All right. I will call the order of the Tuesday, October 14th regular meeting of state city council. Please stand for the pledge to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> We need a motion and a second for the agenda. >> I'll make a motion. Second, >> Stephanie, Sarah, and any changes? >> Uh, no changes tonight, mayor and councel. >> Anybody else have anything? All those in favor say I. I. >> I. All those opposed say no. Carries four to zero. Um consent. I need a motion in a second. >> I'll make a motion to approve. >> Scott, >> I I have a conversation about N, but I don't necessarily need it pulled out. I just want to talk about it. >> I need a second. >> Second. >> Okay. >> Okay. Go ahead. Um, so I'm fine with it, but there was the language change to the ordinance so that in the future it doesn't have to come back through. Um, and I just want to make sure cuz when I read that, sorry, I'm >> sorry, which letter are we talking about? M or >> Nancy and Nancy. >> Thank you. >> This is the variance. >> Yeah. And like I said, I'm fine with the variance that that's not at all what any of my anything is. Um, but there was the little, sorry, trying to get myself plugged in. Um, the change to the language in the ordinance that it doesn't have to come back through. And I just want to confirm or clarify that um, it's not going to allow a I don't know if worse is the situation. I want to say >> others from doing the same not doing the same >> further encroachment into that setback. That is correct. It would not allow for that to happen. that is when a variance would be required at that point. >> But uh essentially the ordinance has changed a couple of times since these newer residential developments have gone through. Uh a lot of which were approved under setbacks that are no longer relevant. Uh so essentially that nonconformity change to that section would allow for homes to continue on those uh existing setbacks just as what is shown in that packet for number n or letter N >> but not past that not >> correct. So if there was a proposal where someone in Rush Creek Landing had an 8ft setback and was proposing a home addition at a setback of 6 ft that would otherwise not be allowed administratively and would require a variance. >> Okay. Okay. So I just wanted to clarify that because then that was the that was the only thing I wanted to confirm. Um the specific situation I'm fine with. Trying to see if I have anything else. I think that's all I had from the consent agenda. >> Anybody else? >> Okay. All those in favor say I. >> I. All those oppos say no. Carries four to zero. >> And we are on to open forum. Is anybody here for open forum? >> Anybody online for open? >> Sorry, not that portion. >> You just assumed Amy was taking. >> I normally don't. >> Uh we do not have any line. >> Okay. We'll move on from open floor. >> Staff consult council updates. >> Yep. Good evening, >> Amy. >> Amy, good evening. mayor as a council. That my name in tag, right? It's going going well. Um, couple updates for you tonight. So, I have an update for you in the uh Maple Grove water conversation. We talked about tenatively scheduling for October 23rd. We've heard some new information from Maple Grove. They'd like to share with us and I'd like to have all of that information before coming before to the council. I know it will be a longer conversation and I understand that. So, I did send out last week's weekly update for November 18th. I've gotten three. Does that work for four? >> I sorry I haven't gotten back to you. Um, November 18th. >> Yes. Hoping it works. It's a Tuesday night. So, >> um, it is a Tuesday night. Uh, how late are we thinking it's going to go? >> Well, I'd like to go like 5 to 7. Okay. >> Maybe 7 7:30, but nothing super crazy. Okay. We start at 5:00 if that works for everybody. We can provide dinner and that way it's something that we can kind of keep on track. I'm assuming it'll be a lot of talking from staff, but then lots of questions will be from council and that's um, understood. And so this will be the first of many meetings to get the a decision made for >> Why do you threaten us like that, Zach? >> It's not a threat. It's to give you plenty of ample time to make a good quality decision. >> Yes. Um that's fine. I just um I'm doing chores solo that week. So I wanted to make sure I wasn't going to get home at like 11:00 and then still have to do all of my chores by myself. >> If we are here from 5 to 11:00, you can be upset at me. That's fine. >> Well, then you're coming home with me to do chores. That's going to happen. >> That's terrible. So I'll pass it. Okay. >> Um, okay. So, speaking of rescheduling as well, we need to hammer down a date for November 11th council meeting since it's on Veterans Day and then we cannot meet on a federal holiday. So, we have tentatively talked about November 10th, which I know does not work for Council Van Aston. We talked about November 13th, which is a Thursday. >> Um, we don't care what day. I prefer not to be a Thursday, but I can make adjustments in my schedule to make it work for the council. So, >> and we need to confirm a date for rescheduling that week. I because I teach Monday, Wednesday nights, so that's why that's non-negotiable for me. But um >> I could do Thursday the 13th if that's >> doable. >> I am not leaving the US for a long time. >> I'm wide open. >> I think I'm good on the 13th. >> Okay. So we will I I believe Council Fashion when I talked to him sounds like the 13th worked for him from what I remember. But >> we would do normal times. It would be at the normal time 6:30 till whenever and we just move it from the 11th to the 13th. >> No work session. >> Well, for now. >> Okay. Well, that's kind of why I was. >> Yep. Okay. So, sounds good. November 13th works. Wonderful. We will change that in the calendar. And then last but not least, three park district was awarded a grant of $464,000 from the LCCMR grant program on our behalf for a non-motorized boat launch at the property owned by Three Park District adjacent to Gooden Park. So it would be to the east of Gooden Park. Um this will require contribution from us of about 200 grand. Um we will likely utilize some of the federal grant money that we've gotten from either the National Park Service or the federal government and or a small amount of city capital funds if needed. This is matched by the park district contributing an additional $150,000. So, just wanted to give an update to the council that we got awarded the grant. Um, that'll be likely 2027 planning 2028 construction um after I read the email again from the park district. So, >> and which parcel was this? >> It is technically to the east of Gooden Park. So, it's the one adjacent to Gooden Park. Um, but it will be I I think they're planning on some trail connection points to Gooden Park as well to be able to make some more connectivity there. Long-term, that property that they own is supposed to be a trail head for the Diamond Lake Trail and the West Mississippi Regional Trail to come together. I believe that's their long-term vision for that portion. But now they're looking to put a parking lot in and some connection points to the river and a few trails. So, >> okay, that went on. Okay. >> Rough roughly about an $800,000 project, which is great. and spearheaded by the park district which we appreciate their help and partnership. So, >> okay. They had some design already lay out there, didn't they? >> Yes. >> Yeah, we did do some original concept, but it's pretty >> looked pretty good. Yeah. >> Yep. Um it'll be just a gravel parking lot. Nothing major and crazy, but um enough to make it so that it's functional and be able to have another in-n-out point for the non-motorized boat launch. So, that's all I got. Thank you. >> Morning. >> Uh good evening, Mayor and Council. Just a couple of updates. uh wellhead treatment plant is still moving along uh really well. Um we're making connections to the raw water line, the water man and the sanitary sewer um over the next two weeks and the protest pipe work is still your job dear man. You're censoring me, aren't you? One mic. >> Um, do I have to go from the beginning? Oh, well ahead treatment plant. Uh, two week look ahead. We're making connections to the raw water line and the water man and the sanitary sewer. Um, and the process uh piping work on the inside of the building is continuing. Um, we got hydrant flushing going on this week. Um that should be pro, you know, most of it should be done by the end of the this week. There will be some carry over to next week. Normally that's in the Maple Grove area. Just timing up with when they're flushing um parks. Um all the irrigation stuff that we've done is up and running. Um Hayden Hills is looking really good. Um it was very toughy before in there. Now it's filling in with some overseeding and irrigation work. So should make a big difference. um area 21 and we've uh got the paving in there. Um they're still working on the irrigation system. Once that's done, we can start looking at landscaping in there. And that's all I have. >> Chief, good evening, Mayor, members of council. Uh last Sunday, um we had a good turn, this not this past Sunday, the Sunday before for open house, uh even with a little bit of rain. Um and then on Thursday, providing we don't get rain, um the last training they had with the Minnesota Air Rescue team was cancelled, um our intentions are to have them come in on Thursday this week and do some pickoffs in the river area. So might be a helicopter from the state patrol flying around. So I will send out um a message through hyperreach if we do do that training. Evening mayor, members of the council. Um we have we had two officers complete crisis negotiation training. Um giving us six officers trained in that. Um so we have a team available if needed for that. Um we did our final all officers did our final of the year um quarterly training with the other agencies on K9 handling um where they went out and learned um the aspects of when they're walking with the dog, the announcements, everything like that. Um and also we've had a rash of theft from vehicles over the weekend. Um so make sure you're taking your valuables out of your vehicle and making sure they're locked and secure at all times. What was that that training? >> Uh crisis negotiation. >> But what what what does it deal with? >> So if you have a subject that is a barricaded hostage or a barricaded suspect, they come in and negotiate with them >> to try to either release hostages or release themselves. >> Okay. >> Uh thank you. The Met Council issued system statements for preparation for the 2050 comprehensive plan. So, uh, we'll send that to the council in a Friday update. >> Jason, >> uh, milling and paving work is tenatively scheduled for next week for East French Lake Road and 125th. And then also the Dayton Parkway Holly Lane signal system. We're going to have a pre-construction meeting tomorrow. We expect the site work to start sometime soon after that, next week or the following. Um, we did get a preliminary estimate on when the signal would be operational based on equipment lead times. Uh, we were told mid-March to late March would be the optimistic schedule, which is >> Oh, what we were anticipating. We we figured about a fivemon lead time on that. So, we'll provide updates as we get them, but as of now, that's what it looks like. >> Has there been any I mean, I know it's been a short time, but is it look like we're going to need those templates? We haven't had any um at least that I've heard of, we haven't had any incidences or okay >> complaints. Um >> but it it is a five-month period and we will hit inclement weather at some point. So um >> we'll continue to keep an eye on it. >> Regarding the the uh East French Lake, have you talked with Ulio and is that is there been some coordination there? Yeah. His the the main concern for their operations was to avoid MEA, which we did. >> Oh, you did? >> Yeah. They were actually scheduled um to mill on Thursday and Friday. Um so we had them adjust their schedule to avoid that. >> Oh, but they were okay with that. Okay. >> Yeah, we didn't we didn't catch it. There won't be a full closure, but he said that's the busiest literally the busiest two days of their operation. So, >> okay, >> makes sense. So, we will there won't be any work out there um short of potentially some minor curb work um over by >> Okay, Scott. >> Uh Marty, your ditch guy. Great job. Love it. >> Good. I'm letting know. >> Um I was wonder Oh, anything else? >> Okay. Um I was wondering about um we sent the comprehensive plan amendment to Met Council regarding our A3 district. I was just wondering where that was in the process >> under review. So I I would expect we probably won't have a decision from the Met Council till December. >> Okay. It but it had to go to our neighboring cities as well. And did that did that process come in like go or is that after >> it? No, it's before. So um we're we're required to send the comp plan amendment to adjacent cities. >> Um that was done. None of the cities had comments. >> Okay. Okay. I was just curious where it was in the process. Okay. So, it finished that part and now I was just hanging out with my council. Okay. And have they given us any feedback of any kind or they just making a sweat? >> Yes. >> Okay. >> They have 60 days for review. >> Okay. Okay. >> Um I think it was sent beginning either end of September, early October. So, >> okay. 60 days. Mike >> knowing that cult use all 60 days >> which is fair. Okay. Thank you. Judy did say she would shepherd that through, but I don't know how much what that means. >> Yeah. Um, that was it. Thank you. >> And I have nothing. >> I have one thing. Um, I just wanted to say thank you to Dean's Pumpkins um for putting that BOGO for the 50% off pumpkins to carve for the trail um in the communicator. Um, I guess like as a mother of four children, like that's a lot of pumpkins to buy. And so it just it allows for all different types of income levels or families to be able to participate. And so I guess maybe just a shout out to them, like thank you for that. Um, because again, it allows more of our community to participate in the trail um because they will be donating it to the city. So thank you to them for that. >> And that's it. >> Okay. All right, on to item P. Yep. Uh, good evening, mayor, members of council. We have a public hearing tonight for resolution 67 and 68 2025 for unpaid delinquent utilities. One is for Wright County, one is for Henipin County. That's why the two resolutions are needed. Um, I guess open the public hearing and I'll stand for any questions if you have any. >> Don't know questions. I just don't understand why >> it's it's crazy. >> It is crazy. We do a overabundance of communication to all of these individuals that they are well aware of it. Um we're required by statute to do one notice and that's it. Um we do about four um whether it's by phone calls or emails or letters or over and above just to make sure everyone's aware of what's going on. Um, if it's a renter, we always send to the renter and the land owner so they're aware of it. And yet, we still have unpaid delinquent utilities. So, don't know what to tell you. >> Yep. And there was a doozy on there. >> A couple. >> A couple. >> Yeah. I don't know. >> Most of those ones that are really big ones, I did confirm with Marty is like we go out and do everything we can. Knock on doors, leave hangers, try to get a hold of people, let them know there's a problem. If we're able to get in the house, there's individuals that we've gotten in the house, say, "There's >> your water softener's running 24/7. You have a runny toilet. Here's what's going on." And then no changes. So, we do what we can. >> Clearly, clearly money grows on trees. >> Well, for some, it's some people. >> I have a question about this just because this is my first time through. If let's say there is a person who has an outstanding bill but they are working with the city to pay their bill um are they're still charged the 15% even if they're actively working on even if it's just a little like whatever the plan is with the city. >> Yeah. So we do allow payment plans through the city. So we will allow up to 12 months of payments depending on the size of your balance. We'll work with you somewhere between six and 12 months. We won't charge you interest for that. the penalties will be removed. Um, but basically you got to say, I'm going to sign up and pay >> my previous balance divided by however many months we work with you >> and then they have to pay that plus your new balance on the bills. So, you know, it does add up a little bit. But if they are having a an approved payment plan and they've made those payments, they are not on this list. >> Okay. >> So, that is not Yep. That is not somebody who's on this list. if they've tried to make payments and then failed uh as part of the payment plan, reach out to them, let them know, they'll let us know. If we don't hear anything back, then they are back on the list for the delinquent utilities. So, >> I Yeah. And and I appreciate the fact that, you know, we're going multiple times to try to work with people. I'm just making sure that we're not, hey, we're going to work with you and then all of a sudden we throw >> they removed. So, we've had some that, you know, they have a $1,000 bill or something and we'll say, if you can make it work $100 for 10 months, that sounds great. and we try to make it work whenever we possibly >> even if they pay it off before. So before the end of the year before at some point >> so they still have some time from now. So um just because you guys approve it today does not mean this is the final list. They still have until November >> I think it's on the September 14th to pay their bill before it gets certified to the county. >> Pay in full or set up a payment plan with the city. >> Either one. >> Either one. I'm just making sure that if let's say somebody was on this list and they >> didn't know that or they were like, "Hey, like take it off this list and be charged at 15%. What can I do?" >> Just making sure that we're