17 2026 EDA is now in session. All right. What do we got here? Call to order. We are all here at the present. Everybody good to go? Light this candle? Approval of the agenda. Anybody look through and see what was going on? Yes. >> Yes. >> I'll make a motion. >> I'll second. >> All in favor? >> I. >> All opposed. >> Motion passes unanimously. Consent agenda. Do we talk about the consent agenda? >> It's all these things together. >> We just uh Nobody want to pull anything from that? >> No. No. Okay. Then we're going to need a motion to approve the consent agenda. >> I'll make a motion to approve. I'll second favor. >> Opposed. >> Motion passes. Consent agenda. >> I'm going to ask one question on the >> It has nothing to do with approving it. So, but just on that chart that they include, I assume every time someone inquires it gets on there, >> it looks like the same people over and over and over. >> Yeah. Where you see the the same color code is uh basically that's a repeat call for the same project. >> Okay. Sounds good. >> That's what it looked like. But Hayden, we got open forum limit to three minutes. No ED action will be taken. However, direction will going to be given to the future staff for future meetings. Do we have anybody online? >> There's nobody online. >> Dang it. >> Next time >> there anybody online? >> One of these days we'll get >> we're going to get somebody. >> Can somebody call in on their phone and hold it down below and just I'd like to talk to you. Okay. Nothing for for moving forward. Old business. Hayden, let's not go through the old laundry, but let's make sure that we get everything covered here. >> Railroad spur. >> It looks like that no updater. >> Well, we had that we had that >> Mhm. >> meeting that got sent out via links. Did everybody see that link for in the meeting? >> There it is. >> Did everybody watch it? >> Did anybody watch it besides >> You talking about the railroad spy one? >> Yeah. >> With somestone. >> I was there live. I read the report. Is the report accurate in here? >> I thought the report was reasonably accurate. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Anybody have any questions about that spur thing? Because it's kind of a it's kind of a big thing. It was reached back to me from King Solutions. I believe they would like to use it, but they are not ready to pay for it. I think that's the consensus. Yes. from in my opinion I think that's was the consensus from everybody was they would love to use it. >> Yeah. >> Not necessarily be a part of paying for it. >> I am sorry but is this the budget that we presenting to these people? Basically $11 million. Chair Hudner, I think you can correct me if I'm wrong, but uh I think that those assumptions came from that TKDA conversation when it came to what are the potential costs for um doing this project. So those were those were assumptions that were provided by people who have done this in other communities in the past. >> That's just for a spur, not a uh not an offload facility. >> Well, there's two. >> It's both. >> It shows both up there. So there's a $3 million estimate for the railroad spur and then the 8 million for the transload facility >> and there's four million available. Does that mean that if we just did the spur and each business uh took care of their own um loading unloading that the 4 million would cover the 3 million or do we have to compete for the 4 million? Well, I think it's a competitive grant if I'm not mistaken, but at the same time, um I would also imagine that there's some stipulations related to what type of spur or what type of improvements can go into those costs. Um now, whether this is a specific project on this parcel with Semstone that would um work for that grant, um my guess is that we just have to do a little bit more research on that. I haven't done any of the >> because the the comment was well they want to use it but they don't want to pay for it. Well, here if we uh applied for the grant, received the grant, uh the premise would be that yes, we could actually get a spur. Wouldn't cost you a dime other than your own investment for loading and unloading when that would would that assumption be correct? >> Sean, you feel a grant for 3 million or more? Yeah. >> And you're only doing the the lesser of the two, >> right? Well, translove facility is pretty big. >> I think the other thing that we might not be sure about now, John put this summary together and the summary that's in your packet, and I'm not too familiar with that conversation, but um it could be the same thing where 4 million is available for the program in general, where it's not four up to four million per project. Um, so that could be that could end up being the city ends up getting a grant for $250,000 or something like that and there's 20 other projects that may have >> um money coming from that program. So, >> what happens if you apply for a grant and you're awarded it and then decide not to use it? >> It just goes back to them. >> Okay. >> Yeah. There were two, as far as funding goes, there was two separate grants talked about. One was the Minnesota rail service improvement. That's a state grant. There was another federal Chrissy care or CISI granty grant. >> Um that that is also available. The the Minnesota service um grant is closed this year. So it gets awarded in you know from December till January or something to that effect. Um so we wouldn't be able to apply this year anyway. Um, I