elite Marketing Investments and Joe Lonzo's business. Um so long time ago, at least 10 years ago, the EDA did give a loan in the amount of $90,000 to um that business um to aid in their to assist in their relocation here to Cassen. Um fast forward to today, the balance on that loan is just over 55,000. Um but since then um another lender MBT Bank has given Elite additional loans. Um but after all of that, the EDA's mortgage on the property um just across the street here, the EDA's position is in first place ahead of all the subsequent leans on the property. Um, so the request here with a subordination agreement would move the EDA from first position um down to third position behind the the bank's existing um loan on the property and um the proposed 475,000 letter of credit that would go towards Elite for the purpose of um operation operational expenses. Uh I did have the city attorney review the subordination request and she had recommended that the EDA not agree to the subordination agreement um since it does place more risk on the EDA by moving it from first down to third position. Um however um Mr. Alonzo did come to the EDA meeting early this month and there was a rather long uh discussion that we had. Um so we learned a bit more about the situation from his perspective. Um he had also shared a a Mims report that he had prepared um in advance of asking for um the additional letter of credit from the bank um placing the value of his property closer to uh 1.2 just under $1.2 $2 million. Um we discussed a few alternatives to the subordination agreement. Um one of which was to uh instead of the third position take a second position behind the bank's um existing lean but still ahead of the proposed $475,000 letter of credit. Um Mr. Mr. Lonzo said that the bank wouldn't wouldn't agree to that um positioning. Um we also discussed the option of wiping out Mr. Lonzo's existing loan but then um taking that third position and lending him back the remaining balance but at a higher interest rate considering the increased risk to the EDA. Um but Mr. Lonzo was not in favor of that idea either. Um but at the end of all of that, the EDA um did end up recommending approval of the subordination agreement as as was drafted. Um so that is what is before consideration of you tonight. As it's noted, it says we're third, but technically according to M MBT Bank, they would roll both of their loans into one, and that would make us technically second because they classified theirs. Yes, it's two loans, but they would recover them as one. >> Yes. >> So, so that would put us back, that was where the EDA discussed it. That would put us back in second where we were originally when we did the loan. And then when he had to rebuild the building, we became the only loan on it at the time. That's why we >> that's why we're in first position. >> That's why we moved to first. But so technically we're not third. We'd be second even though it list cuz MBT would just roll said that's they count that as one loan. Even though it shows as two paper trails in the bank, they would they look at it as one. That was part of the reasoning the EDA went back and said, "Well, then we're second." And he plus he's never missed a payment from the beginning. >> If that's what I recall from that meeting. >> Yeah. Yep. How long was the time frame on that? >> He's got 10 years left. >> 10 years left. >> Yeah. He's about halfway through. >> No payments missed. >> No pay. We did give them a year off when the building went under fire and they had to rebuild. So that's why it's a little over half left due on it because he he was allowed a year grace period due to the rebuild. >> Right. >> Even at that he's the payments have been timely and >> he's lived up to all the other all the other agreements in the contract. He's held true on that. Okay. >> And there's still value in that one building that would cover everything. That was that was the logic of the EDA at the time. >> So, is any we got any questions for Ann or for a motion? I >> I had one more. >> Yes. >> So, the it's just MBTL that's listed in that. Is there a third party? >> It would just be between MBT and and us. Okay. There's just those two parties and that could move us to the second. >> Yeah. I mean, yeah, they'll still have the two loans, MBT, the >> the line of credit and the loan, >> but they they said >> they're like packaged. >> They package it, but they still leave it as two separate because it's two separate interest rates for them, but they count that as one if they had to foreclose be anything. So that would put us second technically, but it in logistics, yes, it is third, but the bank looks at it as more of a one two. So >> the the amount that would still be left in there to be covered is enough for us to recoup though, right? >> Yes. Yeah. Yeah. Cuz he's at 750,000. >> Yeah. Up to >> Yeah. Up, you know, and that's up too on their credit form, you know. So, and that building appraising according to the report you have in here shows like a 1 almost 1.2 million. Oh, any other questions or concerns? I guess I would take a motion to approve the subordination agreement. Make the motion to approve the subboard and agreement. >> Ryan, do we have a second? >> I'll second. >> Sheldon. All in favor? >> I >> I post. Okay. Next on your EDA ready. >> Yep. So, next item in there is the second half investment um going towards ready. Um the EDA has been an investor and ready for a few years now. Um through that we've um been a participant in the communities council and um you'll c recall last year the um the housing roundt that was had over in Byron. Um, more recently we did have kind of a group meeting with the other investor communities um, just to talk more about the future of the group and strategic planning as far as regional economic development goes. Um, and so at the EDA meeting earlier this month, um, there was a motion to recommend investing for the second half of of this year. So that would take us through the end of this year. Um you'll see the invoices included in the packet. If there's any questions, we did did voice our opinion at the EDA level that we want to see more out of them. So I mean they did send a little packet, but it's almost like you got to force them to do it. So, you know, so they are aware and there's other cities that voiced their same opinions that yeah, you say you want to help, but where's, you know, in where's more input for us? >> So, what did we get out of the first half? >> Uh, well, they've been talking about the that strategic planning and all of that. I think that's where u most of it has gone. They tried applying for a few different grants to um actually like develop an actual written plan. Don't think they were successful. Um but that is a lot of where the time was was spent in this first half of the year. >> Ian meets with them monthly. >> Yeah. >> To discuss issues in the region. >> Um they do provide support on different you know economic development initiatives. Um they've been talking a lot about different things in in the that are coming to Rochester and the Mayo area and the the different projects. I mean that's part of the reason that we want to see more from them. I mean if we were pretty clear like we want something tangible. You know economic development work can be hard. It doesn't always generate what you want it to generate. But doing an event like for example like that housing forum a couple years ago was beneficial. I told him I said you know you need to do something like that regularly because then I can see what tangibly you know even if it you know it's not forcing someone to build here but at least it's it's bringing that tangible thing there. And it was interesting, you know, I think everyone at the meeting was kind of doing the Minnesota nice thing right until the last 15 minutes when I said that. And then all the other cities kind of chimed up and said the exact same thing. And some of them were even a little bit more demonstrative than than than we were. But but it was it was good for them to know like put your money where your mouth is, you know, kind of a thing. So >> do you need a motion on that? Yes. >> I would look at a motion to approve the second payment. make the motion to approve that second payment. >> Brian, do we have a second? >> I will second. >> Thank you. >> With the provision that I would like to see like at the end of the year, are we getting anything out of this? >> Sure. >> Sounds good to me. >> Yeah, I agree. So, we have a motion to second. All in favor? I >> oppose. Thank you. >> Excuse me. >> You guys use your microphone. >> Oh, sorry, Dave. Thank you. All right. Um, next planning commission public works preliminary and final plat. >> Yes. So, at the planning commission meeting just last Monday, we did have a public hearing to discuss the preliminary plat of the public works subdivision. Um, I'll just show it up here on the map. So, you're all familiar with the public works site. It's actually uh right now it's just one parcel just shy of 80 acres out on 16th Street Northeast. Um so it includes the actual public works facility itself, the their garages and everything, the wastewater treatment facility, um quite a lot of open space um in the middle areas and the far extent to the north. Um and some wooded acreage on the um the east side of Masten Creek up over here. Um so with this preliminary plat um it would divide the entire parcel up into um five different parcels labeled 1 2 3 4 and five um as you can see on the plaid up