safe. >> They can set up a payment plan or they can pay their delinquent utility. If they set up a payment plan now, um they will not be added to the delinquent list this year. But let's say in 3 months they can't make their payment anymore. They'll just be added to next year's delinquent list. Okay. Um, so it's, you know, we forgo about 12 months worth of, you know, waiting for the money just to make sure that somebody's able to be taken care of that they need it to be. But, okay. >> Um, we always, like I said, try to go above and beyond to take care of the residents if we can. Some we just can't work with what their needs are and we'll say, hey, you know, if you can pay half of it, we'll only certify half to your taxes and then pay the other half. So, >> Sure. >> And we're able to make it work one way or the other if possible. >> November 13th was what? >> Yeah, there you go. And it was the 13th or something like that. Um and then my question was um so if it goes to the taxes and they still don't pay then what's like what is the next >> seven years of delinquent taxes before it goes into tax forfeature. >> Okay. Like because like Stephanie this is also my first time through this stuff. >> Yeah. And and for multiple reasons just one trying to understand the process and two just making sure that everybody we've said it out loud what people can do to kind of >> Yeah. Yeah. >> work through the situation. >> Yeah. We try to make sure everyone was aware of it. Um but yeah, so let's say they don't pay their assessments this year or they don't pay their bill and then it gets assessed next year and they don't pay it again. It goes into what they call delinquent assessments. Okay? >> And it's a penalty set up by the um county that's done through that process. Let's say they take three years and they pay their bill. Then we just get paid back for those delinquent delinquent assessments for the number of years that they'd be outstanding. But >> okay, >> the county then has a delinquent process that they follow. Seven years technically of delinquent taxes before closing their taxes. >> Any other questions? >> Um there were two that were current resident is that are those rentals then typically >> um some of them are rentals and some of them are the safe at home. Okay. >> Um undisclosed people that we can't >> oh names. So >> totally fair whether it's a >> domestic abuse situation or trying to you know some some sort of situation like that where they have to just use curtain. >> Okay. That was mostly me being nosy. I want to be honest. I just wasn't sure what that meant. Okay, >> I have another Sorry again, first time through. I apologize. Um, >> businesses are treated the same as residential. >> That's correct. >> Should should they be? >> Well, I don't like it at all, but >> fair. I'm just >> I think >> would we prefer to do some other different process for business? >> Well, no. Well, I think if if a business has to collect money, they can't add it to somebody's taxes, but that's my it's a philosophical problem with it. But it's it is what it is. So, >> it just seemed interesting to me that a business would be on the list. Maybe that's just >> I'm guessing that's a business that's in trouble, but I don't know that. I I don't know anybody's financial situations. No, I just it felt weird to me that a business would be labeled as like the business itself, not the owner of the business. You know what I mean? So, it's like so the businesses are listed with residential. So, I just >> it felt weird to me that they were together. >> Sure. >> And that this is just everybody, right? That they would be treated the same. >> They are treated the exact same like any other resident. And then if again they don't pay their bills, then they just get certified to their taxes just like anybody else would be. >> Interesting. It's a 15% loan. So, >> it's a Yeah, it's a 25% loan. It's a 15% fee and that includes mo mostly just extra time that we spend with overcommunication and trying to get people and then it's a 10% interest because we're foregoing that interest that we could be earning on that revenue. So, that's the 10% interest. Technically, it's a 25% increase by them just not paying the bill. >> Any other questions? >> No. Thank you for answering them. >> Right. I will open open the public hearing. Anybody here to address this? Probably nobody online. >> Nope. Be online. >> Close the public meeting. All right. Okay. Um, we'll need a motion. Make a motion to approve. >> Second. >> Any more discussion? All those in favor say I. >> I. >> I. All those opposed say no. Carries four to zero. On to item two. Leaving Mary and council. Um what I have in front of you tonight is the approval to advertise for a full-time public works maintenance technician. Um we're looking to uh fill this position. We've had two um part-time positions that haven't been filled. Uh the original idea was to uh make one of those part-time positions a full-time position in Q4 this year. Um so it has been budgeted for that way. Um we're currently um a little bit behind on our works uh on our staffing levels. Um so I'm looking to advertise for this to get the position in by the end of the year so they're here for snow plowing season and that kind of thing. >> Any questions? >> Nope. No. >> Okay. Huh? >> Need a motion. A second. Oh he motioned I second. >> Any more discussion? All those in favor say I. I. >> I. All those opposed say no. Carries. Four to zero. Thank you. >> On item R. Good evening members mayor, members of council. Water and sewer budgets tonight. I um hopefully can address some questions. I'm sure I won't be able to address all of them, but I'll do my best. Um we'll start with the water fund because that's the most fun one. Um, the major changes from 2024 to 2025. This is the same document you guys saw in your packet. Nothing changed here. I can update actual numbers once we get a little further through, but we're not through with the bank bracket in September. So, I don't want to send you all final numbers cuz September is not finalized yet. But, um, the major changes are in operations of a wellhead treatment plant are now for sure in 2026. So, I should say 25 to 26 for major changes. I apologize. These were incorporated in the 2025 budget. However, after the delay in funding, which was about 9 months, we did not see the actual increase for that. And most of that's in chemicals and then obviously a little bit in wages and salaries just based on the amount of time people are spending in the water fund. Otherwise, there's no other major changes noted. Um the long-term plan items um we'll be discussing a little bit and over the next several months like I had mentioned. Um, part of the things with the water is that we have a lot of water needs and so continuing to increase the rates although difficult and understood that rates are high for water is because we have a lot of needs for water overall just with wellhead treatment plants and water treatment plants and water towers and we do our best to make most of the burden if not all of the burden on developers as they are putting in new homes. um it never fails that it's just never enough to keep up with inflation and changes in um supplies and just I guess just changes in the environment we live in today that everyone lives in and can't believe how much eggs are and whatnot. So um things for water are extremely expensive and have been growing up insanely. Um Jason and Marty and I have talked extensively about this budget and trying to figure out how we can make things more efficient and and more reasonable for cost and there's just no way. And I don't know what the deal is, but the cost for everything has just gone up. Mostly with the long-term plan things, water towers, well-term plants, again, we'll talk about that in a minute. But, um, the main thing is that this fund stays healthy because we are in a major need for water um, resources. Um, so as you can see at the bottom line, the net number um, expected next year is about a $1.1 million increase in the funds that likely will go right towards new capital. Um, that does include $775,000 of depreciation, which is not actually something that we cut a check for. It's replacement of assets that are already in the ground. So, we need to be ready to be able to replace water lines as they break, be able to replace wells as they break because things don't last forever and having that depreciation numbers in there. So, we actually are about $1.9 million positive in this fund if everything goes perfectly. Um, which is good. again, not because we're storing up a bunch of money, but because we have to have money available for when the next need is there. So, I'll stand for any questions, but right now, we try to do our best to keep around a 5% increase in the rates, and we've done that for the last several years. So, we'll switch between water and sewer. Um, I'm proposing a larger rate increase in water because of those needs. So, it's a 4% proposed increase in rates for water for 2026. I apologize, I put 25 on the inter. Um I'm looking at the monthly cost comparison with the other cities that you had. >> Yes. >> Um >> I do not have this on this slide. I apologize. But >> that's fine. Um this is the 2025. So are other cities also increasing by about the same percent or have we heard? >> I would presume almost every city is in the same boat of increasing by something. Um >> so still be in the middle in the pack. >> And we've always tried to be in the middle pack. That's kind of our goal is to not be too high or too low. I know our water, if you were to take it out and say, "Hey, our water our water's probably one of the higher ones." But it's because we have so many water needs, but we don't have a lot of wastewater needs. Yeah. >> And so that ends up >> balancing >> balancing us out a little bit. You know, look at Seagull, which has one of the highest rates. >> Insane. >> And waste water is huge because they have to provide their own waste water. So, they need a new wastewater treatment plant. And those are >> um I've heard anywhere from 30 to $55 million. Um we don't need those. So, um, we thank Matt Council for that. We'll talk about that in the sewer fund, but I would presume you're seeing somewhere between a 2 and 84% increase in most water rates. Unless somebody did a major project, then it's higher. >> If they did a water tower, I mean, 7 to 15 million bucks for a water tower. So, you do that, that's a bond. Now, you got an increase in your rates, and it's probably 10%. That's a lot. >> Well, because it looks like even if no one else increased, if everyone stayed the same, we would still be in the middle of the pack. That's correct. So, so that seems to me like we're probably going to stay right solid middle of the pack. We might actually drop down >> a little bit. Yeah, like I said, our the sewer is helping us and the plan is to try to keep rates slowly increasing so that when we do need a large bond for something, we don't have to increase the rates by such a large amount that it's like, holy cow, that's a lot. If we keep it just a little bit at a time and pace it, then we don't have a 10% increase because we have a, you know, bunch of needs and it's a $15 million bond or $30 million bond or whatever is needed. So, but again, slowly increasing the rates is feels like it's more appropriate than one giant leaf and then it people um really pay attention to that. >> How long has it been since we've done a uh a water study on these? >> We probably should do one again next year. It's probably a good idea. Um, we did one in 2019 and it was a 5-year one. So, which went us through 2024, take it back, 2018, went through 2023, and we've been just doing roughly 3% increases or 4% increases in water just to keep us somewhat stagnant and continually increasing. Again, I get that increased rates isn't always ideal for everybody, and I understand that. But having small increases feels like it's more appropriate than one large one. a water rate study and a utility rate study would probably not be a bad idea in 2026 depending on decisions made in the long-term plan would not be a bad idea. So, there's a lot of changes in that and we'll talk about that in a minute. But, >> um I noticed we don't have a separate storm uh >> not currently fee. Um is that just incorporated into our wastewater or we just don't have a need for it because of the way we are or >> I think it's a larger discussion. appreciate the um question council van asking because it's a large conversation. Okay. >> Um storm water we rely 100% on development to do all of our storm water costs right now. >> Okay. >> Um that is sustainable currently because we are developing and growing. >> Once we get to a point that will not be sustainable anymore. Um I've heard from many communities that are fully grown. Um I'll use Andover as an example, NOA as an example that are fully grown and don't have any more um ability to use developers. they have to implement a storm water utility. We strongly suggest doing one sooner than later. So you can start it off small and then slowly increase it. Um those little increases again make to be a big amount. Um but again this it's tough to implement it when we're having so much growth and we just see a lot of development happening. It's really really good. But storm water utility is difficult. I know there's been a lot of changes with storm water and I'd like to go over them with Jason, but I know we've talked about it and like I don't know this is for effect, but I'm pretty sure if we reconstruct a road in a development that's already there, I believe we have to add storm water ponding to that roadway that was no not needed previously. >> So, storm water rules have changed. >> Okay. >> Um and that if we have to reconstruct or use Bley Farms only because it's across the street and it's an easy one, there might not be any storm water ponds in that um that development currently. If we reconstruct that road and reput it down, we have to add storm water ponding somewhere in that area. >> Okay? >> Which means we're taking out homes or changing roadway layouts or something to add storm water ponding to an already existing roadway. >> Okay? >> And that's a new storm water change. I think it was last year, probably two years, probably two years ago. >> Two years ago. So that's what pushed a lot of cities to implement that storm water fund utility because if they need to reconstruct a roadway, they don't have any new development, >> they're going to rest. going to kill some of these old developments too or at least kill the city >> 100% like you look at the cities of you know Crystal Popes Robins Dales the outer first ring of Minneapolis this will crush their city pretty quickly and it's hard so um it's something we should look at and try to game plan maybe it's a conversation for next year I'm not looking to do it this year right now but >> just because I think we need more information for that but it should be something that we talk about and I think it's important to discuss of what that looks like even if it's small you know even if it's $2 a a month or something. >> I mean, Rogers is $1.90. >> Yeah, it's two bucks a month. Like I said, if it's it's so small that people probably don't realize too much because it would be every other month. >> Yeah, >> but $2 adds up a lot when you have 4,000 homes. >> If we did have some cost there, would we just pull it out of wastewater or general fund or what? What would we do? >> Um, right now we just utilize the development fees. So, right now, most of our costs of operations, it comes from engineering. when they do MS4 permitting or those type of things, we will pay for them out of the development numbers that come from developments from storm water funding. >> I'm talking about let's say we have to do something in the old village, >> okay, >> with uh with storm water. Um where would that come from? >> Right now it would come from those development dollars that are coming in. >> So we would right now we have a fund set up storm water fund set up and we do receive dollars from developments. So we utilize those funds currently. >> Okay. But it's the long-term longevity of that fund that we need to make sure is sustained. >> I was always under the impression that their contribution to storm water stayed within their development. But it it doesn't have to. Okay. Okay. >> It goes into our larger fund >> um and then is utilized across the city based on what our storm water utility is needed. >> But right now we don't have any of those operation costs. Basically, we have operation costs with engineering that do our MS4 permitting um which is needed every single day and week while we're operating. But, um right now we utilize development dollars instead of utility fund. But >> are you looking for a a vote on this? >> Um not necessarily a vote, maybe a blessing, but a vote wouldn't be bad. Um >> I it doesn't matter. I just >> I I will I would think either one of those is great. It's good for direction so that when I come back with the fee schedule, that's when I'll actually need a vote. >> Okay. Um, but if I don't have a good blessing or direction, >> I don't have a problem with that. Same bias. >> I think it's reasonable. I'm glad that we're in the middle of the pack. We're not the cheapest. We're not the most expensive. And even if no one else increased, we'd be in the middle and everyone else is probably going to increase. So, we're probably going to see >> I don't have 2026 numbers for anybody else, unfortunately. As soon as I do, I can provide them. But, >> and the change isn't huge, I think, is the big thing, too. >> No, >> it's even less in sewer. So, we'll talk quickly about sewer. Nothing major. Again, the biggest thing for us is we don't have sewer. Um, we send it all out to Met Council, so we don't have wastewater treatment plants, so we have to worry about. We have sewer lines and stuff and that's what the depreciation number is there for. Um, that's about $800,000 a year. Um, we are still net positive even though it shows a negative number in that budget because depreciation is not an actual number that