think where we left it was that, you know, we would need to figure out how to raise funds for the for the uh feasibility study more than anything before we could apply for the grant is what I was what I was gathering. >> That makes sense. So, and forgive me, I you know, I'm uh haven't uh really looked at the documents. However, in the questionnaire that was sent out to, let's say, King Solutions and Kimstone, um, if this could be, uh, paid for through a grant, are you, you know, would you be interested or, you know, having the EDA continue to uh, uh, check the feasibility of this uh, railroad spur for your business is yes or no. >> So that's our conversation today. Do we as a group feel this is still worth pushing on? Now we don't know where the 20k is coming from but yet if we can get that covered somehow and we don't take the feasibility study and you know kind of break that up so everybody kind of ponies up for it and we can get some grants. I what I also believe uh for John's point is the guy who was on the phone center center camera he was the one who says look we can still apply for it we don't need the study but with the study they're faster and quicker to write checks if I get that right and if they're going to write checks okay let's figure out how we make this work but we should really have some stone to the table on a lot of these questions because they're the primary going to be now If King Solutions doesn't stay there in that spot and they decide to move out, that whole access to that building for the owners of the building will have such a benefit to retail that out to other people who have a spur online is well beyond what they don't even know yet. That that's my feeling. If I can move into a building where there's a spur right up against my property line, why wouldn't you take it? >> Okay. Why um what is it? AIG is our um uh marketing real estate guys. Have we posed them a question that let's say that we had a property with a railroad spur? What does that do for the value or the um you know the uh >> triangle of property >> any >> or the value in the area, >> right? I mean, if King if we're going to produce, you know, put this on our agenda that uh does nothing but improve the the business in Deon. >> You want a regional benefit? >> Yes. >> I think that's part of the feasibility study would that would be that would be the result or >> Yeah. I mean, if they put the spur, it doesn't increase your value of your property or um you the wants of of that uh businesses to have a spur. Then >> my thought on this whole conversation is that if those private businesses and and both of them pretty much said that they would benefit from the spur, but if they're interested in it, I I would say that our role is more encouragement um because I I think that the feasibility study should be privately funded in in my opinion. just you know >> well what does the EDA get out of a railroad spur these properties >> I think that's one of the things about the feasibility is >> what are what are the benefits to the city >> from a railroad spur >> I mean I I can see the benefit to these private companies I can see that the value of their land could go up if they were to sell it >> is that is there any trickle down effect for the city. I mean, maybe you say the land sells for more, the tax >> tax tax base >> base would go up a little bit. And it seems to me you got to identify what are >> what are the things that would actually benefit the city in terms >> the point is to gain thriving business. That's what you're here for. >> Well, right. But I mean, we have where this spur is except for I don't think there's any property that's not filled, right? They're all owned, right? >> Yep. H we have all businesses there would be to help the businesses but then I agree maybe the feasibility say should be privately funded or at least partially privately >> you're certainly going to find out what kind of interest if you can't raise 20 grand. >> Right. >> It is dead. >> Right. Right. >> You could say that we'll pay for X and you guys pay for Y. >> I would say you guys pay for all. >> Yeah. I'd rather be there. But >> forget the point why we're here. We're not here to make money. We're here to foster growth in the community. And this is a growth function. >> So just if if anybody wants it, that's the deal. >> We know some all over it because we were in that meeting. Did you watch the link? >> No. >> Okay. I talked to I I did talk to King last uh at the U the highway 94. I I the coalition last weekend last. >> Yeah. Yeah, the one invited to >> and uh King has absolutely zero interest in in funding anything. >> It does what? >> They don't have any interest in funding anything. So, I mean, my point is if if the businesses are not going to fund it, >> what's the point? >> What's the point? >> Yeah. On top of that, let's just say even if we get a grant to build a spur, who pays for the cost of insurance? Who pays for maintenance? Who's responsible? What happens after it's built? Where's that cost go? Well, you mentioned something, Scott. You were at a meeting and this was what the 94 corridor businesses. >> So, from a high level, we already have rail service up 94 from here to Monosel. So, we we already have that. So the spur is just a a a subset of of the fact that we already have it. It's not like we're trying to put a new rail line into Dayton. Are there any um grant possibilities for the feasibility study? >> I haven't