here. Um so a couple things with this proposal. Um since access is only provided via 16th Street Northeast and then a drive that comes off of it. Um some of these lots are going to not have direct um frontage off of the public street. Um so to remedy that situation um we do have an access easement running through um the entirety of the lot, almost the entirety of the parcel um which would provide access to um those lots that don't have the the exact um access off of the public street. Um so you'll see in the resolutions we've got a couple of things. Um one is just um making sure that the declaration that's included in the packet as exhibit B. Um having the city attorney review that and everything. Make sure it's all ship shape before um we actually move to record the plat and the access agreement to go the access easement to go with it. Um let's see. There were a few comments that came up during the public hearing. Um, some of them having to do with this proposed lot five um down in the southeast corner. Um, right now it's it's just wooded acreage. Um, I did share that one proposal by the city was to um develop it possibly as a single family residential housing. Um, however, a lot of those present felt that it would be better utilized as a public city park. Um, but I just want to reiterate that, um, the single family housing was just a proposal. Um, and the effect of approving these plat lock, um, that proposal in by any means. Um, so I just want to share that with everyone. Um, and then there were some comments about the land owners out here to the east. Um, they expressed wanting to have some access to a portions of their property, although it also sounded like they did have access already. um um little bit of a a situation there, but um even with that I think I don't think there were any issues that would have um there weren't any issues that the planning commission felt um would have prevented them from recommending approval of these plat. So um in your packets you do have the preliminary and final plat together um separate resolutions for each um any questions. No questions. So we need to prove the preliminary plant first, right? That's right. So, I would guess I'd look for a motion to approve the preliminary plan for the cast and public works subdivision. >> Make that motion. Ryan, do we have a second? >> I'll second. >> Sheldon. All in favor? >> I. >> Next. Uh, the final plat. We look for a resolution to or a motion to approve that resolution. >> Make the motion. Brian, do we have a second? >> A second. >> Thank you, Sheldon. All in favor? >> I >> I >> Thank you. Um the exhibit B the the access agreement, you'll need Is there any questions or concerns in that from anybody? >> Yeah, I mean, as far as access, we do a an easement back in there. Um, that is a waste. That is our water treatment plant. You know, that's who comes and goes driving right around there. It is off by itself. A little concerning in my opinion. And granted, somebody could go back there, but anyway, there's no gates, right? >> Well, the the plant is gated off. >> Okay, that is >> the plant is. So, then this road would kind of go along that just know. So, I don't know if you you can't really see the fence on there, but it is fenced there. And they actually I think earlier this year we reinstalled new gates there. So they're those are the ones they they got approved in I think February. But yeah, so this does kind of head up behind Berts but there kind of between where they store some of the the soil borings and things like that. But >> but yeah, >> that was the only concern. Just little. >> Mhm. >> Well, and it's all property still owned by the city, >> right? Correct. >> And the far is the far lot. That's farther north. Lot one. Is that where the >> Yeah, on the west side of that. That's >> is the solar, right? >> That's right. >> Brandon, mayor, if I could. >> Yes. >> Um, just to be clear, um, you mentioned to access anybody going back there. So, if we have an access agreement, that's only going to be dedicated to that property. So, it's not going to be necessarily public access. It's going to be access just for that specific property. So, if they were to put solar, whatever, up there, um, or farm it as it is today, be accessed just for that property owner. So that'll be in the access agreement. So it's not a public access. >> I'm good. >> Everybody's gone through and looked over the specifics of the agreement. So with that, I guess I would take a motion to approve. >> Make the motion to approve. >> Ryan, do we have a second? >> I'd second. >> Thank you. No. All in favor? I >> I >> thank you. >> Next up, old business. >> Colarium. I'll just preface this and I'll let Linda and Ian take over because I mean maybe Linda probably the one here. Um, so this is a project we talked a little bit uh earlier this year about um possibly doing an improvement at the cemetery site by adding Colar and we're seeing a lot more of the cremations and um so this is a this is a kind of a want not a need but we do think it would extend the life of um letting people obviously have burials here in Cassen. Um so I think that Linda and Ian work together and Linda I'll let you take it over there. She's included the one that she thinks might be the best choice to start with I think. Is that kind of what you're looking at Linda? It is it is that is um the one that Ian and I kind of agreed on. Uh the price is on there. We are responsible for the concrete pad foundation that goes on and the crane rental >> microphone >> using grab microphone. >> Sorry. Sorry. Um we are responsible for the concrete pad that the the uh columbarium will sit on and the crane rental to lower it onto that. Um each niche will hold two. So if if there's a couple that want to be together in one, um the stones are then etched by the company that we buy this for. Um they are very reasonable and that would be they would so that all the printing and everything is uniform. It would all go up to that company. This company is in shoot Krookton. >> Yeah. Yeah. A Minnesota company. >> A Minnesota company. Yep. So this is the 64 niche. So there's room for 128 people. >> So it averages out to about $1,000. >> What >> averages out was estimated cost is 64. >> That's for the concrete pad and the crane rental. >> Just the pad. Oh going down. >> No, the 64,000. That's only for the colarium. That's not the cement pad and the crane rental. >> It is more expensive. Um, we would charge more for this too cuz right now a cemetery lot is $775. We were thinking if they bought a niche um to raise it up to $2,000 because then they could put two in there and it would be then like $1,000 per person, but charge $2,000 for each niche. Um the cemetery is nothing that we ever make money on. Uh we're lucky if we ever break even. Um, but Tim found, where did you find the money? >> I I think, you know, we're planning using some of the reserve funds there. You know, it's one of those things where, you know, people come and they still want to be buried here if they can be. And, you know, you're running out of lots that are desirable lots and like I said, we're seeing the cremation. So, like I said, at the end of the day, it's a want. It's not something that you have to approve. I think isn't going to necessarily cost the taxpayers anything. You know, we'll we'll use the reserve funds from the cemetery. Um but you know if you you don't want to do it you know that's fine too. It's something we've talked about for a couple years just sort of kicked around and you know the question is do we want to pursue it or not? If we don't then you know I don't you know I think staff has brought you what they found and >> we've been we've been putting we've put new fencing in. We've tried to keep making updates. This sounds like a good one if we can use >> right. Our goal is to try and keep that as attractive as it can be you know and and I think you know we've been able to do that over the last couple years for sure. >> How many >> We're not out of lots. We we actually we have a lot left. Um there's a lot along the trailer court side that are on that side. There's um some on the west road down towards the front and there's some back in the souththeast corner. I mean we must have three 400 lots left, >> right? >> How much >> we have a lot. >> How much space does this take up? I mean, how many lots would we have to take out of lots and turn to this? >> We would only take out one block, which is eight lots. >> Eight lots. Okay. >> We put it towards the front by the uh storage >> building there. >> Why did you pick 64 versus the 96 or >> cost? >> Cost. Okay. I'd like before we would go forward with this, I would like a little bit of a number on a concrete pad and crane rental. Just a rough estimate. You know, if we could bring that back to a next meeting just so we have an idea of what we possibly >> cost. Yeah, >> I know it's an estimate. It won't be exact, but I think that would >> we should be able to come up with something. >> Yeah. So, if we could have that by the next meeting, we could just table us until then. >> I can do that. >> Well, I'm fine with that. We want to make sure you guys get all the information you need. >> All right. Thank you. Up next, old business. We got the fireh hall rental. So, we've discussed this a few times. Um, I guess my opinion is we we said that let staff pick a rate for a nonprofit and bring it back to us and then, you know, cuz they seem to know exactly what goes into each thing. So that would be my recommendation