we had a check over. We are still cash positive in this fund. Um, but I'd like to slowly get us to a point where we're about at zero. Would be nice to be at the bottom line so that we're actually covering 100% of depreciation and not just 75% of it or close to that 70%. But right now, I'm just looking for a 1% increase in rates. Trying to keep that 5% number in total. Um, and focusing more of it on water than sewer. I have to stand for any questions otherwise. >> Nothing. No issues. No issues. All >> good. Okay. Sounds good. S >> water and sewer long-term plan. I'm going to start with sewer because it's going to be a less conversation than water. Um I'll look for Jason and Marty to chime in on anything that I may misspeak on, but I'll start with sewer. Again, we don't have a whole lot of major things that are going on in the sewer fund, but we do want to make sure that things are still happening. Um major thing that we looked at adding this year is a permanent generator for the River Hills lift station. That's something that Marty had brought to my attention that we don't have a permanent generator at that lift station and it's one that um goes down. Does it go down frequently because of the service isn't very reliable and at least three to four times a year that goes down. We have to put a generator out there. So, um I think it would be a good idea to put, you know, a full-time uh generator at that location. Yeah. So, so but then instead of having a temporary one which we do have um the temporary one is you know then we then we're chasing typically the process. So we'll chase from one to the next to the next. So the lift station pumps from one to the next lift station and then try not to back it up into people's houses. But permanent generator is always nice just to have on site. >> Is do we have enough budget for that or is that going to be >> Nope. That should be fine. Yep. We have enough funds and dollars. Um I think I pro I did provide you guys with tonight um with a long-term plan that go shows both the plan for the dollars and then the cash flow. Um the water one is not as pretty as the sewer one. >> I have some questions about the water one. >> That's that's fine. And I anticipate lots of questions like I said which is totally fine. But for the sewer one we are healthy in that fund. Okay. You know barring any major major catastrophes. >> Knock on wood. And um so uh the biggest thing again maybe adding longterm is to replace the back truck. the territorial road improvements in the 113th Avenue reconstruction will happen as development happens. Um we just continue to push that out a year at a time. Trying to wait for something to happen. It was in 26 last year. It'll be in 27 this year. We're looking for if we get any push from developers, we'll let the council know and we may pull it up, but um it'll only be based on development um andor residents. So if residents come in from 113th Avenue and say, "Hey, we want water and sewer down this roadway." Because they currently don't have it. that would be north of 81. We would say, "Okay, sounds good. Let's figure out an assessment process and go from there." But they have currently not asked for it. Um although it is one of our busiest roads in town, but um they've not asked for it. So, >> some of us are happy with our well accepted systems. >> Yep. And that's fine. Like I said, some people want it, some people don't. And right now, we're at the people don't want it. And then we're not going to force it on them until they're ready. Um until that roadway is really, really bad. There's no point in redoing that roadway unless you're redoing the sewer and water underneath it really just based on the fact it's only so long and it's our busiest road. So, >> um, security cameras at lift stations, is this a I mean, I'm fine with it, but like is it a concern? Is have there been issues? >> It's part of a bigger, you know, program. We want to uh install security cameras around our water infrastructure as well. Um there's some instances where you know they are a good thing to have. Um and this would be just a backup for us to see what's going on there if anybody's getting in there and it shouldn't be a huge cost. It will go on our skater system. Um so it be moni mono just like every other alarm that we have. >> Okay. >> I don't think we're having any issues but we're trying to avoid them if we have. >> Yeah. Marty RR um this probably has more to do with water than anything but any remote access there is that done through just normal network >> sorry >> do we have a dedicated network to the water system >> yeah we have a um I can't remember the word is it a tunnel system >> tunnel y >> yeah that's what we have it's totally only accessible by us and one other person that is security who um to controls manages all for us. They're the only ones who have any external access to it. >> Okay. And the the both sides of the tunnel are in secure area. So each tunnel, each water tower be in a locked area or something. Okay. I was just curious about that. >> And the last one I just shrked it up so you you don't have to look through 29 through 2034. It's just playing um planning to replace that back truck. We bought it a couple years ago, two years ago now, three years ago, something like that. >> And it was used when we bought it. um got a really good deal on it and it's in really good shape. So, we we'll utilize it for as long as we possibly can. Um just trying to plan out um for when it's needed to be replaced. So, >> do um so we have a back truck and everybody else around us probably needs a back truck. Do we loan that out? Do we I mean somehow the the concept of a co-op has to start somewhere. So, um, we're part of a joint powers agreement with several other cities around here where we share equipment. Um, so if they're asking for it, then we will loan it to them. Um, uh, there's I think it's five cities on that. Um, and we do a lot of work with Corkran and Rogers. So, they're they're borrowing one of our rollers this weekend. We borrowed their, you know, their sweeper and stuff like that. So, it is part of that deal. >> So, the answer is yes. We try to do as much. >> We try to help out on the co-op. That's one thing we got to do. We need to provide something to the co-op. You know, always be a borrower. So, this is what >> you can't be the neighbor who's always asking to borrow things and never have anything to be borrowed. >> Correct. >> I mean, you can be, but no one likes that neighbor. So, after a while, they're like, you know what, you're out of the co-op. So, >> yeah. Okay. Yeah. Again, this is just to keep an eye on it for knowing that it needs to be replaced eventually. >> But the fund looks healthy and >> Yeah. I don't see any major concerns. Um, we'll spend our time on the water long-term plan. Um, I know that we will not get through this as which was noted on my staff report. I understand that this is a big conversation. I want to strongly focus on 2026 and 2027 tonight for our conversation because the rest of it will relate to further conversations that we have related to Maple Grove Water. Um, and just overall changes. There are quite a few changes on here and I get those. Um, I understand those. I'll touch base on the big ones just because those are the big hitter numbers. The Northwest Water Tower, we ran new numbers for that from Jason and I appreciate that. Those costs have skyrocketed for how much it is per thousand. Is it per thousand gallons? >> Oh, just per gallon rule. >> Per gallon rule. Much more expensive. >> It's crazy expensive how much that went up. So, >> this is for a quarter million tank. >> Quarter million gallons. Yeah. Um the 3.8 20 million does include water piping to get there. So, when we first put our cost together, we didn't think we needed upgraded pipes, but by knowing that is it is it a 6-in main right now? >> 8 in trunk, 6in laterals, >> and we need to have a >> we want to put in a 12in direct connection. >> There we go. So, we thought there was 12in connections in mains because that's what we put across the entire rest of the city and it's only >> they're only six, I think. >> Yeah. So, um, we need a 12 in to get to the water tower to be able to fill it up fast enough to be able to be utilized. And so, that's what elevated the costs from what it was before to what it is now of $3.8 million. That is a lot. Um, we did apply for funding from the state. Um, we are on the state senate bonding tour which is going to be October 30th. So, any of the council would like to join, you might join at 8:40 a.m. October 30th. It's a Thursday. Um I don't anticipate a lot of us being able to get here, but if you could be here, that's always great to show some support. Um >> October 30th, April 30th at 8:40 a.m. Yep. So, we'll have the state senate here, Senator Hoffman, >> Senator Papus, um the bonding committee will be here to be able to tour and do some things. So, >> if we're available, should we email you to >> Well, you don't have to email me. Just let me know. We'll plan on having a we'll post for a quorum either way. So, if you can make it, fantastic. if you can't. I understand it's during the daytime and people have regular jobs too. So, um but we are in for I think that one we have I think it's 2 million um for funding from the state. We were um this close three times two times for just over a million dollars twice on that project. So hoping that this third time is the charm >> on this one or >> on just this northwest water tower for the historic village. So this 3.8 how much of that is tank versus connections? >> Uh the connection is probably roughly a million. We just started the initial right design. We had our first kickoff today and for our first check. >> So this includes a million for that. >> Yes. >> Yes. Yep. >> Total about 2.8 million. So if you think about it 250,000 gallons, 2.8 million rough number >> about $10. >> It's just crazy. >> And the Yeah, >> it's crazy. about $10 a >> and it's for an event that we >> Yeah. >> It's trying to keep storage available. It's trying to keep fire flows available. It's trying to be able to make sure the hydrants are able to be utilized. It's >> a >> few different things. If a wall goes down, we want to make sure people have water there. >> Yep. >> Um it's tough, but I think it's important that we have a water tower in that area to be able to >> Well, at some point in all these important things, something has to get >> Yep. And like I said, so that's why the numbers towards the end of the thing are more trying to figure out where those are going to fit in because it does um tie into it. But we are looking, I said, as best we can at all kinds of grant money because we understand that all of this stuff is very expensive. And >> I don't expect nor I do nor do we do on the well treatment plant look for all Dayton dollars to be able to pay for the projects. We got 5.75 million out of eight on the well treatment plant. I like that percentage. So I can try to keep doing that. So, um, wellhead treatment well number one, the seven >> that that one is one that we're going to have to make sure we have grant funding for. This will be no different. So, if we don't get grant funding for that, we'll continue to push that one out. >> Okay. >> Um, because the will treatment plant is no different than the well treatment plant here, >> but the scale doesn't scale too much better for >> it doesn't scale. >> It doesn't scale. So, um, it's still very expensive at $7.3 million. That's updated cost for 2027 based on what we're seeing. It would be more expensive if we didn't have a water tower because then we have to add pumps to be able to get the right pressure through the lines which means that cost goes from 7.3 to probably 10. And so the there is a there is a small trade-off for having a water tower is you get that pressure without having to have pumps. But again, this is something that we're looking at trying to make sure that we're making equitable water across the community as well. Um, again, treating water for manganesees and forum iron is important as well. And but we understand that this would only be done likely with a grant just because it's a large amount of money. It's a small area of town and we understand that we want to make sure that everyone's taken care of equally, but it's expensive and it's no different than the well we have currently. So, >> is that one on this but is that on any sort of radar? >> That is on this year's radar. Same thing. Yep. of them are on this year's bonding tour. Um the other project that's on the bonding tour is the Pine View and Dayton Road intersection >> to try to improve that one is another one that we did apply for. >> What did we ask for bonding or what did we ask for grants in this for this? >> So we asked for 4 million for the well treatment plant. We asked for 2 million on the water tower and I believe it was 2 million for the intersection at Pine View. I can verify those numbers tomorrow. But >> so even if we did that grant, we'd still be three million in the hole for 200 homes. >> You got it. >> It's got to be a better way. >> We're Yeah, we're trying our best. Like I said, just cuz the, you know, that doesn't mean it's the only way we can get money, too. You know, we can look at other options as well. The federal government will look at too. That's only from the state. 4 million bucks. >> Again, I know that that might be a small change for the state, but that's a huge amount of money for us as a city. So >> typically do you for that process do we get it from the state first and then go for the federal money or do we look pursue them simultaneously? >> Simultaneously. >> Okay. >> We'll do them both at the same time. We're applying for them all the time. We're looking at different spots to get different dollars. You know I think you can look at a couple of them. I think you know National Park Service we looked at for the for the trails. I'd look for anything to get more money into the city that's not taxpayer dollars to be able to pay for the wild treatment plan because I think it's important. But I also understand that there's a financial need too and you can't just suffice $3 million from the whole system to again pay for a small volume. But and I get it though. It's equitable water. It's tough. Um it's a tough conversation to have. Uh the biggest change that we probably will see that I want to focus on a little bit from 2028 talk about is the Northeast Water Tower. Um, we are in need of a water tower in this region that we weren't quite aware of until Jason brought it to our attention about a month ago. Um, while he was doing the water plans updates for the comp plan that we are currently working on, um, he realized and I think their team realized as best I understand that we are at capacity for the water tower that we currently have. Um, we were told as staff that we could upgrade that water tower to a larger tank when we put that water tower online. I don't know many years ago. I'm going to look for Marty for that one. Um we did analysis on it and it is not able to be utilized for a larger tank. Um based on the the base of the system is not able to support the weight of the new tank on top. So we are not able to upgrade that one which is what we had thought on doing before. And so we will need to build a new water tower that is looks like about a million gallons to be able to suffice for a number of years on this side of town. But um the first things first is kind of reverting back a little bit is we need to buy land for that. So >> what is the one we have now? What size? >> 500,000. >> Yeah. Okay. >> Is there and I don't know the whole process. Obviously we can't upgrade that one. But from a land perspective, can we just like take that one down and put a new one up or can we not afford to not have water for that long? >> I'll look at Jason because he's the engineer. >> You'd have to maintain the storage. You could build a second tower on the same site potentially. >> Okay. I'm just thinking if if buying land is going to be expensive, we have that land. So, >> is there room? >> Um, we'd have to. It'd be very tight. We did some storm water improvements with the Pine View project that kind of took up the empty space, if you will. So, we'd have to do some mitigation there likely. >> Um, I don't know if it'd be preferred just to have two of them literally right next to each other. >> I was more thinking, could the one that exists come down, put in the proper footings, and then put it back up? >> It could. Probably not. real cost effective. There's a lot of life left in it. Okay. >> I mean, it was built in '08, so it's um >> just got a lot of use left out of it. So, it it'd be more cost effective to just add storage >> at another construction. >> I like that $9 million is cost effective, >> long term cost effective. >> When you're talking about water, it is amazing how fast it adds up. >> Well, look up to the line 302. >> Yeah. Look further down and then you and then it gets into perspective. Um, I think I don't know why things are so expensive today than they were five years ago. I mean, I can speculate all day long, but >> can we go back in time when those people decided to make this one too small so it can't be upgraded? >> I would like to because I think everyone in this building was understood that it could be upgraded. Um, including myself and Marty who was here at the time. >> Um, and that's what I've been told for numerous number of years. So, um, when he said we need a new one, I said, "Okay, great. Go up there." >> Put a new top on put a job on that baby and he said, "Um, well, we can't because it doesn't work with the strength." >> Just was that a decision that was made intentionally or was that a a mess up by somebody? Was that a >> You'll never know that answer. >> I don't know that answer. 