done any um looking into that. I don't know if John has noticed anything either for that. Um, but to Commissioner Weber's point, what I was going to say was that yes, the feasibility study is going to realize economic impact to the surrounding area. It's also going to likely include additional funding opportunities in that feasibility study of here are some here are some availability for grants or something like that um that could further assist you to make this possible. So, I think that that part of it would come from that as well. Um, but to your question, uh, Council Member Fashion, I don't I I don't know if there is off the top of my head. >> And not to throw gasoline on the fire, but is there other things, you know, I mean, we talked about the railroad spur because I think Chemstone, they're a good business to have. Kings is good business to have. You know, is that a high priority? I mean, if it is for them, I would sort of agree that that, you know, they should be coming to EDA and saying, "We'd like a railroad spur. How can we all or we should go to them and say this?" But, um, I mean, if it was very important to them, I think they would they would step up to the plate. No, >> I tend to agree with Scott. I mean, you go back to them and say, >> you know, feasibility study is going to be 20,000. are you guys interested enough to pay for that? And if they are, at least you know how what their level of interest is. >> Yeah. I mean, they can say, "Well, we'll cover 10 or 15 or whatever, you know, between them." >> And then, >> and then maybe we can make up the difference if we really think it's important, but we'll know in the study. We got to put the cart before the horse on this one. >> Yeah, we'll know after the study comes out. But I mean, we're kind of trying to be the barometer of how important it is before the study, you know? I mean, because we've talked to people. We, you know, we got some idea anyway. >> Well, regionally, I can only think it's a win. But I I've been pushing on it just because King Solutions, the ones that really wanted it. >> Yeah. >> They were the ones that were explicit in saying they wouldn't participate in the feasibility study. Yes, >> Sen did say that they would participate. >> I mean, they they said there was inter. They didn't know to what level >> in that in that meeting, but >> but he also said >> he also said in the meeting, our our resources are drying up and we're going to need some type of long-term solution. And he was all over that. >> He he absolutely was. I I think that his timeline fits the timeline of the grants. um because he said that the infrastructure isn't even there on the other side to be able to, you know, to be able to utilize it. Um in other words, if if you want a transload or sorry, a spur to offload, you need some place to be able to load, >> right? >> And right now, that's that's not that's not well, it's not developed. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Right. and and we're, you know, based on on at least the second point on here is that we're already a year away from uh being able to think about applying for the grant because >> the the one grant >> the one grant, right? >> Yeah. There's two two available, >> the federal and the So, what do we know about the federal grant? Is that just available anytime? Okay, we all got the same conversations going. >> Yeah. >> Can we get a grant for the for the grant to serve the grant when the grant won? You know, that that conversation for the 20k feasibility study. First of all, we got to decide whether or not we want to continue pushing on this and and that's going to be a majority consensus or we just drop this thing and move on. >> Do we I don't think we need a motion on this just show hands type thing. I mean, who's in favor of continuing moving on if we can get this thing reasonably funded? Because I know I am. I am I I have a stipulation to put in there. I guess I'm in favor of moving forward, but as the city and as as an EDA, I I I don't want to be paying for this. >> Yep. >> So, if someone other magically the money comes out of a hat to build it, great. If it comes down to where EDA has to put in $20,000, I'm I would say no. So that's that's kind of I guess I'm just being honest. My opinion on it is if we can get it for a grant, okay, but we don't have the money to put into this our own money anyway. So >> well, if the feasibility study shows that it's going to greatly impact the area because of this by IG or whoever the feasibility study guys say to 20,000 drop in a bucket. Now, if we can increase those retail spot for sales, that 20 grand on your tax load ain't nothing. You gota look at big picture. Exactly. And I'm looking at the big picture as far as once it's built, who who the insurance, who maintains it, who pays for it, who who who pays the bills. >> That's the long-term expense. Building it is the cheap part. >> Yeah, I get you. >> Maintaining it for the next 30 years, who pays that bill? Chair Hutner, would you say whether or not you know for a fact that um See and King Solutions would not be interested in >> I didn't say I said King. >> Would it would it be in the EDA's interest for staff to reach out to them to see and see if we can encourage them to do this on their own the feasibility study if they're willing to move forward with that? >> I would recommend I'm sorry. >> That's well in my opinion that's going to tell you the story right there. >> Yeah. If