is we'd let staff set it right and bring it back and forward it on. But any thoughts from everybody else? >> That's fair. We want to find a good plan for this and >> sure we're helping people but also not >> hurting anyone. >> Yes, that's our goal. I mean we want to make sure that it works for everybody. >> Yep. >> Am I allowed to ask a question? >> Yeah. Are you talking fireman staff? like the staff of the fire department. >> We're we're looking at if a nonprofit rate for when people want to use the fire room, right? >> Where the truck bay is. >> Yeah. >> Yep. >> So, who's going to make that decision? >> We'll have staff direct staff. >> Yeah. We will talk to the fire the fire department as well, ministry of staff. Yep. >> Yep. So, that way the whole fire department >> So, basically, you're talking you want to create a nonprofit rate and you want us to try and talk to them, see what kind of number we can come up with. >> Yes. Okay. and make it work for everybody. No pressure. So, if you could bring that back, >> if anybody has any other questions, I mean, I guess that, you know, we talked about it last time and I know, >> you know, it's a question of do you want to do the nonprofit rate or not? >> I think we do. I think we do. I think we have enough interest from folks for that. So, I think that's probably fair. And then I know Linda has been looking at it and she's talked with uh, you know, people about things, too. And so, yeah, I think that should be something that we can come up with. them. Um, you know, the biggest push back is going to be from folks who are from the general public who are going to say, "Well, why do we have to pay which is probably going to be more, you know, if they're using the same facility?" I mean, that's that's just so you're aware, that's probably the biggest push back would be is, well, if I'm doing X, Y, and Z, why do I have to pay more? And I mean, I think, you know, the argument has to be, well, the nonprofits are providing a service to the to the residents or to the community. Um, and that's if somebody came in, that's what I would tell them. might say, "Well, that's why the council decided to do a nonprofit rate as well as the regular rates." >> Yeah. Do we set that where do we draw that line on the non where the nonprofit go? That would be an important thing to me. Is it local >> kind of a thing? That would be >> Well, I mean that's the hard part like because if you set a nonprofit rate, it's not going to matter whether it's, you know, the folks at Carisher or one of the other, you know, local ones or if it's, >> you know, the Eagles Teleathon or something like that, you know. I mean, I think you probably have to just kind of have one. I mean, because you don't want to do an out of town nonprofit or something. I just think you get to be too, >> but we were adding a caveat that they have to have the firemen there. They're they're hiring the firemen. So, as long as the firemen are there, >> right? >> That's the caveat that goes with these nonprofits >> because it is all it is the fire department's equipment and they have to maintain it, move it, bring it back in and be there to m to supervise it. That was the whole >> We want to make sure they're 100% comfortable with what's going on >> because I know the fire department has said in the past that they've didn't want to rush we weren't able to support the um you know function last year from post you know the post problem because it >> it didn't fit very well with what the fire department wanted to have. So >> yeah. >> So >> so is just so that I'm crystal clear on this I mean both of these instances the the fire relief association is gaining a benefit because of the sale of alcoholic beverages. What happens if we have a group that wants a nonprofit that wants to come in and use the entire facility, but they are not selling alcoholic beverages and therefore there's no benefit to the fire relief association. >> That's where the caveat comes in where as long as the firemen >> are there in some as hired as some >> okay >> um it for some event. Okay. >> Because both the the Blaine Halverson and the Karen share hire well not hire but have the firemen there and the firemen get the profits from there but the firemen are there and that's where any nonprofit that came in would have to have the firemen there in some capacity. >> Okay. >> As long as the firemen agree, I would think that they're going to be there in some capacity. I don't know. Maybe they'd have firemen, I don't know, watching bounce houses or I I don't know, you know, >> something that I mean, the fire department is going to have to talk to us. They're going to they're going to have to communicate with us like saying, "Okay, yes, we're going to be there." They're okay with it because in the long run, I mean, I'm not moving the trucks in and out. I don't have the ability to do it myself. They're going to have to be there. So, yeah. >> Linda, how many nonprofits would you say we have renting that space now? >> Oh, these are the only two. >> Two. Okay. You guys came in last time. Is this are we moving towards the direction you were hoping to or is this >> I mean absolutely. I think so. I mean I think just taking the effect of like thinking critically about the nonprofits and how we like we definitely all of this funding goes right back to KM residents. So I think I love that idea and it just gives us more money to be able to put back into the community. I mean and we understand the fire the fire department is incredibly helpful. Um they're wonderful men and women that are there every you know the last two years for us and so um I mean if we can get it as low as possible that's the goal right I mean I realistically I know it costs money for us to be there and I understand that and I I definitely want the city and the fire department to break even but if we can come to something of like not making a profit off of it that would be I mean preferable you know because none of us are trying to make a profit you know our caterer is donating 15 to 20% back to us this where you know everybody is donating something. So that's I think what we're looking for is just like a break even cost would be awesome >> because we we do give a lot back to the community. >> Yeah. No problem. >> Yeah, I think I think we should be able to have some for you on the 9th. >> Perfect. Yeah. >> Try and have this all finalized. >> Thank you. >> Up next, uh request for proposal for auditors. You'll see those in your packet. >> Yeah, I'll let Sarah talk to that. >> Yeah. So, we sent out an email to eight. We got three back and you can see the the pricing in there. There's really no decision to make because of the differential. So, resonate. It was significantly cheaper. >> Yeah. They're thousands of dollars cheaper. >> 10 and $13,000. Yeah. >> Anybody got any questions for Sarah? >> Give me a motion. >> So, if not, I guess I would look for a motion to approve a three-year commitment with Conresnic for our annual audit. >> I'll make the motion. >> I'll second. >> Thank you, Ryan. All in favor? >> I I >> Thank you. Thank you for reaching out to him and getting back. Appreciate it. And I don't think that was much different than the past contracts. >> Yeah, apparently the last time it was similar. >> Yeah. All right. Uh up next, we got the 2012 joint powers agreement with Dodge County on the ice arena. We're looking at I'd like a motion to direct staff pursuant to the 2012 joint powers agreement that a city is exe executing its right to end its current position as the operator of the Dodge County Ice Arena. So in our contract we have to give them a fourmonth notice if we would like to talk to and change the contract. So that was just I would look for a motion to have staff notify the county >> that we would like to discuss >> like to discuss the terms of the Yes. >> I'll make that motion. >> We have a motion. Do we have a second? >> A second. >> There any other questions? Not I would. All in favor? I >> I >> reach out to stat county. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. All right. New business. We have the SRO agreement. This is >> so both the uh KM and the Z SRO agreements are similar to the last agreements we had for the last two years. Um only changes are some uh statutory changes that we had to add for language for SRO duties. And about the financial changes too. >> Uh ju just the the same percentages that we had before. >> What are the differences in language that were statutory? >> All the SRO duties >> which we were already doing that stuff was just reporting into the contract. Is this a two-year contract? >> Two two years each. Yes. Just as a reminder, the cameras don't turn on while they're in the building talking to kids. They when they wear their cameras, >> those aren't >> that's up to them if they want to activate it for some reason. So, if they think it's could be a criminal event, then they would. It's not be it's not recording 24/7. >> Yeah. Okay. >> And the schools has gone through the contract. >> Uh CAM has already agreed to it and said they have uh their next meeting. >> Okay. Okay. meetings tomorrow. >> Okay. >> I work there. >> Okay. Um, does anybody else got any questions for the chief on SRO? >> Okay. Do we have to approve of both or one? >> Make one motion to approve both the Z SRO agreement and the KM SRO agreement. >> So, I'd look for a motion to approve both SRO agreements. One with Cass and Manavville School and one with the Zed. >> Do I have to abstain since I work for