2008 was a long time ago. >> That's so long ago. >> Yes, it was so long. >> But the biggest thing for us is making sure that we're on board for buying land. Um, does it mean we want to put a water tip tomorrow? And does we need to put up a water tower the next year? Um some >> can it go here? >> Possibly. Yeah, we would look at any place that's able to be sufficed. I said just the main thing is that we want to be able to secure a spot for it and we need council on board for either buying that land or securing some spot for that water tower. >> And we also so right now I don't know that we have we have we run the numbers. Absolutely no. Today we need another tower or >> it's I'll say on the there's different ways of estimating the appropriate volume rules of thumb because nothing's exact. Um >> two of the three suggest you need it today or at least very borderline. One of them suggests you have the three that we typically use. One of them suggests you have a little time. >> Yeah. >> Again, they're recommendations. Um they're they're I'll say conservative in the sense that they take into account existing wells running. Um best practice, you wouldn't rely on that, but you can. In other words, you can get by a little bit longer, but I would say um you should consider building one as soon as is feasible. It's not like you won't have water tomorrow, but you will right >> have to continue to keep. What I'm getting at is is right now, as far as I'm concerned, I think we need to stop building on the north side. Anyways, it seems like this is another good reason to to look at that. >> And and if that's the case, I would say you can continue as is. We do have a >> quite a few new homes going in in Riverwalk still. Um, so there are some being added. I mean, we could continue to monitor. >> Um, it's when we get the data in that it it really points to where we're sitting with it. I would assume that there's a some lookup tables in some engineering book that says for how many gallons you use a day, here's the size tank you need. Is it not that simple? >> Um, we we do project. Yeah, there is there is rules with that. It varies greatly though. Um, depending on actual users and actually even demographics can make a monstrous difference because if there's a lot of certain >> teenage kids for example, they're the use goes up significantly. And then irrigation as well. >> People obsessed with green lawns versus people who are not obsessed with green lawns. >> That as well. That's another big one. So the most reliable is going after actual data and then combining that with projections, but it's which is what we did this last round as we were updating the comp plan. We got the actual use data in and that's what sent this flag up. >> So like I said, the main thing is finding the spot for it. That's the main thing in staff's perspective. Doesn't necessarily mean that we have to build it. Um, but we need to be able to have a spot to build it when we need it. And so finding that spot location is important. So that's what basically what I want to make sure that we touch on today is that we're okay with looking for a spot and using engineering time to be able to focus on where that location could be. >> I think that makes all kinds of sense to have the land because the land is not going to be the big dollar amount. >> No, it is not. But it provides that security that when we need it, we don't have to go out and pay through the nose or find another spot or panic secure or panic and now we need it today. >> Um, but it does identify then ability for us to focus on when do we actually need that water tower and that's why it's in 28 is because I don't know if we need it quite yet. So, >> how do we make sure that we don't do the same thing and build something too small so that 10 years from now they're not cursing us >> and wondering why >> 1 million gallons will be >> it's a million million gallons. Right now we're at 500,000. >> I can I can comment on that. We actually initially were planning for a half million okay >> gallon tank and that would suffice for quite a while actually >> but we suspect not long enough until the northeast and the northwest systems are connected. Okay. and the next tower is going on the northwest. In other words, if we built the half million now, we can't rely on that other tower in time to need another one. So then we would need yet a third >> just to service the northeast. So we feel with the 1 million that would buy us enough time to connect those systems and then just have >> I'll just say one more and final. >> Okay, >> in the northwest. >> These aren't very linear, are they? I mean adding because I was looking at the 3.8 8 >> they are not linear. >> Okay. >> But >> some of it is also to do with costs increasing that they're looking at inflationary costs too. >> We are adding inflationary costs over time to be able to suffice and make sure that we have enough dollars, actual dollars in in the bank to be able to do those projects. Like I said, it's it's out there far enough where we're not looking at it today, but it is something that the council needs to be aware of um that it could be a decision that's made in the next few years of direction. >> Are these kinds of things that like so when when the bonding people are here on the 30th to like to start putting like plant seeds of like we're going to need this or just focus on the current one? >> Um we try to keep it in their budget year which is typically a bianium and that's a two-year process. So we look at 26 and 27. That's kind of the two process we're looking at. Typically bonding happens on odd years. >> Should have been this year. It wasn't. So then we'll do 26 and 27 and then we need to push out every couple of years. So >> worse, um, our presence at the bonding committee is strong. We are we submit a few every year because it's important. >> Yeah. >> Water and transportation are bipartisan issues that everyone agrees upon and so it's an easy cell. Um, we aren't looking for community center upgrades. We aren't looking for upgrading our something else. We're looking for bipartisan issues that can get support from both sides. And it typically has gone pretty >> would have been nice to get some of that access money they had last year. >> Uh, would have been nice. I tried down there on their um >> my thing, but >> okay. >> So, those are the two main ones. I know that there's big numbers out there. I don't want to spend a ton of time on them tonight because they're the council has the decision to make in the future, but I want to make sure that you know what those numbers are. Those numbers include inflation for costs of what they look like based on the year that they're in. Um we'll touch base just quickly on them, which is the South Dayton water tower system. That's a 2 million gallon tank, a South Dayton water treatment plant, um Northeast Treatment Plant, and a South Dayton wells. Um those probably aren't in maybe the bestest order but for now they work because the water tower is going to be needed in the south of Dayton whether we are on our system or Maple Grove system because of the amount of usage that we have. So either way that water tower is going to be needed and so um we can put that up whenever we're essentially ready for it in the southside. And I don't know when that is. That's why it's in 29. But from what Jason's team has put together, it sounds like that's a rough date on that. >> The time is when you find some money. >> I would love to find a money tree. I have a small one, I think, around the office somewhere. It just keeps losing leaves though, so it doesn't has >> Someone else has said enough. >> Somebody's hitting the money up. I I just get the leaves. So, >> it's just producing pennies. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Any questions for this long-term plan? I like I said I presume questions if you have some that come up like why are we doing this what does this mean um some of them like I said are still going to be pushed out reconstruction projects extensions so on so forth it's not needed by a developer or an assessment we won't do it >> okay >> thank you on to item >> T stormwater projects >> me mayor and council um this project was last before you. I think I want to say back in like February. Um so it's been a while since you've seen it, but I'll I'll try to move through a little bit quickly on the background and then um kind of go through the projects um just to let you know the status and moving forward. So this should be a reminder but probably fuzzy just being that it has been about nine months. Um Elm Creek wershed did secure some funding through a program with Bowser uh the board of water and soil resources. It's called the WBIF. The watershed based implementation funding is where they got the money. Dayton requested that projects within the city of Dayton be funded under that program and all three of those submitted were actually funded through the program. So, we do have funds for those. And then, additionally, I'm just lumping this one together because of timing and it is quite a bit of overlap actually with one of the three projects. Um, there's also consideration for a treatment in Diamond Lake. um that is a partnership with the wershed outside of the WBIF, but certainly funding coming from the wershed on it. And I'll show more on that. Um just to note where the projects themselves came from. In 2022, Dayton completed a subwaterhed assessment for Diamond Creek which looked at the area highlighted on the screen. In that we identified opportunities to improve water quality to benefit um Diamond Creek as well as the water bodies within the the satershed area including Diamond Lake and French Lake. And then the intent of this was for this exact purpose to identify these projects for the request for funding uh through grant programs. So I'll go through the four projects briefly here. Uh the first one is a feasibility study on French Lake or impacting French Lake. It's actually looking at the runoff from the existing mobile home park. Um, as shown here, the study area just again being the land between the mobile home park and French Lake. The project cost for this is estimated at $15,000. And this one because it aligns with the watersheds goals is funded 100%. And then this is just an aerial look at that. Um, so it'd be the um along that blue line, if you will. We would look for improvements before it it crosses under uh West French Lake Road and into French Lake. >> Is there a timing um because that little triangy thing there? They just came through at our last meeting to get approved to build there. >> Correct. >> Yes. >> Is there uh like a timing thing that we want to get this before or after they do that or >> um not not critical. Okay. um we may be doing some work in that area, but we we've already been in contact with them and we would be coordinating with them. I I don't expect there would be any negative impacts to to either side of that. Um could be benefit if something were to happen. My cursor works here. Um in that area, um you know, timing that may be of benefit. I don't know if something will happen in there or not, but um probably we could do something more efficient to benefit both of those properties together. Okay. >> Uh the second project is this one is an actual construction project. So it it involves uh design work as well as uh hiring a contractor to complete the improvements. It's regarding the neighborhood immediately north of Diamond Lake as shown and it's to in this to install two devices. It actually should say three devices. There was a third device or a third uh location identified that is included in the project. Um cost estimate on this one is about 116,000. Um it's not a 50/50 grant despite how that is to let the 58,000 is the grant amount and then the city would just pay the balance. Um so we don't have to match it if you will. Um just the way this one um is set up. So >> those are estimates or those are the actual >> those are estimates. Yeah. They're they're >> So if it comes in high, we pay more. If it comes in down, we pay less. >> Yes. Yes. The 58 can be applied first. Um I guess is >> And what are those devices? >> Um they're Yeah, I don't have it. They're they're called Saffle baffles. So they're they're just they're structures. And Safel just Saf just stands for St. Anthony Falls Lab. That's who de made these. They're just um new catchbas and manholes that just allow the sediments to trap out and it keeps the material so they can be cleaned by Marty's crews up on the street rather than letting all of that wash down and get into the lake. >> So, it's basically a >> sediment trap. >> Sediment trap. Yeah. Yeah. It just has a series of baffles to help all of the solids fall out and make it easier to maintain. >> Those are sucked up by the back. >> I was going to say that's our back. >> That's where the back truck comes in. The back, right? Yep. >> Cuz a guy with a bucket doing it is not fun. >> I would imagine that. >> And you said there was three >> there. There is a third in here that was not identified when we initially put this together. There's one. >> I'm not sure. I think it's through through here. So, >> yeah, there is a third. So, we are looking at three structures instead of two. That's part of the reason those numbers kind of got skewed. It used to be 58,000 and then a lower amount for the city, but okay. with that third structure um outside of the terms of the grant. So, it might fall on the city. >> Okay. >> Uh the third project is a study of Grass Lake. Um if you're familiar with that, it's right over the border. Takes water from most of the industrial area in the city of Rogers. Um, this is intended primarily to just gain an understanding of what the water chemistry is, what the quality is like, um, what is going into Diamond Lake, and that will help inform uh, the best ways to treat Diamond Lake for water quality on there. Again, a study like this that aligns directly with the wersheds goals, uh, this is 200 also funded 100% by the the grant. So, no cost to the city on this effort. And then again just the aerial of the inlets coming from uh Rogers on the left side uh into Grass Lake which is mostly cattails a little bit open water and then that flows into Diamond Lake before going into Diamond Creek. And then project four as mentioned is a treatment. We're just using the generic term treatment for Diamond Lake. We fully anticipate it will be an alum dosage um to help with the the phosphorus and and algae in the lake. Um but we need to do some chemistry work and find out what's in there just to verify that assumption. So >> this is so wasn't one of those done I want to say about 12 13 years ago something like that because the same topic came up whether Alam would make sense in this case or that case or >> I am not aware of one being done but that's certainly possible. >> I thought so >> it's a pretty common treatment. Um, I mean, I don't know if they're done often, but they're >> And I think the other question was they were kind of recovering from the I shouldn't say recovering is a poor choice of words, but you had a lot of these septics taken care of at that point. You also had a major cattle area cleaned up. Um, so they were looking at maybe some of the phosphorus might actually kind of been corrected over time. >> Okay, that that is possible. I don't know. >> Um that is possible and that's the intent of this part one of the the process is to determine that this will also utilize the data that's being collected from the grass lake effort. That's why these are very closely tied together. >> Is there any thoughts that it that it may need dredging to clean up the phosphorus or they don't there's just no idea right now. >> It's expensive. I mean that would be great. Um but yeah, just the disposal of that is very costly. Um potentially I mean a draw down in excavation would be I think there would be many benefits from that. Um >> but it would >> but again it also comes with a monstrous price tum as well. >> Are there grants that would help with that? >> Potentially. Um I don't know if the wershed is interested in that. Um their their grant program as indicated here um is a 2575 match. So 75% wershed 25 city. Um, I could approach them on that. I don't I don't know if they would be able to to do something. They get their funding. They're not a district. They don't have taxing authority, but they can do advalorum um taxing to generate revenues for projects. >> Is this something that you normally check with the DNR also? Because I know given that they >> definitely have to go through DNR. >> I mean, for for grant opportunities. >> Oh, potentially. Yeah, there's a lot of a lot of different sources. Um, okay. the the water is it the the >> still >> storm water legacy >> I forget it's a common one too it kind of hosts a whole slew of funding opportunities that kind of come together there there's a lot of storm water money out there we have folks that work on this a lot so I rely on them to point me to the right places to get money and then just to note the the alum treatment would be the second part of this pretty substantial cost with the alum treatment if that's if or whatever treatment it ends up being. Um, but that would come at a later date after the findings of this report are determined. And then just a summary of the costs. Um, this is right out of your out of the packet that you received for the meeting. >> So, it's about 33% city responsibility for the the $200,000 improvements for the four projects. So this is all storm water funding. >> So this is this would be funded from developer costs because that's where the funding is for the storm water. >> If you looked at the projects and said which one could we utilize for operations, it would be the Diamond Lake structures because that's an existing thing that we now have to pay for. Sure. >> And so if you looked at it from a perspective of the utility, the utility should be the one paying for that and not necessarily developers because it's not something new that we're doing. It's something that's existing and we need to fix in order to make the process be more efficient and effective. >> How does that storm water get there from Rogers? >> Um through three separate discharge points um just with the collection. Sorry. Um yeah, at these three these are approximate locations, but they're >> um they're just through culverts and ditches. >> Does Rogers then have to chip in if it's their