you can't raise 20 grand to do the study, >> it is over. >> Then there's absolutely no interest in it. If you can't raise 20 grand, >> I agree. >> And just reiterate to the businesses too that you know this feasibility study is kind of the thing that gets the ball rolling to understand what are the potential positive impacts to this project and at the same time >> in the grants. >> That's exactly it. Yeah. That's going to tell the other the rest of the story is collecting the 20. Then what's the story after you get the 20? Cuz you're not going to get a grant for three million bucks and build the whole thing. I >> 99% that you're not going to there's going to be some contribution from somebody, >> right? But I I think you need a lot of those facts before you apply for the grant and >> have some sense of what you know what the the grant possibility or contribution would be. >> You know, I think that they they need to put some skin in the game. >> Y >> more than just say, well, we'll use it if you build it, you know. So, I I mean, I could see the EDA participating in this, you know, as a as a partner. So call it 21,000 and you know the other two pony up seven and we pony up seven. I could see that as reasonable because then they're then they've shown with their checkbook that they're that they're interested. >> Yeah. >> But I think their interest whether they're willing to do anything at all tells the tells you. So to me it's I'm I'm willing to continue to push but that's the point. Push that. See what they say. They say yeah we're interested. Then you determine whether it's a fund at all or or you split it three ways or four ways or whatever it is. >> And I think the EDA, you know, interest in being a partner at all in this is is to Tim's point, you know, that this is got potentially bigger impact than than just those two companies. And so that would be, you know, our our interest in pushing it forward. I mean, increasing the value of those two properties, that's good for Dayton, but you know, does it does it do more for us than that? And that's where I think that's fair for us to participate in that question also. >> And then I think that at a higher level, what does the spur do for the property value? Does it increase the property value? Does it decrease the property value? If Chemstone sure >> I've never seen a Cadillac without power windows. >> I >> So you want to crank them up by hand? That's on you. But the rest of us want a button. >> Understand? But you know, I mean, is there a benefit to the city and increase taxes because their property just went up? >> Oh, it will. >> 150,000. >> You ever build anything on a piece property and go down? >> Of the study. >> Well, but a a railroad spur. I think one of the things you bring up is the liability, the insurance, the maintenance, you know, >> and it's on property. That's why we have to have that conversation. >> Yeah. >> It's infrastructure. This is no different than buying a 7in pipe down old town. It's still infrastructure. >> It's another way of communicating. Remember when the I94 bridge when that came in? >> Oh yeah, whatever, whatever, whatever. Now look at it. Look at that interchange. Incredible. just from one interchange. Now everything started building up around it. Now if we can take some of that traffic off the street, put it on a rail. >> Do speaking of the interchange and and it's do do we have any clue as to what Maple Grove >> Maple Grove feeling from their city council. I had a conversation with them. They would love to increase the regional area presence of rail. I've had that conversation with three of the people. They are all in. They ain't writing checks. It's on it's on D turf. So, to answer your question, yes, I've already had that conversation. It sounds like we need to to set up a conversation, a meeting with some, do we want to put King in the same room? Is there any other big player in the area that want to say, let's get him in city hall here and say, "Hey, this is where we're at." And if you if you want to make this move, cuz up to this point, how many times have we heard See's not interested. See not interested. No, no, no, no. And all a sudden we come to the table and oh, when do we start? Because we conflicting information. Did Turbine Pro attend the meeting? >> I mean, they're the other business that's right there in the corner there. >> Turbine Pros. >> Yeah. >> Well, there's there's a couple of businesses back there. To me, that's part of what the feasibility study might, you know, like, well, A, who's going to maybe pay for it? And then B, are there other I mean, I've always said to me there could be businesses in Rogers and other parts of Dayton that might use this, but >> till you actually get a study done, you don't know. >> You know, I don't know what you look at all the warehouses we have, you would assume that some people would have interest, but you know, I mean, most of their trade might the right area, >> you know, >> it's totally the right area for something like that. We ain't going to put in a landing >> because you're all truck pretty much. >> There's no need. >> Yeah. >> But a railroad or a spur? >> All right. What's the question on the table? >> We want to move forward. Is that a yes or no? >> Well, we need to come up with the money for the feasibility study. >> We need to have a meeting with the people. I'll make a motion to move forward to approach the companies to see if they're