the district? Hope so. >> I was gonna say I have no position as far as I know. >> No, I don't. >> The bone and get him a camera over there. He'll be all set. You know, >> I never thought to ask that after 5 years. I probably thought I should have. Okay. Doesn't hurt to ask, but no, you should be good. >> Get in trouble. I'll make the motion to approve. >> We have a motion. Do we have a second? >> I'll second. >> Thank you, Sheldon. All in favor? I >> oppos. Thank you. budget presentation. So, so earlier tonight, obviously, we had our long range uh planning meeting with Mr. Rubani. Um we did uh meet with department heads, spent a lot of time and Sarah spent a lot of time meeting with them in data entry. So, I appreciate her work on that. Um think we've uh this is kind of our first look at the budget. And included in your packet, you have a couple of items. Um one is kind of what I call the budget in brief. It's just the top sheet. It shows you the the numbers from the library, the general fund, economic development, um the debt service, capital levies, as well as the tax abatement levies. Um and you can see there the numbers um biggest changes in the budget for um 2027 or healthcare that continues to be an area of uh increased cost. I think right now what was the projection, Linda? Uh I think we put in the budget 20% but um Bill was talking 12 to 15. >> So we're hoping that that can drop down but I know as council's kind of guide in the past to be conservative with that. Um so you know and last year we did have a really large deductible increase too which has mitigated some of that but um so anyway that's a big increase. Uh the other is the uh police department with that position as you're you're aware um that was added. So there's a little bit larger than standard jump in their budget too. Um otherwise, you know, overall debt levies are flat. Um you could see there that that's not changing much. Um the library fund does have a little increase too and part of that is their health care as well. Um you know, and and the tough part about for them is so much of their budget is staff. You know, probably I don't know 85% of their budget actually comes down to healthcare and wages for their staff. And so the truth is even when somebody just switches from single coverage to family coverage, you know, that's 12 to $20,000 a year depending on what option they pick. So I mean, you know, the they do the department heads to do the best job they can going off of previous years, as you're aware. You know, libraries had some changes in staffing over the last three years, too. So, and they're going to continue to have some changes in staffing. I don't know. I think we'll get that probably in our next packet. We do have a library staff person who's, you know, taking a different position. So, you know, they, you know, they do the best they can, but that is why they see a little bit larger jump than normal. Um, most of it's related to wages and benefits there. Um, so, you know, I I think, you know, we're at, you know, a number that's it's well under where a lot of cities are coming in. I'm happy about that. We expect to get it lower. You know, as those healthcare numbers come in, they firm up. That'll be something that we'll be gladly glad to cut. Um, otherwise, um, we do have the clear doc document in there and Sarah can bring it up maybe or do you have access to bring it up, Ian? I do. >> Um, and Sarah can talk to any points that she wants to highlight there, too. I think it's um, you know, you've got the PDF in your packet, but also the link is available online and I think send >> everybody the link. >> Yeah, I think she emailed it out to everybody. We will have that on the city's web page and we also will put that on Facebook. So, if members of the public want to take a look at the budget and it's got the um, audited financials from 25. It's got this year's budget number and then it has the budget number for 27. So, people will be able to see kind of that that bar chart and the graphs. they can kind of see where the trend is. Uh we don't have a lot of capital items next year. Um in fact um you know there are a number of areas where they're they reduce their capital cost to a certain extent. Um and you know we're hoping that interest rates come down a little bit as well as fuel cost. Fuel cost is something that was kind of an unplanned force spike this year. Um and that's on a federal level. There's not a lot of control we have over that. Um so some departments see a lot more use of that. Obviously the police department sees a lot more use there. They also have some more capital items. I know that. Um and and the good news is Josh is going to present that in September. He'll be here. I think we're planning on uh the police department and also public works parks. So, some of the biggest general fund line items will be here to talk about their their needs because there's a lot of technological, you know, changes coming for Josh and for the body warn cameras that kind of that data stuff is still um I don't want to say it's it's exploding in cost, but you know, it's going up pretty fast and we're hoping that if we lock in some longer term agreements, maybe it'll kind of mitigate some of those costs, but it seems like every year there's another thing the state requires or something like that. So um yeah, otherwise we consider the staff to be fully staffed at this time. There is um if you look at the admin budget, um we do have some additional money for training there um for additional staffing. We we have been notified that one of our staff uh will be retiring, two of them actually in the next year or so. But um we want to be able to possibly bring some people on a little early to do some training in house because um last time on the finance department it was difficult um hiring outsource. Thankfully, we have some good um you know, clerk um kind of employees possibly may be able to fill Linda's job internally. Um but you never know. And we just felt like it would be it would be beneficial to have that budgeted um ahead of time just so because we know that those those vacancies are coming in the next 18 months. So, I don't know, Sarah, if you have anything else you want to highlight on there. No, >> if you want. >> But yeah, take a look at it. You know, we'll have those department head presentations in September. Um, as I said, hopefully did we would we know when healthcare is coming in? Did we get that earlier date? >> Coming till October. >> October. Okay. I know in the past we've we haven't gotten till next year. We're going to change it so we get our numbers in July. We're going to change it to a December 1st start date. >> Like to see some highlight. >> The insurance would go through the end of the year, but the rates would change December 1st, but that means we get our new rates July 1st. >> It's okay. So, your HSA plan, your insurance runs calendar year, but um the the um rate change would start December 1st where next year when we do this, we can actually stay in the 27 rate. So, whatever we get for next year, we would renew at that same rate. >> Okay. the way Bill was explaining it to me. >> So, >> because we wouldn't change plans, we'd just keep going. >> Okay. >> So, that's our plan for next year. >> Yeah. >> Because that would make budgeting a lot easier. >> Yeah. >> Right. To to know earlier would give us that shity. Absolutely. >> So, yeah, if you have any questions, feel free to contact me or contact Sarah, reach out to her. Um, glad to run through it with you. If you want to go line by line, we can do that. you know, it's easier when we do it one-on-one or two-on-one or whatever, but you know, uh the budget's all going to be available online and uh you know, we're certainly looking for feedback on it, hoping that uh we can get that number whittleled down. Absolutely. So, >> all right. Thank you for all that work on that. Uh next, administrators report. >> Sure. And I'll just uh highlight a few things here kind of um LGA announced uh the new amounts there. Uh our numbers are pretty flat. You know, it's they didn't do any increase at the state level. Um so it's it's pretty flat, but thankfully that's been certified. So we'll receive that funding for next year. That still is a good chunk of change there. Uh state revenue tops the forecast by about 400 million in July. So Minnesota Management and Budget released their report. So, you know, it sounds like their numbers are stabilizing. So that's a that's a positive. Obviously, they'll have their their late November, early December report, and they'll use that for their next two-year budget. So, the state's kind of in the middle of their benium budget. Um the 27 street and utility projects. Um thankfully, we're coming to a close. Uh hopefully, right, give Brandon some thanks there for pushing and proddding people along. But, um Southwest Reconstruct that it's been all paved. The the bottom coat is anyways. They haven't got the top coat on as far as I know yet. A lot of the sod's been laid out there. Um, Main Street, uh, seal coating and striping, as far as I know, it went very well. You know, we had some folks who say, "Oh, you know, a lot of the work got done before businesses even opened up in the morning." So, that was great. I think it looks really sharp. Um, they did widen the parking lane, so we're really happy about that. Um, so that's done. Um, water tower project, to be honest with you, the water tower itself has made a lot of progress. We're still kind of waiting on