water? Uh, no. And the the good thing I was thinking about that is the the at least the majority maybe even in its entirety of their their area that flows in here that was what we would refer to as built under rules. So I think it was about 1985 a lot of these um rules were put in place that you know treat water that that comes down on your developed site. So most of it is treated water if you will. So >> um that's of benefit. That means we're probably dealing with something better than we may may have otherwise been dealing with if that would have been developed, you know, pre-1980, for example. But >> developed this and gone through their grass buffers and this that the other thing. >> No, there's it's probably not significant. They probably were all built with what we'd call a Nerf pond. So, just lets the water go in. Hopefully, stuff settles out before it goes downream. It uh >> it's it's certainly better than nothing. Is there anything that we do to encourage residents and this actually I meant to ask when we were talking about water long-term usage to like your lawn doesn't have to be perfectly beautifully green and lush every second of the day of the year. Um are there things or projects or grants to to be like, "Hey, stop putting so much fertilizer on it. Stop watering it so much." And guess what? You wouldn't have to mow as often either. Like winds all around. Um, the only one I can think of is at one time there was a subsidized program for getting smart meters on and I I don't I don't expect that's still active or at least I don't think so. >> We didn't get a little take up on it. >> I think there was maybe a handful at best. >> I think there was one person interested. >> We uh we do do education at the open house or as much as we can with the University of Minnesota. So we do try to provide actual information of what it actually takes to make grass grow. >> Yeah. Um, and it's more education stuff. We put what's on our website. We do stuff on our Facebook page. We do stuff in the communicator. Try to get people to know and realize where to go for resources and let them know that you don't need to have that much water on your grass. But >> or that much fertilizer. >> People like green lawns. >> They like green grass. >> But even if they do like often like >> and they like to mow it gets them out of the house. I'm not sure. >> But I mean like the process that they use is often not effective in the first place. like they put, you know, like they're not putting fertilizer at the right times or they're not thinking about the weather and like it just washes right back off again and now you spent a ton of money. It hasn't actually gone into your lawn at all because then you turned around and irrigated it before it actually had like a lot of people just don't even do it right in the first place. And I just said, but we do do >> we do as much education as we can to be proactive in letting people know >> what to do. But >> yeah, clover is beautiful. I'm just going to put plug in for clover. It stays green. It's drought resistant. It pollinate. It helps pollinators and um >> we we also occasionally uh so we have >> like clover >> some neighbors that that up the street that her her lawn is very bee friendly. >> Yes. >> And uh she's gotten some complaints about grass length. So >> is it actually or do we just not want to mow our yard? Because there is a fine line between actually being bee and pollinator friendly and >> I just don't want to mow my lawn and I'm going to stand on that. >> We're off topics. >> I'm just saying wildly different. >> That's true. >> No dandy lines and no clover. >> You must Jason fire away. What do you got for recommendation? >> Recommendation. the the proposals, four separate projects just combined because of similarity, but um proposals were included in your packet. So, our recommendation would be to authorize those as presented. >> So, I need a motion in a second. >> I'll make a motion. >> Second. >> Any more discussion? >> All those in favor say I. >> I. I. >> All those opposed say no. >> Carries four to zero. And we are on to payment of claims. >> All right. David's not here. >> Hey, I know I got a couple. Go ahead. Me, too. >> So, do you want to go first? I got to find I got to put my back up. >> Got a little one. >> You start first then. >> Gary, it must have been uh equipment fixed while I was gone. A lot of trucks got some work. >> Yes. Mayor, members of council um few years ago,000 bucks. >> Uh you approved or we added to the budget the $1,000 maintenance per truck. So, that was done. Um so, they go through them head to toe. Uh we did pump testing. um so to certify the pumps and then there are some minor repairs on some valves that need to rep be replaced. So that was for all the trucks in the fleet. >> Um and this is just I just want because this always catches my eye when I'm looking at my bills. Um repair engine tanker 11 is listed on on two separate lines but it's the same date and everything else is the same. Are those two different things or like like I said I always get suspicious on my credit card bill if I see something twice. Yeah, that truck had a couple repairs on it just at different times. >> Okay. It just happened to hit the card at the same time, which is why the date is the same. Or >> their invoice for that one we don't put on the card. So that's an in physical invoice that we Okay, that makes sense then. Um and this is So we actually had the same one. Um did you have anything else there? >> No. >> And then um this is for I'm guessing Marty uh the two Toro. Are there two separate Toro? Um, what page is it? 155. So, it's the same thing. It looked like it was the same, but it was there twice. The tower groundsmen has two separate ones. Are there two Toros, and that's why it's there twice? Okay. >> It was the same, two different issues. >> Okay. Okay. Like I said, that's that's what I always look at on my card in case something hits her twice. Um, and then, um, on page 152, the EDA had a flower pot reimbursement for $821. What was that? >> Um, so, um, Car Ramuno, I think that say her last name, right? >> Jane, sorry. Jane Runo. Jane, >> um, has and does our maintains our floor pots for the EDA for down in the store village. She does a fantastic job. She purchases all the stuff herself first >> and then asks for reimbursement for it. Okay. >> So, we pay for that through the sponsorships that we get from the um >> flower pot. So, shout out to Ji does a fantastic job. Maintains them things well. So, you'll start to see soon here. She'll switch everything from flowers over to some sort of Christmas winter type thing and she does a wonderful job done. But she gets reimbured afterwards. So, she does it all herself, make sure she got make sure basically make sure it gets up and running and then she asks >> for and it why does it I guess why my guess my question was more why is it going to the EDA? Like why is >> so they run the sponsorships through the flower pots. So they get the money and the revenue to come from the sponsorships. Basically what the sponsorships do are pay for the plaque on the front of the um flower pots and then pay for the flowers. >> Okay. Okay. I just >> And then I think it's a small we give Jane a small gift for doing it. She does it basically. >> Yeah. I was just confused what the EDA cuz I didn't know that. I was like why EDA and flower pots? What's >> So they Yeah, the EDA purchased flower pots four years ago. Three four years ago. Um and then we sp have businesses or people sponsor them and they can write with a little note on there and >> overall it's been a pretty good success. So we have eight of them. >> Okay. Very cool. Um that that was it for me. >> I have one question. >> I'm not even sure which department this is, but on what page is this? 142. There's a $320 charge for workout training clothing. What is that? >> What code is it? >> Uh 10142120. >> Mr. Mayor, members of the council, that's for our all our officers and um a lot of that comes out of their uniform allowance. >> Okay. >> So, it's split from what the officers ordered and then it comes out of our uniform allowance. >> Okay, that makes I just was just a different code I'd never seen before, so thought I'd ask. >> Question. Uh, I just had one that caught my eye. Um, you guys are really ganging up and helping out with Dave. >> Well, Dave's not here. We got to >> Normally I drift through pretty quick. >> Proud of you guys. >> This is probably Marty. Um, core drill. How often do we use a core drill and how is it possible to spend 4K on a core drill? >> I knew you were going to ask that. Um, we use it for um irrigation repair. uh not irrigation um drain tile repairs where we're core drilling into a manhole. So for instance on River Hills uh there's a a wet spot on the hill there um it's not draining. So then we put in some uh uh drain tile in there and to get it into the the rest of the system we core drill into the structure. Okay. >> And we're using it more and more. Um so it made sense to buy one. Yeah, it's I I won't say it's only 4K, but it is only 4K, but uh yeah. No, it's I'm fine with it. Any other questions? >> No. >> Okay. All those in f I need a motion in a second. >> I'll make a motion. >> Okay. Any more discussion? All those in favor say I. >> I. >> I. All those opposed say no. Carries. Four to zero. And we are on to Elsie Stevens master plan. >> You presenting this thing already or is MSA? >> Well, I'm waiting for the MSA people to get here to do the presentation. >> We're an hour ahead of schedule, so that's good. >> Yeah, I know. I called them. They're on their way. So, I don't know if we want to wait table or >> I I would table it. I'm I'm fine with that just cuz I are they on their way. >> I have a lot of questions on this. >> Well, then you don't want to table them if >> they're coming. I don't know how long they're going to be. >> Okay. >> I don't know. >> Oh, do you have a cell phone from somebody? >> Yeah, I just called them and they said they were on their way from AOA, but that was >> Oh, so that's only going to be 10 minutes. >> Okay, we can take a threem minute break. >> You just want to take a three-minute recess or something? >> We'll take a three minute recess in recess. Thank you very much. Yep. Use the restroom to All right. Good evening, Mayor and Council. Um, and before you is, uh, the LC Stevens master plan update and concept. Um, we've gone through a rigorous process with this, um, from various meetings with various groups. a lot of uh resident input um meetings with uh stakeholder groups which included members of the council um park commission EDA um various members of uh uh the public who represented developments and that kind of thing and based on their feedback um uh the plan that you had before you is what we came up with. Um there's costings in here as well. Um the the idea of the project was uh initially to get an idea of what the rest of the project buildout was going to be um what it could look like um from the original master plan that was developed in 2016 I think. Um so I know you guys are going to have a lot of questions. Uh I've got Elellanena and Dan from MSA who put who put the project together. Um I'll have them come up and and go through the presentation and then stamp your questions. Thanks. Thanks, Marty. Um, everybody has uh the information from the packet that Elanor sent. >> Yeah. Okay. So, I'm just going to introduce us again because it's been a while for me to see everybody. And so, I'm Dan Williams. I'm a principal landscape architect with MSA. And then of course Elanor Brandt that you've seen more of here in um Dayton. Uh what she's she's going to go over uh the project in the PowerPoint. She went uh presented it to the park commission. Excellent job. So I'm going to let her run with that. But in your packet, these were the results from uh some of the public involvement and engagements and then uh some meeting notes and stuff. So Elorn's going to take off with the uh presentation and then I'll be here to help answer some of the questions you might have with El. >> Thanks Dan. >> Dan, if you want to go in front of the mic there, you can always stand there and you can answer questions into the mic for the council. >> Great. Thank you. >> Perfect. All right. Good evening everyone. Thanks uh thanks for having us here. Excited to see you sooner than we thought. So thank you for bearing with us. Uh like Dan mentioned um I'm going to go through a little bit of the background before we get into the master plan. the meat and potatoes and the master plan that's been developed. So, as a refresher on the process and like Marty mentioned, there's been a robust public engagement um to get to this to get to this point, which has involved um a public input survey. We got responses from over 134 different households. This is approximately representative of 400 different people. So, really good turnout there. The public involve the public engagement also involved uh key stakeholder groups. We also met with a um sort of a steering committee of sorts of which Marty and Scott were both members of. So, it's exciting to see this all the way through. Another part of the public engagement was a pop-up concept review at the Dayton Car Show. We had a lot of uh great conversations there with folks and we were able to get a get a good listen to what the community was asking for and get some feedback on the initial round of concepts that have had been developed at that point. From there, uh, we met with the parks commission to review the results of the community engagement process as well as the initial plans that were developed that we'll take a brief look at here. So like I mentioned uh this has been sort of an iterative process of ident of working with Marty and working with other folks to identify the needs, take a overview of the existing park master plan, what was already out there, work on developing goals with the steering committee, developing the initial concept ideas, reviewing those with the parks commission, the steering committee of and then refining the plans based on public feedback and back and forth again. So, just an overview of the first part of the process, inventory and analysis. Like I mentioned, we had 134 responses to the survey. Uh, widely representative of different areas within Dayton, um, different age ranges as well. Phase two was conceptual development. So, what you're looking at here on this screen are two very preliminary or two very preliminary concepts that were developed for conversation with the steering committee and conversation with the public to see what uh what the public was looking for at this park. Phase three is the phase we're in now. That's the development of the full master plan. Uh you can see sort of that behind this. I know one of the biggest things that was uh an ask by several members was for more performance space. And so this gives you an idea of very loosely uh what you know an expanded stage could look like. So I apologize somehow this image got stretched out. So I'm going to switch to a different page to take a look at it. >> Back a couple >> back a couple. >> There we go. >> There you go. >> There you go. Oh, seem to be missing a page in here. All right. Well, we're going to pivot then to what you have in your packet because I believe the pages should be in there. >> Yeah, whatever was in the packet I picked out for the council and bigger version. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> All right. Okay. So, I'm going to give you a quick overview of the different areas of the park before we take a different look. May appear to be a missing image. Okay. So, I'm going to walk you through what you have in front of you in your packet. Uh the >> Yep. should look like this. Should have the main part of the park. So, the Oops. This actually gives you a good So, we'll start with enlargement area one actually because that's a good bulk of the park um or a good place to focus in on. So, as you enter the park uh through the existing entrance drive, we have a key part that was uh an asked by a lot of the community engagement which was more opportunities for play within the park. Another ask um or another thing that came up in the course of public engagement and talking with key stakeholders was to really uh strongly hold the sense of identity that's unique to LC Stevens and part of that identity are these historic structures along with the riverfront access. So in this part of the park enlargement area one we have the uh existing silos being shown as renovated structures. In the future, this could be something like a concession stand, a restroom, a rentable facility. Uh that would support this main splash pad development in here. Uh the splash pad is also complemented by some seating area. Uh Gabian shade, a Gabian wall for seating along the shade along the splash pad really ties into the existing stone foundation of the barn that would be that would see new life as part of a um an accessible play area. So since the stone foundation is sunken into the ground, you would be able to access the top ideally for ideally via like an accessible ramp. So that way you could have multi-level play, multi-level accessibility for different folks uh with different levels of access um within this play area. So in here would be a play area. This would be poured in place surfacing, not wood chip. So that would be a uniform surface that's accessible that won't, you know, impact any any splash pad functions. Uh this area would also see the barn structure over here repurposed as a support facility, either um interpretive center, picnic shelter, or a different, you know, engagement or a different use that would support the bike trail that's along the the riverfront. Yeah. All right. So, we'll pivot to uh the second enlargement area. Enlargement area 2. This is the sort of central heart of the park as it stands now. And this was something that we heard a lot throughout the public engagement process was wanting more opportunity within the park to support different city activities. Uh we also are showing kind of a unique feature here with the expanded uh stage and