willing to pay for the feasibilities, >> help assist >> in in all or part, you know, whichever way you want to you can explore that. That's my motion. >> I would second that motion. >> All right, then. Who's in favor? >> I I >> Who is opposed? Scott. Oh, I'm sorry. >> Are you opposed? >> No, I'm not. I mean, >> I didn't hear the I You spend 20 23 minutes and if you get 20 grand, then you do the feasibility stud,000 a minute. We're doing pretty good. >> Yeah. >> All right. >> I mean, but they have to understand the 20 grand is not the end of the >> No, we we >> that's just a just this much of it somewhere along those long. >> Well, we know all big companies understand that the property is they say >> I mean who's the property? >> I don't have any idea. >> Who knows? Graco. I mean, you know, Graco is going to have their, you know, >> Well, let's finish the motion first before you keep discussing. We have all in favored. >> The motion passed. Okay. Yep. The motion passed. So, I we've got our we've got our direction. We can reach out to them and uh coordinate a meeting to discuss get the ball rolling um for that feasibility fund. So, >> do you have a great co contact we can bring in the same meeting? We want the big players in town. Yeah, I can certainly reach out and see if they'd be interested. Yeah, I don't know. Um I don't know to what scale John's reached out or what range he has within this area. So, um it very well could likely be that we haven't reached out to them just to >> course will to come to the table. You can be in the same meeting as well. We got your your your big company and corporate. We want to reach out to Caterpillar >> MTL >> of course. >> Sure. >> I mean, no one's no one's contacted MTL. I can I can assure you of that. Yeah, >> he knows nothing about this and he's a trucking company. >> Well, what about >> kind of garbage trade? >> Yeah. >> What about the auto the auction? The >> these Takata guys. Were you Were you impressed with those guys or what? Cuz I like them. >> Carvana, >> the guys who were held the main >> Oh, yeah. Yeah. >> Weren't they awesome? >> Yeah, they were good. >> They they they nailed it. >> I believe this did get brought up to Carvana, but they had no interest in in uh being a part of the the rail service. Oh yeah. >> So when they were going through their their entitlements for their building expansion, Carvana, uh we did mention this to them, but it sounded like they didn't have any interest of uh use of rail for their services. So >> that was one that we did have contact with. >> Okay, good. >> When will we have that ready for transmit? >> I'll have to see what John um see where he's at with when he gets back. I think either tomorrow or Thursday. So, and I'll I'll debrief him on the meeting that we had. >> Should know an answer by the next meeting, I would think. >> Yeah, >> it's a fivem minute conversation. >> Yeah, that's no problem. >> Yes or no? >> Well, it's Yeah, it always sounds that simple, doesn't it? >> It is that simple. >> As government, friend, meetings, not meetings. All right. Where Hayden, where are we going next? We can't talk about the land property quite yet. >> You could other than uh just to recap, this is still um listed for sale. Uh it sounds like there's been some verbal uh conversations between John and some people interested in the property, but no formal written offers to consider at this point. So, >> any IG conversation? Um, it sounds like I AG had this uh marketed at a um realtor and development conference out in Las Vegas where he had a few minutes to discuss this property and this opportunity. Um, a lot of questions about the flood plane. Uh, it didn't sound like there was too much hesitancy related to making this accomplished. So this specific concept that they had brought to that um other than that there were no formal offerings or anything like that that were um that came out of that. So >> okay and then no updates we'll leave alone any any of course John's not here so we can't talk much about the signage or the sign ordinance. >> I can speak to the sign ordinance if you want to have a conversation about that. Um, I'm more than happy to answer questions that you may have. Uh, before we get to that, I'll just >> one note on the triangle property. John informed me that, uh, the contract has been signed and, uh, the deed a deed has been ordered for. So, things are moving >> like a turtle. >> I albe it, but uh, >> how did this get misplaced on the Hampton Countyy's desk? That's what I want to know. >> Me too. >> You're talking about government. could talk about anime county. You think 19 minutes talking about a problem is something. Imagine this thing. Holy cow. Uh then can we and now reach out to IG and say full throttle. >> Uh yeah. Yep. So I think that uh they're going to have a meeting. John is having a meeting with them this week, I believe. So that get that in the process and start with uh some marketing material. >> Will they act even though we don't have it signed yet? that I'm not sure, but we can certainly ask. >> All right, let let chime in on that email. >> Sure. >> All right. >> Go ahead. Anybody got a question on sign ordinance? >> Yeah, if anybody has any questions about uh things that you saw in there, um feel free to to ask me some questions or why we got to that. Um, this was recently amended last year for uh to allow for taller monument signs within commercial and industrial districts. So, what