the booster station, and that's a matter of when that shows up, they can hook it up and we can actually get things going. that that's, you know, something that Brandon can probably answer before me and maybe he can't even because it's kind of a that's the tough part of the of the uh the market is supposed to be coming. So, >> yeah. So, hopefully that um otherwise uh the Reagan edition, if you've been up that way, they've made a ton of progress up there, too. The retaining walls almost finished. A lot of units have been built. Um so that you know, and you know, I haven't been in. I'd like to I'd like to get in see what one of those units look like because it's it's good to be able to talk about it. Same thing for the fourth lane flats apartment building that has some occupants. I don't know how many yet, but it's it's up and operational. Um, we'll watch how that goes. Um, Brandon's going to talk about street feasibility. Let's see here. 27 budget. We we kind of talked about that already. I did include some numbers in the packet um from Dodge Cent's audit. So, their ambulance fund performed well last year, so that's a plus. Um, you know, I've got a note in here. You know, in the past, we contributed 5,000 for training equipment. Last year, we contributed 12,000. Um if the city council would like to continue to contribute at that higher level um certainly you can direct direct me to you know we we can certainly see if we can find some funding for them um you know planning and zoning talked about that and then uh the farmers market which we'll talk about during the round table at the end. So that's my report. Then I've got a couple other things in here. As I said I mentioned the Dodge County >> Yep. My Dodge County ambulance audit uh numbers there. Um we've got our conservation report from the electrical system. uh the report from the state revenue projects and then one of the items we talked about with Mr. Bubani tonight would be that I5 the electrical borrowing and basically what I'm looking for from council is direction if you'd like to proceed with that this year or not. Um otherwise I need to let folks know that we're not going to be proceeding with the electrical borrowing. We kind of will change change gears. Included in your package you do have I5 you have that staff report. Um, basically what this funding would be going for would be the um, substation on the north side. Last month is a good example where we had that during the fair, you know, Excel had a a transmission line fail and I think uh, Kassen was dark pretty much for 2 hours thereabouts from about 6:00 until 8. You know, there are a couple points of failure in that system and that was a big one. Obviously, you know, we run off of um, Excel's transmission system. In the case of this substation, we'd be looking at it going off of Simpa's transmission. Um, Simpa's southern Minnesota power. They're based out of Rochester. So, um, we think it might give us an option, you know, opportunity to have a little bit more diversity in the in the power supply for the city. Um, still can't guarantee there's never going to be a failure obviously u when they have a major transmission line goes down like that. But, um, that's what that project that's what the money's for. That's what it's going toward is is that substation project. So, I know for us, we're looking at direction is as the council, you know, if if we can get a motion to move forward with that, that's what we're looking for. Um, Mr. Bonnie's kind of run some of the numbers and he's got it here for you. We won't be increasing rates for it. It's a matter of um we have prepared for that funding wise. So, we think it's a good project to provide more reliability for the electric grid. >> And where is it going again? >> Um, well, that's one of the reasons we approved that plat there for the the public works. It would actually be going north of the north of the public works building. And so there's the the public works building that fronts off of 16th Street and then there's a building behind that that's kind of long and it's got like the salt sand storage. That's the electrical building right now where they got most of their stuff stored. So it would be going north of that. >> So what we'd end up doing is right now we tap off of the on 16th Street we tap off of the Excel sub there. So what we would do is we would run a high trans high voltage transmission from that substation, the new one, down onto Simpa's line, which also runs along 16th Street, and then that would run over to the Byron sub where their line goes, and then their line proceeds into um Rochester. They also have a 161. So that's a 69 KV. I know we're using terminology here. 69 KV is it's the lowest level of high voltage transmission. The next level would be 161. So they also have a 161 line that runs along the railroad tracks. So if you kind of if you go out you know if you can kind of almost you can see it from 14 when you so the idea would be in the future eventually you know he talked about second barring potentially the idea would be to create a ring around castm so you'd have two substations you have one off of the 161 line and one off of the 69 so that if you did have something happen for example a tornado or something like that where it knocks out one of those substations what you can do is you can shunt the whole city onto the other one and then you would have that reliability so you wouldn't see a failure with the So obviously that's in the future, but we do think that it would be beneficial long term for for the community. So because even with all the efficiencies, the power demand is is not going down and we're still seeing quite a bit of growth. So >> how big would the substation be? >> What's that? >> How big? Um, well, I think it would be smaller than what Excel's just for comparison purposes. You know, if you go past Excel sub, we would it would probably be smaller than that. What we would probably do is we would we would fence off an area similar to what Excel has fenced off >> and we would have two spots for two tubs. So, you'd have one 20 megawatt tub and then you'd have space for another just because you want to have that once again the duplicate, you know, and if you're putting it in then you want to make sure you size it right because after the fact >> once you, you know, you can't really go back, you know. So Excel like when they upgraded their sub three or four years ago, they had to basically go in and cut down and tear out and put more gravel and stuff. We think it would be better just to have that prepared kind of already ahead. Even if it's just the fencing, we could put a concrete slab in there later. That's not a big issue. But um so I mean I would I would guess that's a 5 acre parcel. So I'm guessing we'd probably look at about uh 3/4 of an acre to an acre we'd want to maybe have fenced off. >> I mean I know it's something we need. It's something we've been talking about for a while. Yeah. >> So, you're looking at lot three. >> Yeah, that's right. Exactly. Yep. That'd be that lot. That's, you know, behind there >> because that's the public. >> That's Flood Works and then there's the electric building and then Yep. That's 4.6. It would be part of that. Yep. Okay. >> And that'd be the other, you know, consideration is we'd have our battery storage in that area too potentially. So, it would work in tandem. Yeah. What are you you looking for something tonight? >> So yeah, if I can get a motion to proceed with uh preparing a borrowing, you know, you're still going to you know, as you know in the past, Mr. Ruban will bring the documents in. You'll have an opportunity if something doesn't look right, then at that time we wouldn't proceed with it, but we want to get that so I can kind of task him to get moving on that. Do a rating call um with Sarah and with with Mike and then we'd, you know, be able to set that up. So probably early this fall, maybe October, we would try and commit that borrowing so that it gets on the calendar before the end of the year. >> So just to be super clear, this having this substation would diversify a little bit more our power coming into town. It would provide backups for emergencies like we had with that. >> Absolutely. I mean that that's probably the biggest the biggest plus to it is, you know, in an emergency if Simpline Line failed, you could still run off of Excel if you if you needed to. Right. >> Right. And that's you know threequarters of the year we don't have a lot of issues you know fall winter spring cast is a very heavy loaded summer it's air conditioning users and so we go all the way from 2 and a half megawatts of load on a on a kind of a quiet day in the winter all the way up to 14 megawatts potentially of load in the summer. So I mean it's a you know big big difference but but yeah I mean that that's where we want to just provide that option for the residents. So, and all this borrowing this comes out of the electric fund. >> That's right. Yeah. And it's been it's something we do do the rate study every 5 years for. We prepared for it for a project of this nature. Kind of that handout he's giving you, you know, kind of breaks down where we anticipate it would be around $630,000 a year in borrowing, you know, payments. But that's easily covered by our free cash flow in the electric system right now. So, >> because I just wanted to make sure that people know if we were looking at it's not coming out of the levy. It's coming up. >> No, absolutely not. No. Sep. Totally separate. And