pavilion um pavilion being supported by this bioluminescent walk that enters into the park uh with this stage being about more than double what it is right now. So if you imagine this area over here where number 10 is that's about you know the the area where the current stage is. So, this fan or this amphitheater area would see expanded life to support larger concerts. Uh, the parking area in here would support the the expanded use of this area would feature a roll curb. So, that way events that are happening within the lawn space of the park would still be able to take advantage of that open space opportunity. One other element in this enlargement area too is this pavilion structure. This would be um this would have a con, you know, this would have something like concessions, would also support restrooms, could support larger gatherings, uh things of that nature in here way. So, we've broken out the the master plan into uh five five individual phases. These are not necessarily in order of priority. They are a function of being able to take an indivi a closer look at different areas of the park that could be prioritized in different areas. Um some basic assumptions before we get into the rest of it. These costs are all in 2025. They do all include a contingency um for future development and future refinement of the plan. So I believe in the back of the packet you do have a unimi unit cost uh breakdown. This is all very high level at this point and will need further refinement as things go along. Um some other assumptions for different areas of the park. Phase A uh includes costs to extend the water and sewer mains uh within the road rightway. Also in phase A are the historic structure cost renovations. Um these are given as an allowance. Um some things like historic structures often need further evaluation to appropriately cost estimate for their uses. Uh as another note, all of the play areas we have currently estimated out as court and place surfacing. This has an impact on costs as well. Uh phase B again similarly uh some of these costs are for expanded areas uh that are already in proc in place right now such as the stone amphitheater. Uh landscaping costs in this phase also support storm water treatment areas. With additional paving in the park comes additional need for storm water treatment to preserve the high quality of the river. Phase C uh which we'll take a closer look at has a cost allowance for public art that's interactive. Uh this phase also includes uh restoration or improvements to the wood stair access. Phase D again includes some utility uh costs to extend utilities that part of the park. And then phase E has the pavilion which has the building costs which will vary dependent on uh the eventual use of that structure. So we'll get into the phases here. We'll be able to take a deeper dive into some of these different areas. So phase A we have broken out sort of as this enlargement area E or enlargement area one. This is uh what we started off talking about. This has the splash pad, the restoration of the historic silos within the site, the active play area, and the um historic structure, this historic barn reuse as well. So, taking a look at some of the images in the upper right of the screen, you can see the splash pad. Uh lots of that was a very highly popular item during the public engagement process as again was uh accessible play and unique play opportunities. That was something that really kept coming up again and again during the public engagement was making something at LC Stevens that was unique and like nothing else in the area and wanting something that you know not just was unique but that was special and representative of the community. In image two sort of right across from the the text you can see an example of multi-level accessible play. So, you have the the ramp off of the top level that supports the play opportunities on the second level, giving people an opportunity to uh interact from different different spots within the play area. Image three underneath is an example just sort of for concepting for a gabian wall that would tie into, like I mentioned before, the uh the seat wall around here. And then image four shows you an idea of a potential structure reuse for the silos. So getting in more back into the heart of the park, phase B would include the parking lot improvements, the bioluminescent path. That would really be a feature that's would be something really unique to this park. Um the expansion of the amphitheater along with the shade shel the shade shelter or the shade structures and then the play area. Another unique feature of the park uh that we're proposing and of this particular phase would be the per uh expanded pergolas along this bioluminescent walk approach into the main park. So, if you take a look at uh image number two on the upper right, something like uh hanging swings would be another opportunity for folks to sit and relax uh either within the park if there is an event going on or you know simply uh some time to take a break, take a breath at the park while kids are running around and playing. Image four down. So, image three is uh an example of the bioluminescent path. So, this is an aggregate that gets seated into concrete that glow in the dark. Kind of think about those, you know, you see the I'm sure everyone's seen the the sticky stars that you can see on the ceiling. It's not that. It's an improved improvement upon that. That would be something that's unique, especially if there's concerts there at night. Uh, it's been um it would be something that, you know, is would be unique to the park. The image on the bottom, image four, is an example of the shade sales. This would allow for coverage of bands or different events that are taking place on the stage while still maintaining the the views out towards the river. So phase C is the connection point between the the two areas of the park, the clo overlook section and then the the main heart of the park down here. So phase C would involve connecting both areas of the park with expanded pathways. Uh we're showing boardwalk and fishing overlooks along the river to give folks a better access to the river. Again, this was something that came up in the public engagement proc process. People were really wanting to interact more with this great waterway that uh is a unique part of this park and really special to to a lot of folks. Um, so these we incorporated boardwalks along here similar to what you see in images two and three to allow people to access the river safely and access these the link between the two parks. This part of the or this phase would also involve an interactive art and seating opportunity that would be a center focal point coming from the main parking area. um and really highlighting sort of a again another unique feature of the park as central here. This would be something that would uh help direct the view out towards the river and give this area um a life of its own. This phase would also see like I mentioned there's um an allowance in here for renovation of the existing stair structures to improve access as well. Phase D would be improvements to Clo Overlook Park. Um up at the top there, another thing that we heard throughout the public engagement process again was wanting multi-generational opportunities. So, this area of the park um does feature a ninja warrior style ropes course as a opportunity for play improvement for multiple ages. This uh the improvements to this area also include a walking trail with fitness stations. Uh the walking trail could be measured out in you know third of a third of a mile or quarter of a mile segment so you can get your steps in all the way around. Improvements to this park that would support these different uses would be another restroom facility as well. And then phase E the final phase of the final phase that we're talking about here and the um improvements would be the development of a larger event space pavilion. This was another thing that has come up in in discussions throughout the process. So, this pavilion um we're giving it as a range dependent on final uh final use and final direction. So, there's a couple different ways um and a couple different images we're showing here with the topography and the natural drop off. There's the opportunity to do a multi-level building that would have the opportunity for storage or space underneath for different functions. uh that would support a patio or a open space that would give you views out this way towards the stage, towards the amphitheater, and towards the river. Uh this is this space is or this building that's shown currently is spaced out for uh approximately 200 people standing or 120 people seating. So you could have a decently sized invent here. Um a couple different ways that this building could go. We're showing a couple different images that u that sort of connect to the farm history of the area that have a modern function as well. So, it could be any um in this there's a couple of different like I mentioned there's a couple ways uh this could go depending on the final decision whether it's an open air structure whether it's something more enclosed with more uh support facilities and so with that uh I will turn it over for questions. >> Yes, sir. What is kind of our estimate for park funds on a yearly basis for a regional park? >> Are you talking about percentage wise? You're talking about dollars. >> Dollars. >> I don't want to say a number because I don't know the number off the top of my head. If you're looking for a number, I can get that to you, but I don't want to say a number because it's >> I probably am going to be wrong. So, I'd rather be give you the right number than give you a wrong number in the meeting. I I think here's here's I'm getting to. >> It's roughly going to be 250 homes is what we can probably count on. I shouldn't even say count on, >> but if you take 250 and I think it's 3K per lot >> for parks. >> That's it. Sounds a little low. I think it's a little higher than that. >> Is it 4K? >> 4K. Yeah, probably. >> Okay. 4K. And we've allocated 25% of that to go to regional parks >> roughly. That's 250k a year, >> right? >> I'm wondering I and I know when we started this thing, we probably should have put a dollar amount on this, but this is >> the only way this project works in total is if you have buyin from the residents about a referendum related to bonding or tax. there's no way to be able to suffice this project with development dollars at the current rate. Um, one thing that we do need to note from the council's perspective is we don't have any new parks going in like we've had over the past several years. Um, so the last several years, every other year we've put in at least one park, if not two parks per year in new neighborhoods, new areas in town. We do not have that anymore for the foreseeable future, at least from what I can tell based on current parks and where our park um search areas are based on our comp plan. And so because of that, you're now changing from se 25% of those park funds going to those regional parks to now probably 100% of those funds going to regional parks currently. doesn't mean they will always go there, but for now we don't have any search areas that are looking for >> Well, even if it was 100% that's a million a year. >> That's a million a year. >> This is going to cost. It's going to cost more. >> This is going to cost 20 years worth a million year. >> You got it. >> And I doubt we're going to keep Yeah. >> Yeah. Like I said, from the council's perspective, you need to understand that if we do this project, which is extremely expensive and understood from staff's level, is that there has to be buyin from referendum or from residents that it's going to be a tax levy on top of development costs to make this thing possible. There there's no other way to do this project at the level that we're looking at doing without that. >> I guess I'm I was I I wasn't aware we were going to do it at this level. Um >> well, I think that's a a misstep on our side. We should have probably said, "Hey, the limit we're spending is 8 million bucks or whatever it is." Whatever that number was because this number is way out of line. >> Yeah. And we understand it's a big number and there are a lot of grant opportunities out there. >> Oh, I'm sure there's some >> Yeah, I know. It's it's still a very big number. >> I mean, from a concept when I when I because we started with the concept and the pretty pictures, it's like, "Oh, yeah. This is great. This is amazing." And then I got to the price tag and I may have used some exploives when I was at home and saw >> and then when I realized oh for sure I was one meeting and I was a little crabby about that particular topic. Um but and then I realized this was just phase A and then I used some other exploives um because I was like oh that's not even the whole thing. Um, so I mean conceptually, yeah, amazing concept. Reality never going to happen. Um, unless we win the lottery, but I don't think we play the lottery. So therefore, the lottery of grants in some ways, but >> you could do what you want personally. I I think I I even have problems with >> with the concept >> with the concept. >> Concept. I do too, but >> I got a long laundry list. So I don't know how we want to do this, if we want to. Is this going to be a plan that's going to get churned? >> We we have our from staff's perspective, we would like to have a plan that the council backs and is behind that we can >> work um pursue grant money, start working towards. Again, we understand this is not going to be a next year project. We get that. >> But there has to be something. So the last concept of the master plan that we had, we were working towards that process and it was unanimous across council that council didn't approve this. council did was behind this master plan and that's not what we want as staff. Yeah. >> We want residents and council to be on the same page or at least a general direction from us for staff so that we have something to shoot for and so that we're all working towards the same goal. This is not the goal of staff to make this the cheapest park and it's not goals of staff to make it the most expensive park or make it our park because that's not our goal as staff. It's to make it the residents park and the council's park and be able to make it work. But >> so how do we get this feedback in other than just spewing it here? That's probably the best option is to give us the feedback now. At least from MSA's perspective, then we can revamp the master plan or get some feedback back and then MSA can come back. We want something that council is going to be able to support so that we can follow. >> Before you all jump in, I have a question about the grants and the money. So um cuz you guys do that more than we do. Um what are like you so you put a price tag of I think I totaled up what was here was 16,000 or so sorry >> this 16 million >> buy today it's closer to 20 >> yeah but I'm just saying when I when I total the three phases in today's dollars right it came up to $16,811,000 if like from a grant are are have you seen cities get 50% 25% % 75% like what what is a realistic number for grants >> in in terms of matching funds or in terms of like dollar amounts awarded >> um either I guess I have like I'm new to this so what are my what are our options I guess >> absolutely so a lot of the grants out there are 50% match and it really >> um the grant awards really depend on >> the public engagement process whether or not it is something the community supports that's something that the the grant folks the people who are awarding these things really look for. So I think you know the the fact that you guys have gone through this public engagement process really sets you up for future success. Um another thing that they look for that gives you a little more points in the um in the standings are things like accessibility infrastructure um all things which the the park has the the park design master plan will have the ability to support no matter what sort of like iteration it looks to. I want to say Three Rivers just got a pretty major award. >> Yeah, we talked about that earlier. That's when they got forgotten. But something similar is available for this. So, we're going to look at that as well. >> Mhm. Cuz then just like if 50% is like a pretty typical and we're like, okay, well, we have $3 million then 50% so then our total is $6 million, right? So, that's why I was okay. >> Yeah. We've also seen um different communities take the approach of like okay so we we do know that we do want to phase this. We can do one phase with uh one grant you know maybe here and then in three years do a second section. I know that's a different approach that some some communities will choose to take. >> We can also divvy up a little bit if it's water and sewer main extensions. Those aren't paid for by park funds. It's going to be paid for by the water and the sewer funds. So there are some different funding sources within the city that we can utilize for this process. But >> well, we don't necessarily have to have sewer and water there. >> Not necessarily. >> There's already a well there. >> There is a well there that feeds the irrigation system. That is correct. >> Oh, and that's all. >> That's all. >> Yeah. So, it's quite small. I'm going to dig a splash pad to show. >> Well, the splash pad you could use a recirculating one and just every so I don't I don't know the terms of it, but every so often you got to change the water. >> Whether that's weekly or semi I don't know that number, but >> but we would need sewer for a bathroom. >> Not necessarily. So you can put a tank in there and have it pumped. It's what every home does. Every home that's not on sewer. >> It would be like a primitive one that you'd see like a um what do you call >> like when you're in the mountain >> state park or whatever. >> You put three onegon 10,000gallon tanks in there and you got to pump it once every couple years. >> Yeah. And that's I think that's a really good point like level of development has an impact on cost and that was a thing that