you have in the package should be the most up-to-date version of the sign code. So, >> did they lessen it up or do they add more words? >> Uh, lessened it up. >> Nice. That went to council, did it not? >> Yes. >> Like recently, >> a year ago? >> Yeah, it was probably February of last year. >> 30 pages or something. But yeah, it >> was during the discussion for the second quick drip that that came up. >> That's how it's spurred. >> And just to reiterate, you know, John had this uh rendering brought up by a company when you guys were talking about this along Dayton River Road. This is a code compliance sign. So, um just for the record, just wanted to state that this what they have shown here is not uh something that wouldn't be allowed by the current sign code. Um, I went through it and have some comments. They're not t a ton of them. I mean, to me, one that's just like really simple, and this might be for all the ordinances, just the formatting. It's really uh somewhat difficult particularly when you get back into the different um zoning areas to like to know like this section is for that zoning area cuz that it's it's a number and the only way you can tell is there's a parenthesy around the number but it's not bolded or it's not you know it's not like a title, >> right? >> And so it's it's a difficult read from that perspective. it doesn't flow very well. I So I don't know if all of our ordinances are like that or this one's in particular unique in that manner, but um just >> yes um >> that's more of a stylish stylistic thing. >> The short answer is that all of them are like that and I would say that it's most likely due to American Legal's style of formatting that they have on the website. It's it's not intuitive or you know cuz like most times when you read things like the the headings are bolded or they're atalic there's somehow distinguished so that you can see okay if I want to go look at you know agricultural zoning or whatever see what the issues are there I can find it the title and then read the stuff below it. So anyway, probably nothing gonna happen there, but it it is uh >> I'm sorry I lost it. Where where we go with this? >> Well, just it's hard to read. So it if if whoever is writes the codes could come up with a little better way to do it, that would be good. >> Conversation with Tony on on this property piece with the sign. I do understand that he's ready to give up some acreage for this sign. is that that we still have that in in gold. >> Um, from my understanding, I don't know about selling a portion of the property and for this sign, but whether it was to uh dedicate an easement for the city to have a a sign on that property, I do believe that >> um >> John got an answer or you might have got an answer. >> So Satan says if you put it up there, he can put it in the same spot. We can put the new sign on it and and I'm sure that he'd want his name flashing on there as well. make sense to everybody? >> I also tried to look through this from a business perspective and see the one thing I would say is an under temporary signs. I thought 10 days 10 consecutive days seem to be a little short, but just my my thought, you know, you put you got something going on, 10 days isn't very long. Put up a temporary sign, you got to have it down in 10 days. Um uh and then if I understood this right, there are no billboards allowed in the city other than what's there to be the billboards that are there can be converted to digital but otherwise >> depending on the separation between existing billboards uh with in the freeway area which is the only area I believe there are billboards currently. Um I recently had a call with a gentleman who wanted to turn a static sign into an electronic one. Same size billboard as existing. Um but there is a provision in the code that uh limits that to I think it's one per 400 ft linear feet of uh right ofway and uh there was a electronic sign already in proximity to that. So they weren't allowed to do that. Um I know that a lot of the times that uh cities will require or have tried to require that billboards come down at the time of a property being developed. Um it sounds like cities have recently been challenged on that um to where they likely retain their rights to stay up there even after development. But just the the overall approach from the way the city's looked at this, the council, whatever, is like no more new billboards, but existing ones can be converted if they meet the conditions in here. >> Correct. >> Like you just described. And of course, all electronic has to be static. I mean, it can it can move, but it can't be like scrolling or whatever. It's got to be boom and then change to the new image. And that image can be up for 8 seconds is what I read. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Well, that's going to be kind of odd when you have a clock on there and it changes every second. >> Well, that's a every minute I would say, but uh that's that's a little bit different of a of a scenario. I mean, this is full picture changes from ad to add is kind of what we're referencing, not necessarily the changing of the clock. >> How about if I want to put Goodyear tires on my sign? Not a problem? on your sign? >> I don't believe so. No. >> How about if I want to put Good your tires in my neighbor's sign? >> I'd have to look into it, but uh >> cuz that was a problem a while back. >> Yeah, I'd have to look into that a little bit more. Um I don't know if >> my logo on my neighbor's sign. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. It would technically be considered an off-remise sign because the business that's being advertised isn't on that property. >> Yep. >> So, your official conversation is no. I would say that uh I'd have to take a look at it because there might have been some changes related to temporary signage that um went around in late 2024 um that may have allowed off-remise signage with property owner um consent, but I'd have to look into that. >> Okay. Well, I know Dennis is on that. He didn't like that at all. >> Sure. >> He should if I want to put on the dentist office on mine, there shouldn't be a problem. And and I didn't know where that landed. And you didn't see it in there because I didn't see it in there either. Did you? >> I I didn't see anything specific to what you're talking about. >> Okay. Well, let's play that. Let's find that out. >> Yep. >> And we got to keep moving here cuz we got to close business. >> More though. >> Uh well, the main one is it seems to me there should be a and this is from our an either an event or agroourism zoning for signs here. There's agricultural and residential and the signage for that I think is I think for for event centers and uh a tourism it should be more similar to the other business districts and not strict agriculture. So I would recommend that we add that and then adopt the kind of the provisions within some of these other zoning areas. >> Mhm. Does that make sense? >> Yeah, it does. I think there was a little bit of a conversation with with your project at the city council level. Um, now there's a couple of ways that you could think about this, whether it's having it included in the IUP event for the event center specifically where you say these are the guidelines that you have to follow per signage rather than just strictly going by the zoning district. In my opinion, um I would my preference is to tie that to the intermuse permit because when that intermuse permit is gone, the expectation would be the commercial signage would go away as well. >> I think in in hindsight, bringing a sign plan to the city council at the time of the original interim use permit approval, like in your case, would have been my preference um at that point. But it accomplishes the same thing. It'd be a little hard because you're so early in the process, but I think if you could bring it at some point, >> so the IUP wouldn't be conditioned on that approval, but you would bring it. It's just there's, you know, there's a gap there and somehow that has to be addressed. >> And I mean the signs from what I understand this whatever a public recreation district is is I mean they're a lot larger, which I'm assuming that's a park. >> Mhm. But I mean the restrictions on those are not much at all. Could be like 400 square ft. Um I think that's about it. Yeah. Anyway, those were a couple things that I had. Otherwise, I thought generally it was pretty good. I mean, you could argue about the the motion stuff and all that, but I think we had that argument a year or two ago and lost. How many signs ours do you have in town, Hayden? >> How many what >> signs ours? >> Um, >> we'll call that a zero. >> Probably just a couple. >> Yeah. Okay. >> Myself, maybe. >> So, if you don't have a complaint on it in the full motion signs out in front of your business, nobody's going to go and raise static is what I'm hearing. >> Uh, other than uh if I see something like that, I might stop in and ask if there was a permit pulled and it that would be ideal. Cities never go after businesses. They actually have to have a complaint driven. >> Correct. >> Oh, okay. Typically. Well, that's with all. >> We'll still take that as a zero. >> Yep. >> So, if you're going to put all kinds of motion on there, it'll make it all weird like weird motion. Moving on. >> Mhm. Anything else on old business? Cuz we kind of put that one to bed. And if you did look at some of those boxes, the damaged utility boxes were covered. Now, at least all two of them. >> A few of them, yes, are covered. A few of them are replaced, I think. >> Well, better than nothing. It doesn't look like crap over there anymore. >> It's a start. >> It's a start. And we did that as a group pushing and pushing and pushing. Infrastructure close meeting. >> Uh, do we want to talk about I I just I only had one, but was goals. I thought that was on there somewhere >> on the Are we going to have a separate session on that? >> I'd imagine it'd be a rule setting a separate session because I only saw one that I thought was there's nine and there's one maybe that could come out >> on the goals, but we're we're going to do a separate session. We can it just it's set it I think in the agenda. So, >> Commissioner Bernins, if you'd like, um, or I can make a note of that and we can add add that to the agenda if you want to discuss that at the next meeting. >> Yeah. Or I can give you my input. >> Sure. Either either way. It'd be uh best if you did it from the deis and uh when we had an agenda item for it. >> Okay. I think we should >> I saw one agenda. >> Sure. >> We can't put it on today and we got to talk about this. >> The city center one was the only one I saw that didn't fit anymore. >> Okay. We'll just make that a separate thing. You hear that? >> Yeah. >> Okay. Close session. Pursuant to Minnesota State Statute 13D.05 subsection 3C3, a close session shall be conducted to develop, consider offers, counter offers, purchase, and or sale of real estate personal property located at located at P 36,121, 23, 41, and 0014. We are in close session. No, you're good. >> Anyway, I was just curious if anyone saw the article in the starting about forgent, the company in Dayton. It was very very uh uh flattering for Dayton. I thought that they presented Dayton in a very nice light and uh and they talked about building more facilities in in the area. So I mean uh the they're doing a lot for um data centers stuff like that. So >> what company is this? >> For states >> they were the ones that states >> no is that that is in states? >> Yeah. Is it >> states same thing? >> Y >> really? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. It's the same company. >> Same company. >> Oh. >> So, okay. >> Oh, that's >> I mean, in general, there's been a lot of positive press on Dayton. Fastest growing suburb in the cities. Da da da da da da. >> Yeah. >> And to me, that all comes back to the interchange. >> Speaking of, >> everything changed when the interchange went in. I mean, it was >> night and day. >> Yep. >> Speaking of States Electric Forune, are they in the facility now? Is it up and running? Yeah. >> Would it be beneficial to >> set up a facility tour? Maybe >> missed it. >> It already happened already. >> Maybe do some PR with them or something or >> I don't mean it. >> Uh you're right. I think there was I was out of town. Yeah. There was a tour of the facility. >> They're in the cubes, right? >> So >> half million, wasn't it? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> That's a big center. >> They're like like Gray called the these are very desirable companies. There's engineers, project managers, a lot of white collar and and highly technical manufacturing. So I just would wanted to mention >> maybe they want to build an office building across the street in the triangle. >> Maybe they need a railroad to spur that >> kind of like Draco, you know, put your world headquarters right here in the triangle. >> That'd be good. Uh Hayden, why don't you rev us up on number seven? >> All right. Um just to note on this, there is a economic development association of Minnesota is doing a webinar um about uh what economic or what developers are kind of looking for in terms of bringing projects to fruition. Um John just wanted to put this up here. If you guys were interested in attending, let us know. We can sign you up. It's only an hour long. >> I think I am signed. If not, make sure. >> Sure. >> Yeah. Would you just send out uh the link and an invite? >> Yeah. Yep. Um these are just the standard placeholders here. Dayton has a city app. Um here's the breakdown that uh John followed up with related to the CO funding. I think uh Commissioner Bernins had mentioned or asked about this last month in regards to where did that money that the the city received go. So this is the breakdown that he had provided >> and I wish I could provide you with more detail. Internet I can't read it but >> internet antenna at Dayton mobile home park. >> Okay. >> IT equipment for city hall is 75362. >> Personal protective equipment >> 23522. Okay. Was that >> those are interesting categories for an internet fund but broadband But at least we know, >> right? U just to reiterate the snow plow policy. Um this was the love local storefront grant that the Anipen County H awarded to the EDA. Um so these funds are available to um building improvements in Oldtown. Um, so if there's anybody that's interested, feel free to send them our way and we can walk them through the process. Um, my guess is that, you know, this is a cost sharing grant. It's not something that's going to cover improvements related to the entirety of the exterior of a building, but uh, at least there's some support there. >> We got one interested party. I know. >> All right. >> No, no, no. You talked about it before, but I wonder if the Well, wonder if anyone's approached Carly. >> Well, it would really be Lero, I guess, because it's his building, >> the bar. >> There's only two buildings. >> Are you flashing so the people at home can see this? >> Yes. Okay. Um, and the other ones were placeholders that you've seen multiple times, but uh this one is new. Uh, the open house has been scheduled for the city. Uh it's Wednesday, May 13th from 5:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. and that will be at uh public works >> like last year's. >> Yep. Exactly. >> Okay. Well, get us that in a ping, too, so we all have that. >> Sure. Yep. >> Please, >> elevate. >> So, this is just kind of a where are they this month um type of thing as they are still doing this. Uh this is going to be an online event that they're going to hold Wednesday, February 18th at 6:00 p.m. Um so if you're interested, you can also attend this. Uh this one is a an online session. And during our last one, we had a couple people from different cities come in. I don't know who else was here with me. >> I was. >> Yeah. And it was interesting. Kevin, was it Kevin? Who was our county commissioner? >> Yes, >> Kevin Anderson. He was here. >> Bunch of online elevated people were here. uh some attorneys, some Yeah. could have been busier, >> right? >> Okay. And the next meeting is Tuesday, March 17th. Right here. >> Anything I want to add before I pull the pin. >> Nothing. I'll make a motion to adjurnn. >> Second. >> I'll second. All in favor? I. We are adjourned.