that's not why we run the utilities the way we do. So, >> anybody else got any questions for Tim? Concerns? >> I just think it might be a good idea. Um, this town isn't getting any smaller and that's one of the things that creates a big problem in the near future, I see, without having an upgrade. With that, I would look to for a motion for staff to move forward with the electric system borrowing. >> Electric system borrowing. >> I'll make that motion. >> Thank you, Mel. Do we have a second? >> I'll second. >> Thank you, Sheldon. All in favor? >> I thank you, everybody. >> And that's all I've got. I think that was enough. >> Okay. Up next we have the engineers report. >> All right, more big items. So uh before we jump into the two items on the agenda, just wanted to note uh water tower painting. Um the painting contractor is looking at it um city staff um citing the location of the casting logo. So I think I sent uh council location one on the south face, northeast and northwest corner of the tower. Three logos similar to the way the other three other two are painted. Um, so unless council provides other direction myself and I think I'll have Ian come out tomorrow morning after our staff meeting, we'll cite those with the tower contract unless you guys have other directions or thoughts. So >> I just have a question. >> Yeah, Ryan. Ryan, he's school's out. So Ian, you're off the hook, but >> yeah. No, I have we have you worked with other cities that have looked at um selling space on their water towers. Uh we do sell space in our water towers for uh communications >> logos. >> Um no, I'll be quite honest. Like a personal level, I'm surprised we haven't put uh banners and electrical um LED um sponsorships on our water tower to be quite honest with you, but that's just kind of my thing. >> That's it's a thing now and I was just wondering if that's >> I haven't seen any towers that have had it. Okay. I'm surprised that we haven't to be honest with you. >> Yeah, I know we we rent space on them, but I more marketing based. Yeah. I didn't know if that was something that was coming down or if you've heard of other cities that have looked into it. >> It's not or even just you know logos for you know what >> businesses. Yeah. Mhm. >> Not that we want to but if it brings in revenue. I didn't know if it was something that's becoming the norm business. It is >> yeah question. >> Um just lighting them is the only thing that we've seen from the from the ground up. Rosemont St. Clouds um got a nice one that's lit and then we light one from St. Charles too there. So, so we can talk about if you know if looks nice during the day if we want to light that more, we can have that conversation. >> Yeah, I was just curious area. So, >> yeah. No, that they would like that. >> St. Charles over by the interstate. St. Cloud on the interstate. >> I understand that. No, I was just curious. >> I'm I'm surprised it hasn't been a bigger discussion on our history to be honest with you. So >> So, okay. Unless you got any other comments, we'll plan on doing that tomorrow. >> All right. So, I'll jump into the agenda tonight. Um, first item is First and Second Avenue Northwest Reconstruction. Um this is something that was discussed at the council workshop um and also discussed tonight with Mike Bubani in your financial kind of forecast and foreshadowing. Um so in your council packet is three items. Number one, the feasibility report. Number two, we're going to ask for resolution calling public hearing on the improvements. And then finally, a professional service agreement with WHKS to to start uh doing some engineering. So um to kind of close on that, um ultimately um that's what we're going to be asked tonight to start incurring some significant costs for this project. So, if there's anything that we need to discuss or delay, um, now is the time, um, because we're going to start some significant work on the project if we move forward, I think tonight. Um, so that's where we're at on the highest level. Um, to talk about the assessment process. I think we may have may one counselor that may not be real familiar with it. Um, the other ones have been part of the process directly. So, um, it's been been uh, so they're well aware of it. Um, so tonight is step number one of the special assessment process. We're going to um discuss the report, potentially have the resolution to approve the report and call the first hearing on the improvements. Um and that will be a hearing about a month from now at your council meeting to thumbs up or thumbs down the project. After a hearing with the property owners, I'll do a presentation going over this report. Um you'll hear comments um and then you'll have a decision to continue on at that point. Um assuming we are moving on. Um we will work through the winner. We'll have a polar meeting with the property owners. We will bid the project. we'll get some better cost and then you'll have the final hearing on the assessments which is the drop dead we have to decide the assessments we're going to talk about some numbers tonight um but we're not setting those if there's questions comments that we want to bring to the first hearing more than happy to do that um so we're not you know the more clear that we can be throughout the process the better because we are proposing special assessments and that can be politically unpopular um or it takes political capital to do that uh we all know why we we do do that um so that's that's where we're at on the highest level um so if there's no questions I'll jump into the report um and then obviously have questions at the end um as needed. Okay. Um so again this is First and Second Avenue Northwest reconstruction um is what we're calling it. Um this is ultimately and there's a figure um one in the report but uh is bounded by Third Avenue um to the west which has been recently reconstructed in 2017. Uh Main Street to the south that was recently reconstructed in the early 2000s. It's not so recent anymore but generally a newer street and we've been providing some maintenance on that to maintain that street here. here as we talked about tonight. Um and then on the east of Highway 57, which obviously has been reconstructed in the last couple years, um full reconstruction up to Third Street. Um so kind of three blocks north there. Um and then the two alleys behind the businesses on Main Street from 57 to 2nd Avenue. Um we are not planning from Second Avenue over to Third because that's recently been repaved and there's a small amount of infrastructure. Um so we don't think the bang for the buck is quite there yet. So staff is comfortable to not um include that alleyway. Um, so that's what's included uh in the project for footprint. Um, existing conditions. Um, when I go to public works and say, "Where's your worst area in town? Where are we going next?" After we did third, fourth, and fifth, and southwest 57, it's this area here. Um, if you go down the alleyway now, it's blocked off because we had another catch basin collapse um by CAM Telecom. Um, if we fixed one last year, we had a sewer collapse or partially collapse. Um, every time they jut that, they get a lot of sand. So, um, it's in a state of dis disrepair. Um it's had it useful life. Um some of the streets on the uh first street going into um HY there is in really rough shape. Um so ultimately that pavement is in um rough shape. So we're looking at uh replacing that. Um that's existing condition. Proposed construction very typical of the previous reconstruction we did in third, fourth, and fifth or southwest. Full reconstruction rebuilding the roadway. Um drain tile behind the back of the curb. Sub drain services. We don't have some pump pumping to the street. New curb and gutter driveways. um new sewer, water, um increased storm sewer system to prevent flooding and reduce the frequency of flooding um like we've done in um typically all of our reconstructions. Um there is some notes here. Um we ultimately stubbed out some utilities from third, fourth, and fifth and 57 um to accommodate that, including some larger storm sewers. We're kind of setting this project all up ready to go. Um and then we also have some long services that kind of go down the boulevard. We'll extend some mains out. did that a lot of that on third, fourth, and fifth um to ultimately so property owners don't own services all the way um to a side street to kind of square them up and have them with traditional service. Um there's a couple blocks that are um don't have um sidewalk. There's some gaps there specifically on First Street that we're looking at filling. Um and if you look jumping ahead to the schedule, we do have a public meeting coming up. So that's some of the things we'll talk about. um if you um continue with the first hearing, uh we want to ultimately sit down with those property owners and and have some conversations on what they feel about sidewalks. We feel pretty strong it's in the downtown district. There's heavy pedestrian uses there directly to our um local H high. So um we have included that um in our cost estimates, but again tonight we're considering report. We'll work on final design back as we proceed. Um street rightway and easements. Um nothing really of the discuss there of importance. Uh plenty of cost. You can see we're at about $4.7 million project that includes everything. Um, as we said today of again an engineer looking at something in a short amount of time just come up with general cost there. Um, and then recommend recommendations and schedule. We do have a city assessment policy of 30% total roadway. That's what we applied on third, fourth, and fifth southwest. 