we heard was dream big. So this is the dream big version. >> Yeah. This is the dream. And that's that's kind of being on the committee. I should have said, "Hey, I'm a little bit of a thrifty guy." >> Well, I know, Scott, you were you >> I didn't say any I don't even know how you pronounce it. Bioluminescent. >> Bioluminescent walkway. >> By the way, >> what the heck is What benefit is that? >> The sun. >> The sun. >> Oh, so it just absorbs and then for a couple hours it radiates the concrete. >> Yeah. It needs like 10 minutes of sun to charge and then it's good for 8 to 12 hours. >> Oh, that's kind of >> Looks nice. That's it. >> It's got a cool effect for 75,000 bucks. >> Do you want to start or Yeah, >> you want to start? >> Yeah, I'll start. I'll start. I'll start. >> Do you want to start? >> I'm not I'm not a fan of the splash pad playground and all of that, the phase number one. Mhm. >> Before the building is built, the number one thing that people wanted was running water restrooms and that's in the building that is that the last phase in this plan. >> Yeah. >> So, in my opinion, we need a building with the restrooms in it first. Um and and I'm a I'm a splash pad guy. I'd like to see my grandkids be able to play in it before their grandkids see it. Uh >> well, you bring up a good point and what we tried to do with the the phasing, we didn't say one, two, three, we said ABC because we don't know what's first phase. >> Okay. Yeah. >> So, if the building is going to be the first phase, then that could be the first phase. >> Um >> can I ask a question to that extent? Mhm. >> So the building is meant for one the restrooms >> and then to be rented correct for events. >> Is that replacing our activity center or >> Well, our activity center can't right now this year's concert events. I mean we only had what two that didn't get rained out. >> Two. Yeah. And you could have you could have one of them a couple of them events inside >> if the building >> but what what she's asking is is replace the one downtown. >> Well, you can't have a concert in there. I mean they have >> No, no, no. But I mean if you build this >> I think we were a lot of events or activities of this building. >> Um if we had them at a level that we think we could fill the building. Um, roughly the I was trying to look at what the because I think everyone's been to Mississippi Crossings. That's about the same size as what the building is. Not the layout maybe, but 120 seated is what Mississippi Crossings can fit. And that's what this building is designed to to fit. But we would, to C Henderson's point, yeah, we'd probably move a lot of the events to this spot >> just because it gives us more space and ability to have more people there. >> I think that was the plan anyways to at some point. >> Yes. >> Long field activities. That that was my question. >> That's been the long-term phase for a little while, but it's just >> Yeah, >> it's not a high priority. >> No, understandably. So, I'm just like I don't see the need for both. >> I would agree is what I'm kind of like getting at. >> I would agree. And with the location here, the idea was um >> at first the patio was on the other side facing the trees and we were like, well, it should be facing the stage because you could use that building for outdoor music, too. So, it's like a rentable like uh dinner tables at the concert. They could be up in the building and then everybody else's come to the concert to sit in the amphitheater. So, it's it's not just a either or for concerts. It could be used in good weather and it's also houses concerts for bad weather. >> Yep. Um I don't like the shade sale thing at all. >> Oh, yeah. I mean, >> this I don't maybe you guys weren't aware of this, but we had this presented to us last year >> and it got shot down pretty hard because it doesn't help >> when a band shows up there. They don't want sales. They want a building. They want to make sure their equipment doesn't get wet. So, I don't know why this >> Well, we didn't specify anything. I mean, >> yeah, >> I think I did. >> It would have come up in conversation or something. >> I think I had my picture there. I think I mean I'm not I don't think but anyway best >> uh and pergolas. >> Yeah, >> I wouldn't spend a dollar on a pergola. >> They are the biggest. They're not they're not worth the plastic they're made out of. That's my opinion. >> I think it's fiberglass. >> I won't sugar coat that one. >> Uh the parking ofund roughly 50 stalls is still not enough. I don't think. >> Well, >> the uh the walkway thing. Yeah, maybe it sounds. Huh? >> What's your parking number? You think we're slow? >> Oh, you're going to need 300. >> I think at some point at some point >> Why? >> Because this is going to be similar to Mississippi Crossings and >> Well, then we can add parking then. But I I don't >> How many parking spaces does Mississippi Crossings have? >> I don't really know how many I don't know that answer. I don't know. But >> because every place every single person business who's come through here is like you have too much parking like too like people don't come by themselves. you come with your family. So like I don't think we need insane >> 300 stalls only covers about 600 people. >> Didn't the survey that was done say that a lot of people walked to the park? >> Yes. >> So anybody in River Hills will >> for a huge >> uh splash pad at a million a million and a half. I don't I think that's way out of line also. >> Yeah. >> Was it Sorry. Say that again. >> The splash pad at a million and a half I think is way out of line. St. Michael built theirs five six years ago for $26,000. Um, now that granted that was six years ago and it's it might be double by now, but that splash pad is better than any splash pad within 30 miles a year. >> Um, >> you've been to a lot of splash pads, Scott, with the kids. >> Yeah, >> just a question. >> Yeah, Rogers just love them. >> So, we could find Yeah, they do. I I'm not too worried about I mean obviously I care what the dollar amount is but it's the amenities the because the dollar amount's going to be whatever it's going to be. Um >> well then it can be 20 million. >> Well no what I'm what I'm but but we know that that some of these are going to be expensive items. Splash beds is going to be expensive items. >> Yeah. >> Do we want it or not? >> It's expensive. You can say half a million and and be be happy with it. I mean, the one over in uh an Andrews Park, that might be 100 grand, maybe. I mean, it's just a couple of things shooting up in the air. >> Yeah. >> I don't know how much maintenance there are either. I have no idea. >> There's significant maintenance costs on those things. Um, >> does it cost 10,000 a year or I I have no idea. >> I don't know the exact numbers. I'd have to dig into some of the stuff from Champlain, but you know, the water's treated in there obviously with chlorine and stuff. So, you got all those supplies to do that and that also feeding that has a a detrimental effect on equipment as well. So, there's a significant amount. >> Can I something I do like while we're beating it up? Are you you want to keep going? You I don't >> Well, the design is gorgeous, but I mean, how you how do you pay for it? >> No, no. I I hear you there. >> Okay. >> Yeah. I'm pretty much That's >> Sorry, I didn't mean to cut you off. >> I mean, I can see, and this is my personal opinion. I mean, I could see spending five or six on this park for now and calling it good and doing it out one crack. That's what I because you're going to bond for it anyway. We don't have 5 million bucks or 4 million bucks. >> We do not. >> So, you're going to have to bond for it no matter what you do >> in bonding. So, just an FYI for the council, bonding for a park requires a referendum. >> Yeah. I don't >> you cannot bond for a park without a referendum. Just an FYI. I just want to make sure everyone's aware of that. >> Well, I mean, if even if you bond for it, >> you don't have to tax people or the money. It can come out of the parks. >> It can any bond uh I guess if it's not being paid for out of that, it can be a lease revenue bond. It could >> have to figure that out for us. But if it's not going to be tax levy, it can come out of something else. But if it's going to be a bond and it's going to be paid for by tax levy, then it would require >> Right. Yeah, that's correct. >> I just want to make sure the council's aware of that. So, >> as far as the building, to me, I mean, I think you can put a building up for two 2 and a half million bucks as long as it's not a brick with not lots of nice glass. And I mean, my building is 9600 ft and I know you could build that for a couple million. So, I'm done. >> Let's go next. >> Stephanie, >> go ahead. Stephen, >> what do you like? >> What do I like? I want to start with positives. >> Um, again, I'm a mom of four, wide range of children. >> Um, and I, don't shoot me, Sarah. I like the idea of having the non-traditional like playground equipment. No, just the last time I said something about the playground we had back and forth. It was more of a joke. >> Um >> cuz like when I look at this, I think of um like Shore View Commons. They have, you know, I'm talking about they've got like the it's like built into the side and they've got you climb up the stuff and it's all um very interactive but not traditional like playground equipment like what you would think of when you think park or you think playground. Um and like I think it has like that connection to nature which is really what we're looking for with >> you talking about on the west side here. >> Yeah. >> Oh, okay. >> Um I mean and even there is some too on the enlargement area number two. >> Um yes. So like up in the corner there in like at Shore View Commons that is the hands on the coolest park I've ever been to my entire life. Um, and again like very interactive, very connected to the terrain and to nature and not what you would think of as like a traditional park. >> Um, and I think that if we want people to come and visit the park and to stay, um, as a mom of a really busy 5-year-old, >> he's all over the place. and we go to the car shows, we go to and to have somewhere for me to be able to still listen to the band or enjoy the car show or whatever it may be. And to have him be able to be climbing and getting all of his wiggles out is important. Um, so again, that I really like that idea and the more um like things built in or climbable that we can do the better. And also that park has that I don't know what you called it. The material on the on the actual playground is different >> in place like squishy. >> Exactly. And I know it costs more money but again I think like longevity you're not like kicking rocks out or there's a sand dumping out of the shoes. And again it's like minor inconvenience things but I think that it wears better. >> Um and especially with little ones >> I appreciate that. So that's something that I would be willing to put extra money into. >> Yeah, I like that stuff. >> Yes. And then the other thing is um I liked the fishing overlook idea. Um again, part of what I see Elsie Stevens being is that connection to nature and because the river is so beautiful and right there. >> Um and my kids walk down to the river, they have a little wagon they pull and they go fishing um where you know down where we live from this park. Um, but it would be nice to be able to go there and to spend the afternoon, have a picnic, go fishing, play at the park, and do all those things. And so I thought that was a really nice touch and something um you know the boardwalk kind of video is really cool but if that wasn't feasible even having some sort of this would be a lot of you know extra work but even a pier or some structure where you can stand instead of standing on the bank would be um something that I would look for if that makes sense. >> Yeah. So, those are my my positives. I enjoyed those things. I can, you know, give or take on a lot of um kind of the fancier pieces. I see the purpose of the larger building. Do I think it needs to be the Taj Mahal of buildings? No. I I I agree with you, Scott. I mean, it would be wonderful if it could be this, you know, stellar building, but to be honest, um, we could scale it back a little bit. I mean, there could be a plethora of things that we do or even just make it a covered space with bathrooms inside so that way it's more like open air kind of an idea. um almost like what you see in Andrews where you have that big kind of covered area that we stand under when it pours during the soccer game and they have all the picnic tables and there is like they store things inside. Maybe it's something like that. >> Um >> I don't I think there's a lot of really great things and again yes I also had some words I said when I saw the price tag but um I mean doing it in phases makes sense to me and I am also pro splash pad but um that dream got shot down for me when I saw the price tag I think it was last year year before when I said we should put a splash pad in here and I went maybe we shouldn't put a splash pad in there. Um, so that one again I have little kids on Pro Splash Pad, but if that turned into more park or n natural parkish stuff, that would be fine with me, too. >> I'd also like to see some sort of a Veterans Memorial memorial in it, which is inexpensive to do. >> Sarah, you have anything? Um, I there were I mean, again, I enjoyed I like the design. I don't have children, but splash pads, sure, knock yourselves out. Um, uh, you can join us. >> No, thank you. Um, I have a Yeah, if you ever try to give a horse a bath, you get plenty of splash pad. I do not need to get wet in any other sort of way. Um, I I'm cheap as hell. So, well, okay, that's not that bad. Um, I'm super cheap. So, and um, so I look at the price tag, I'm just like, this is just not going to happen. Um, it's kind of like I feel like in some ways, >> so when we bought our land and I drew my barn, my dream barn, I drew my dream barn and then I got quotes and I was like, well, I guess not. I had to cut like 98% of that out. Um, and I kind of think that's this is what this is. This is This is our dream barn and this is gorgeous. And if we did play the lottery and won, I would absolutely build this. Just like if I won the lottery, I would absolutely build my dream barn. But I don't play the lottery cuz I'm a mathematician. Um and the city doesn't play the lab lottery. So therefore, it's never going to happen. And so I do think we really just need to think about priorities and scaling back. um if it's if it is but on the flip side, if it's a referendum, if the citizens are like, "No, we're willing to pay the money for a splash pad because to enough people the splash pad is worth it, then it's worth it, right?" And then like that's that's what it is. Um and so I think a lot of my questions come to how do we word that referendum? How do we how do we really figure out like when push comes to shove um what are the things the the residents of the city are willing to pay for like are they willing to do a referendum for a splash pad or not? Are they willing to referendum for a building or not? And that those are details I need to work out with like Zach cuz I've never been part of that. I don't know how that process works. >> Um like is it a package? How do we like >> and then phases and like do we referendum for all of it? Did you refer them in phases? And like so those are a lot of those details. >> Well, I think sorry to cut you off, but in that same vein, you know, like much like me, splash pad sounded awesome until I knew how much it cost. And so I think that this gives us a closer idea of what those numbers are. And then if the citizens say, "Yeah, I'm willing to put a million dollars into a splash pad." Okay, here we go. But I think that until you have an idea of what that price tag is, and like you're saying, if they want to spend the money >> Mhm. >> cool. Let's do it cuz this park's awesome. >> Yeah. >> So, you're really hitting on the essence of what a master plan is. >> Yeah. >> So, this is your barn. >> Yeah. My dream bar. >> This is your dream barn. And these are placeholders. So, you know, do you want a splash pad here, a playground here, playground over here, parking? They're placeholders. >> Yeah. >> And so, it's a it gives you a vehicle to go to people and say, you know, do you want a splash pad and do you want it here? >> Yeah. >> This one might be 2 million, but could you settle for 250,000? >> Yeah. That's one. >> That's the place for it. >> Yeah. >> And it's adjacent to the parking. So, this is your road map. >> Yeah. >> For your dream barn. >> Yeah. >> And so, um I guess what I'm asking is look at it that way as opposed to Oh my god, it's so expensive to do this. >> It is, but it can be paired down. This is This is starting out here. >> Yeah. >> To get you here >> where um the the constituents get the part that they want and they're willing to pay for it. >> Yeah. And and at the same time, you've got a road map or a plan to put things in in places. >> Well, and that's why like that's why I did what I did, even though I not going to build my barn because I needed to know where to put the barn. So, I knew where to put the wells. So, I knew where to put the doors. So, I knew where cuz I didn't want to build something where 10 years later I'm like, well, crap, that's in the wrong spot. And now I can't afford to redo it. So, >> yeah. Cuz right now we're talking about infrastructure. We're not going to run sanitary lines here. We're not going to do that >> in 10 years. >> But you know, if you if you go down the road 10 years and go, "Oh, yeah. We want that building there." >> You at least know that the building everybody liked the idea that we were could potentially have a building. >> Yeah. And I like what you were saying about the building having the views so that from that building you can see the river, you can see the stage. So that is the best space for that building. >> So there there was a reasoning behind it. It wasn't just popping down a building. >> Yeah. And so that that's the story that's being told today that might not not happen