57 was a little muddled with the state project, but ultimately we kind of made it right um of that same amount of a traditional street. Um, so you can see the total amount to be assessor is just under 800,000 based on that policy. Um, it's a little bit unique. Um, it's not as residential as Southwest or third, fourth, and fifth was. Um, but we ultimately apply the RE unit. Uh, we have 159 which is higher than what we generally see. So again, we don't need to work on that number yet tonight. Um, as we move forward, that number comes down and it's a non-issue. Um, but I'll hold on the conversation of talking about RUS to maybe the end. Um but ultimately we are proposing our use. Um we can consider that because we are ultimately assessing um some of the alleyways. So maybe we want to do that a little differently. It's going to be a discussion um later on tonight or um in the future. Um so moving forward to schedule again um this is the first um consideration of the feasibility report and then a resolution to call the public hearing um on the hearing on the improvements. We get to work, talk to neighbors, do the design, come back this winter, um present the plans, go off for bids. We have bids we know hard to mount. Therefore, we can talk about the final assessment mounts with the property owners at that time. That'll be this winter. Um and then assuming everything moves forward, we finalize the assessments at that hearing. We award contract we're constructing in 27 and finishing things up. And as Tim mentioned earlier in the meeting, uh we kind of pair this project down not only for financing, but what's a realistic project size that a contractor can get done. Um, so that's what we have before you tonight. Um, construction cost. I won't go in detail there, but you can see we broke it up into street, sidewalk, sanitary sewer, storm sewer. Um, and then water mane um to show the grand total there. Um, with the idea that the enterprise funds are going to be participating in paying for the project, the portions that are not assessed. Um, so we break that up to help um Sarah and staff work on that. Um, and then I'll go to the figure number one with all the pretty colors on it. Um, should look familiar. We've um seen these before on 57 and Southwest and we assess those projects. But uh um in blue is a one RU. Um a house is a house is a house. We're rebuilding neighborhoods. Everybody in that neighborhood if they own a traditional size house gets one RU um for their portion. You can see on the westand side there we have some residential houses in purple that are a half. Um those were assessed a half with the Third Avenue project. So we're only going to assess them half to make a hole with the overriding concept that one RU one residential equivalent is what they would be assessed in modern time assessments. Similarly on 57 there in red we don't have any assessments there because they were assessed a full one with the 57 project. So um again with the spirit that they're one RU um they would be zero. Um you can see some other ones in yellow there. Um those are currently four RUS. You can see HY um there would be four. they did get assessed four on the third avenue in the back side of their project. So that'd be eight. Um and that is all broken down um in the notes in the role that I have on the next sheet. Um and then similarly cam telecom there about four houses for RUS is kind of our thinking there. Um in green there one and a half for those properties there. They're larger commercial properties so you know maybe they have larger needs wer water and sewer services etc. more frontage um incurring more cost there is one and a half reu um similar there for u Denmark um that property there couple properties they did get one on the 57 project but they also have an alley access so there could be potentially some more benefit there and then all the properties along but budding the alley at a half RU um they were assessed with Main Street all their sewer and water services come off of Main Street but they do have an alley access so the thought there is there's some benefit to having a new alley and storm sewer through So I've assigned that to half. We struggled internally on kind of what we'd recommend. So I think that could be a point of discussion. Um but I think it should be something it shouldn't should not be zero is going to be our recommendation. So if it's a half 0.25 a full one that's unfortunately as a council you guys get to make those hard decisions. I can only recommend. So um that's where I that's where I fell on as a half. I thought that was a good starting point. Um and ultimately where where we were at um and we came up with the the RUS we came up with. Um so again we'll have soon we move forward in that hearing we can start talking about these REU concept with property owners. This is above and beyond what technically we have to share with them but myself as an engineer to get the numbers I have to do it. So let's share it and get it out there early. We've done that on other projects and then we can start kicking things around on where things land um after the fact. So, um, that's the pretty picture of the RUS. Um, breaking that down again to RUS, you take the 30% of the street cost, calculate your RUS, um, and then come up with the assessment. And I do have some notes in there because it is important. Um, we're even going to send notices of the ones that were zeros because, um, they're part of the project. So, I want to be crystal clear. Um, we owe that to taxpayers and these property owners why they'd get zero or why somebody'd be off the hook, if you will, will not off the hook. They got it when we did 57. Um, so that's why the notes are on there. um to be transparent. So then you could start sizing up why, you know, why is HY only four? Well, they got four on third, fourth, and fifth. So they're technically eight. So if eight's the number, well then let's roll with it. Um if the council directs otherwise, we can we can we can adjust and then obviously when we have the final assessment hearing, they can object to that in person and then we can even we can even adjust it at that point if needed. So um that's the the gist of what we got. Again, the assessment, I won't go into that unless you like to go into more depth. Um but that's the feasibility report. Um, and I'll pause there, mayor, if anybody has any questions. Happy to answer them. >> So, anybody got any questions for Brandon? Okay, we're good. >> All right. Easy off. Well, then like I said, there is a resolution um to call on the public hearing on the improvements um ultimately a resolution laying out um that you've considered it um deemed it necessary um to ultimately move forward with this hearing. Um, and then attached to the resolution is the notice of public hearing. That is the notice that will be sent to the property owners. Um, so Linda and I got some work to get some mailings out to these property owners. Um, and then the hearing will be held on September 23rd, um, 2026. Um, and the impact assessment will also go in the newspaper. So, the special assessment process is pretty rigorous. Um, and we will send notices to property owners in the newspaper um, based on the assessment role that you guys has considered. So, I'd ask for your consideration of that resolution. Okay. I would look for a motion for the resolution calling a public hearing on improvements on First and Second Avenue Northwest reconstruction. >> I'll make the motion. >> Ryan, do we have a second? >> I'll second. >> Mel, all in favor? >> I. >> All right. Thank you. >> All right. And then last related to this item, um, is our engineering contract to ultimately um, do the engineering from start to finish? um meaning survey all the way through construction including the work that we just did here tonight. Um so you can see that professional service agreement in your council packet um includes project management meetings um topographic survey feasibility report we just presented preliminary final design assessment assistance we'll work with staff on getting those assessments um processed calling the hearing get in the newspaper etc. um construction administration, so having weekly construction meetings, um getting construction staking, etc., and then observation, um to observe the contractor and report quantities back so we make payments like we did today on some other projects, um is all included in that engineering agreement. So, I'll pause there and answer any questions you may have, mayor and councel. >> Does anybody get any questions for Brandon? No. >> So, we'll look for a motion to approve the professional service agreements with the engineering department. >> I'll make the motion to approve the professional service agreement. Brian, do we have a second? >> A second. >> Thank you, Sheldon. All in favor? >> I >> I. >> That concludes that item, I think, mayor. >> So, move on to the second item. Uh, the 2026 lead service line replacement. So, I think lead service line, I think, we all should be experts in that now. So, it's been a it's been a it's been a process, but uh past actions for the council's been um ultimately the the federal government through the Minnesota PFAS um had some funding available for us to go find services. So we went door to door um through our sump pump inspection program. We had some self-reporting um activities. Um we did some work on the back end looking at newer houses. Um so we ultimately found some services that have um in our case is galvanized. We don't have any lead but galvanized is the same as lead in their eyes. Um to be ultimately replaced. You approved us to move forward with engaging the PFA to ultimately secure some funding to get the replacement. So tonight asking for your consideration of a resolution to award the bid uh for the 2026 lead service line replacement project. Um as you can see there the low bid is CAM excavation at 195,841 and I'm sad to report CAM excavation has nothing to do with KM. It actually is a contractor out of Mano. So I know we're getting a local local person but we are not. Um and you can see I had nine bids there um as we bid the project on Tuesday. Um, so we surprisingly have seen a fair amount of these contractors bidding the work, which is good. Um, Kim Excavation also got Manville's um, project, so we're going to be working with them. Um, but they're relatively newer. Um, some of the recent references I've checked out. Um, so we're prepared to recommend them um, to award tonight. Uh, with that said, I will note on the bottom paragraph of the resolution, it does say conditional approval for the Minnesota PFA, which is ultimately paying for this project. Um, and is ultimately you are, um, resolving tonight that the proper city official authorized execute that agreement with the PFA, which we don't have in our hands yet. So unless you're uncomfortable with that, um I think myself and staff um are ultimately looking for you guys to approve this with that condition that we um will assign that agreement or are authorized to sign that agreement with the PFA to ultimately get reimbursed for this work. Um there's a small chance there be some cost associated with this project, but I don't think we're there yet. Um if things don't go well, which we're a little uneasy about, but it is what it is. We think most of it will be in re reimbured, but if we don't find some refined some other things, um we'll have that conversation. But um not too concerned about that yet. So I'll pause there answering any questions there. So there's if you're there there's a cap on the amount that you can do per service. So depending on what we find and we have some con construction consistency, we may exceed that which is $25,000 a service. We're like 18 right now. So there could be some fluctuation on how the bids ultimately are paid out. So if we exceed that cap, but we're not expecting it, but there is a cap on how things work out. So, um, we have an 10 in there and you can see it's, you know, it's less than that. So, and I presumably the city's interested in the agreement with the PFA to recover the costly for our property owners. And we've got a fair amount of participation, too. We've sent notices in the agreement that the council approved to the property owners to ultimately sign off on us doing the work before uh we go do the work to limit some liability in the city side. So, we're getting those received and some of our staff have met with those property owners too already. So, um, we're off and running and it's a good service. Somebody has it. Um, reach out to that number that's on there, learn about the service or call city hall to, um, learn more, have them verify your service cuz, um, it's not going to go away if it's if it's there. So, here's a chance to get it done for free. So, okay. Does anybody got any questions for Brandon on this? I would take a motion to approve the resolution awarding the bid for the 20 26 lead service line replacement. >> Thank you, M. >> We have a second. >> Second. >> Thank you, Ryan. All in favor? >> I opposed. Motion carried. Thank you. >> It's all I had tonight. 16th Street should be other than I guess not all I had tonight. All other than 16th Street should be open here I think next week. So I think they just got some signage. They striped it. So people are still going down it. I seen they put the road close sign back up. >> Yeah. So, >> got around that pretty. >> Are we putting no parking signs >> on the 8th? >> Yes. >> Yeah. They're they're going to be in I think tomorrow or early next week. >> Yeah. In the bike lane. >> The countyy's putting them in. They weren't in. So, >> y >> Okay. Thank you. >> Uh nothing under personnel attorney. Do we want to just hold on to that one for a second? Just do correspondence. All right, we'll finish. We could finish our regular schedule and then go into that. >> You want to do the round table and then >> Yeah, let's talk about the round table. Um, so everyone got an email from a couple of folks in town here about this farmers market. At least I think everybody got there. Did everybody take a look at that? Um, so they asked uh in that email to to talk about it and I had correspond with and I think I CCD you on that um >> told the lady that you know we could talk about it and we put on an agenda if they wanted to come and talk more to us about it. But I guess I'm just trying to get your feedback, you know, initially what your thoughts are. I mean, I think the idea of a farmers market sounds great. I don't know that the city owning it or operating is feasible really. You know, she kind of alludes to that in the email, but um we certainly just like any other event in town. You know, we provide barricades or we help with parking, that kind of thing. I think that uh we certainly would do what we felt was legal to support it if people wanted to give it a try because I mean, I think that it would be it would be really nice to see something like that. I these folks are willing to put their effort into it. So I don't have any objections to it initially. I need more details obviously. Um and to let them know that like just legally speaking us owning and operating it seems unlikely. You know it's it's not dissimilar to like the the festival in the park where we have a private group that runs that which by the way want to thank all those volunteers. Um a lot of compliments. Obviously the weather always contributes when it's really nice out. It helps but they did a great job this year and I think it went really smoothly. similar in the way where I could see where if they want to do a farmers market, maybe even at Veterans Park or something like that could make it into a little bit bigger event. Um, obviously there's different towns where it works better in some places it doesn't work as well, but um, you know, I I didn't have any objections to their actual proposal. Just want to know more about it. Anything you've got there, Sheldon? >> No. No. >> Be nice to see something like that come to town. >> Okay. So, if they want to come present some information to >> Yeah. So, I I think I invited her to come. I'll let her know maybe September, either the 9th or 23rd would work. I mean, it's probably not real feasible to do a lot the rest of this year. I mean, kind of at the tail end of the produce season anyways, but um try and get something maybe they can get something ready for next year then. >> Okay. Well, that's what I'll do. I'll see what our calendar schedule looks like and if we have some available time, then we could slot them in. >> And that's all I have really for that. It's just wanted to see where you guys were at with that. So, >> round table. Can I ask about the Reagan? Is it Reagan? Rean >> Rean edition. Yep. >> Yep. Are they They've got the path in. Are they almost finished with their phase one? >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Okay. I know we had made some contingencies on phase two. We had a lot of concerns from citizens about phase two and when that gets started with their connections to 57 or 16th, where are we at with are they contacted you at all about phase two? >> Answer. >> Well, yeah, go ahead. >> Yeah, I would say they've not only talked us about phase two, they've talked to us about phase three potentially going to the east. they they're well aware of that that requirement of phase 2 is needs to be punched out to 57 um as part of the approval of phase 2. So they acquired that property so they're aware of it. So >> does the road have to be put in while they're doing phase 2 before after that's my >> the discussion we had. I maybe >> yeah we need to figure that out. >> Have to probably go back and look at that because to your point you have what is what's phase two? Is it the start of utility construction phase two or is it the start of home building construction in phase two or is it opening of phase two? I don't know if that's been addressed or was addressed in the council approval. >> We can we can rehash that. >> Review the meeting minutes for that. >> Yeah, I think that might be important. So, I've had some people reach out and ask they're concerned about I certainly think before >> I would certainly say before there are people living and occupying those um if they're building new town homes or whatever. I think before the traffic increase would come, we would definitely want to have that road punched through if possible. Yeah. >> Um that would make sense to me. That was a big concern from from citizens was traffic and flow and >> yes we can talk about that tomorrow our staff meeting. >> Sounds good. Okay. >> All right. That's it then. Uh I'll thank everybody for coming. We will be doing a close session. You're more than welcome to stay in another room while we're having our close session discussion and come back. If not, thank you for coming tonight. Tim, you know, hang. >> Yeah, we can be sure to come to the