for 10 years >> or a different variation. >> Variation. Yeah. >> Um so so from from that perspective, I like this concept. I think it's cool. I like the features. Um I would then take a really big red marker and cross out 90% of the cool things. But the roads are like the is the parking in the right spot? Do we have enough parking? I did total up and the Mississippi crossing one has 221 stalls. I literally just went through and counted them individually. Um, so we're not that far off, but you know that is the question is okay and >> maybe we don't need all the parking right now, but then like in the future if we need to expand it, where should it expand? Um, so I mean I I like this idea of of where the things are located. They're near each other but not on top of each other. Um, I like the paths that connect them. Um, I like I like this ropes course idea. Splash pad is great. Um, I mean, for the record, I do have like 16 nieces and nephews and like, oh no, someone was just born. I have more than double digit great nieces and nephews. If they would stop having babies, it would help, but they just keep on. >> Oh, you can you can have a a family event there and bring them along. >> We would fill up that building at this point. Um, so I I I like the concept. I just don't like the price tag. So that's where I'm at. >> Um, to to me another thing is the splash pad and the main I mean right now there's two playgrounds in there. >> Mhm. >> Which is not necessary. >> Oh, I'm not counting the clo thing. That's >> that's >> okay. >> Dead as far as I'm concerned, but >> Well, technically there's >> I mean I'm focusing on Steven's park. So I mean that's what's in that's what we need now. I I believe the park needs upgrades. So, I'd like to see something there, but not for 20 million bucks. And and to me, the two playgrounds, you can cut one of them out if you move the splash pad over on this side. >> Um, and then you're closer to the bathrooms also. >> What do you mean cut it out? Like, >> just have one. >> Just have one playground. >> I guess that's on my list, too, but I was thinking on the other side. >> So, you you swap the playground that's on the south side of the amphitheater on the west side. You flop them and put the splash pad on that spot and put the So he hasn't basically >> No, I have them both together because as a mom, how are you going to watch your kids when they're 300 yards apart being in one versus the other? >> You mean one park or the other? >> No. I mean, right now the way it is with the way it's laid out, if you don't double up on the two playgrounds, you have a kid that wants to be the splash pad. Mom, I want to run over and play on the swings and he's 300 yd away from me. Are you ask not going to do that? >> There's no no way. >> So they they are glued to my side and I >> mean no we go together. >> No mom's going to want their kids 300 ft apart but 300 yards apart. >> I think if it was me knowing the price tag of the splash pad >> they're not that much money. >> Okay. Well yeah it's a thing like again it's priorities and scaling. So it's a matter of >> but do you want that splash pad? See, I I I moved that kind of stuff on the west side >> cuz then you put the playground on the other side, >> right? >> So, cut park. >> This whole east side was supposed to be kind of it's it's kind of an open open park. If you have whatever this intersection is in the middle at 15, whatever, whatever it is, >> the art >> that kind of precludes a lot of the, you know, activities we've done so far. Um, it it >> Yeah, there it's >> literally puts a stake in it. >> Yeah. Um and and I really don't think we need this much parking at least in the next 10 years. Um >> can you can you >> people are okay parking on the grass for the rare occasions where we have something >> that big >> that big? Um >> but I think to Oh, sorry. >> No. Can you circle back to which you're saying? I'm sorry. Talk about the park again. I'd move the the kit part on the west side with if we're going to do a a splash pad. I I' you know, keep I'd keep all that stuff on the west side. That's where they're going to climb anyway, >> right? I hear you. But >> then your bathroom's 300 yards from the splash pad and and playground. >> Well, that's also an issue. But I'm thinking more that having that piece of park close to where you're going to have the bands >> is a benefit. Then you can watch >> cuz then I can listen to the band while my kid is playing and they're not going, "Mom, mom, let's go to the park. Mom, you said we could go to the park. It was spend 5 minutes." And then they're pulling you all the way to the opposite side where you can't hear the band. I think it will keep people there longer. >> Give their jittery kids something to do. Now you got kids on both sides. >> No. >> Well, what are you going to do with all this climbing stuff on the left? On the on the west side. >> You're going to You're not going to have it. >> What we'll do? Nothing. >> Well, all right. >> Marty, there's an issue on that side, too, right? How much stuff are we going to undig unburied? >> There's nothing buried over there that we need to worry about. >> I don't mind having both. And that's just again, I think back to the Shore View Commons has like six different areas. It is the coolest park and like I don't mind having multiple. >> That's what I'm I'm getting at is the big events we've had so far in this park, this plan would kill them. That's all I'm saying. >> Well, are you talking like the car shows? >> The car shows the the the uh I think it was last year we had the the heritage day stuff with the with the helicopter there and the parking was there. What now? But if you didn't have that >> Fisher, we did have we did have the car show give us feedback on this and they said it would work because the with the rollover side with the rollover curb, they would then have the show cars on the grass which is where they preferred to park anyways and then have the cars that were there to look at it in the parking lot and we did >> with the current parking lot with this one the proposed parking lot. >> Yes. >> See, I think there's way too many parking lots there. So the idea would be to have the show cars from like I said from the car shows perspective and I think it's important >> that's been a big event at the park and how does that work >> and we did get feedback >> from the car show you know host >> sufficient >> that it would be sufficient >> it it was that arc this >> that arc right there >> they talked about parking the cars along that arc and then people could walk on the pavement >> path and see it sidewalk and then have obviously in the middle and >> do And they could be on either side of that arc. >> Correct. >> Yeah, because this this right in here is is that existing underpass. And I believe when I was out there, the rows of cars kind of ended right about in here. >> So, and I don't want to say that that's right or wrong. I just want to say that there was feedback given from that, which is good and important because those are things that we're seeing today that we need to also. So then if we did put I mean it seems seems like we're cluttering up what's supposed to be our activity park with stuff. What are we going to do in the west side then? Is that just going to be a what is that then if we're going to move that stuff to the east side? >> I mean Stephanie and I are both okay with having both parts. Scott's the one who wants to get rid of the west side. >> No, I'm saying you got to have the splash bed and park together, not separate in my opinion. So, you would nyx the park that's by the amphitheater and just keep the one by the splash pad. >> I don't I mean the other the problem that I have with that though is then you're 200 yards from the bathroom. >> Is that a problem with little kids? >> I I I mean I've been to parks where we have where you have permanent bathrooms that aren't again aren't attach attached to a large building. >> Yeah. >> Yarn over there. Sure. Well, because there's the old um the barn that >> that we haven't burned down. >> That's another topic. But I >> No, I'm just saying. But like >> you guys are hurting Marty Stoy. >> Like you could put some nicer like cuz I've been like just standalone toilets right there and they don't have to have all of the special things. It can just be for your little kids who need to run and can't make it. And the adults can trek the 300 yards to the nicer bathroom. So >> listen, we are porta potty people. If we had a somewhere to do the business, >> I'm a horse stop person. >> We can't go in a bush in this park anymore. So we would love to have any sort of per >> the corn cribs. You could put the board pit inside corn. >> Listen, I mean, you you could do a lot of things, but I agree with you. You would want to have something close so that way you're not running that. It doesn't look like a large distance on this small map, but it is a substantial distance. So, if you had some nothing fancy, we're talking like what you see in like the mountains when you're >> Yeah, just pose it out and call it good. Something like that. >> Step up from a porta potty, but that's it. And by that splash pad. And Scott, to your point, I don't and I think this goes to your point, um, Dennis, I don't want everything crammed into one spot. I would like to have a little bit of space. I'm okay with different different spaces because if you cram everything into one spot, it also just gets too busy, too messy, and it just feels crowded. I would like a little bit of um so like we I the park I go to a lot is the one by the Maple Grove Library and they walk around the pond um and they have the music they have the musical >> toy like art music whatever stuff >> um and then they have beautiful plantings and stuff like so like and I like that there are different little locations there's the theater and then you come up and then there is the play space for the kids cuz on the flip side if I'm listening to a concert I do not want to listen to a bunch of shrieking children. That would tick me off to no end. Like, I am here for this concert. I don't want a splash pad with shrieking children right behind me. >> It wouldn't happen. That wouldn't be happen. The concerts are at 8:00 at night. >> Exactly. So, why do they need to be right on top of each other? Then the splash pad can be over there. >> You know, I'm not saying it doesn't need to be over there. >> I'm just saying that it needs the park, the playground, and the splash pad need to be together. There is a playground. >> Get rid of that one and then it's fine. >> You're just saying there's a superfluous >> Yeah. Well, it's it's 750,000 more. >> Yeah. It goes without having two of them, but >> Okay. That is my one push back like strong push back. >> Well, then in that in that short including Cloquet, we got three almost million dollar. >> Is it not supposed to be the premier park? Is it not supposed to be our jewel? >> Yeah. And that's I I don't think that's why you need to spread parking or playgrounds in that. I I would lump them in one spot. >> Dennis, get in the car. Get in the truck. Let's go. We're going on a field trip. You have to Listen, >> I have had my kids there. >> You've been to the Shore View one? >> No. >> You need to. It is worth it. I will pay for your gas to go. >> View Shore View has more money than Dayton. >> I don't listen. I'm not saying it needs to be the same thing, but I'm just saying it has very distinct kind of areas and you walked on the path to the next area and there's another area. >> Well, and and you know, to that end, the the the Elm Creek one has a lot of activities there and actually I and so did my wife, but we preferred the old junky one that they had before they renovated it. Um but yeah, the kids were able to climb on all kinds of things. I I get that. >> Um kids like to do that. They like to do dangerous things and >> dangerous things safely. My husband says apparently it's a thing. >> It just I don't know. I just look at this activity park as more of a I don't know. It just seems odd to have a a playground in it. And I guess my only deal with that is is like I said, I think that north loop on the parking lots too much. um at least today or at least in the next 10 or or so years. >> Is that the one on the east or west side? >> The east side. I just it just seems like a lot of parking for for what we're talking about in in the short term. >> Well, you're going to get more than 100 cars there for any any particular event. >> Yeah. But how often do we do that? >> Six car shows >> or five concerts. The point is we want to know where it will go so we don't build something else. >> And I have no problem, you know, keeping that allocated that >> this will eventually be parking. So don't put your park right here. >> And and the other thing to think about, especially because the we wanted the parking lots to be parklike. We didn't want them to be on top of each other like at the mall, >> like a rectangular park, >> a big square. >> So there's there's landscape in between. But if you just do that, what you're saying, the north side, if you just build that. >> Oh, the south side. >> Or the if you just build the south side first, you grade the north side flat so you can park on it. Yeah. >> And grass. And then if you're if it's full, then you pave it. >> And then if you come towards back towards this loop where we were talking about the car, the >> car show. >> The car show back in there. If you need more parking, those two bays can start to pull around and curve park like, but you're meeting you're starting to meet the needs that might be 200 cars in that lot. But you work as you work from from the first lot and you grade around it to park on the grass if you ever need it. And then if it gets to a point where you need that paved, you keep expanding it. And yeah, and I guess the the minor in this in this game, the the minor detail was that I think a big reason we were kind of waiting on this thing was to get a cover on that stage, >> which I don't like just covered all >> which Well, it doesn't cover it. It's a >> And there's multiple ways you can go with that. So, you talked about the equipment being dry. >> Some uh they're basically pavilions, shade structures. Yeah. Uh uh park shelters. And we've done everything from putting a little uh box uh closet space. So like the all the equipment's in there for the sound system and it's in a locked door to just having a back wall with like barn doors in it so that there's a backside to that shelter so that the rain doesn't come in all the way around because ultimately if they're worried about equipment being wet, you need at least a wall somewhere. >> Yeah. >> So they can be up against that wall so that the rain doesn't come in from the sides. So, we've done uh shelters where we just had that back wall, but it's not um opaque. We put barn doors in it so you could open it up. So, in this case, you're you're going to block off the river view. But, if you did something like that to have that wall, you could have the barn door. So, when there's not a concert, you just open that up and you can see right through the building. So there's multiple ways to do that shade shade structure stage that provides enough cover for the equipment so that it's not getting rain blown in on it. >> Well, number one, if it's raining, nobody's coming in. >> They're not coming. Yeah. >> So you you don't really need to worry about it. >> And I know you haven't seen this maybe, but >> that you can have for about 100 and a half. >> Mhm. Yeah, because they're really they're just picnic shelters basically >> and that you can use it as that if it's if there's no event >> trying to >> I'm good with the idea. I'd like the number to be down in the 6 million completed area, but that's me. >> Yeah. So, trying to summarize everything up. Is the council good with what we have today? Obviously, not saying that this has to be the full-blown plan. This is exactly what we're going to do, but master plan is that high level visioning. or is there something that the council a to see differently done for by MSA so we can have some sort of master plan again doesn't mean it has to be to this scale >> I think as long as we're clear so the last one we had we always had this caveat is well this is the plan >> which meant we had to follow the plan um as long >> like the general framework we'd like to keep it somewhat >> I understand that it's just that I don't know how you scale these phases down to where we can afford them And I I honestly we can put a referendum out there, but if it's got a $20 million price tag, it's going down. If it's got a $10 million price tag, it's going down. >> For sure it is. >> I don't >> I did a little deal last week and I mean somebody John seen it on Facebook, the community page. >> People are just >> people won't spend the money. I mean, two people out of 50 >> Yep. >> are willing to spend the money. Go ahead and build it. Build it. We need it. >> The rest of them said, "If it costs money, I don't want to do it. U we can't dictate council business based on Facebook posts. I will say we can but that's a general but I think it's important to be realistic. We don't want to go through all the time, energy, and effort to do a referendum if it's not even within the realm of anything. >> Well, it's got to be something the council supports before it even goes on the agenda. >> You don't need all of us telling people to vote. It's just going to be difficult, I think, for us to scale this down. >> That's all I I think that's going to be difficult. You pick out the things you you'd want now. >> I mean, to me, the most important things now are a building. I like the splash pad, a half a million dollar one, not a million and a half dollar one. Uh, the playground, and to me, that playground in that park has got to be somewhere around a half a million bucks. I mean, uh, the building, playground, splash pad, and a cover over that stage with some expansion on the stage cuz it's not big enough. And I I don't like everything slanted like it is. >> You can't There is no dance floor there right now. >> And the grading is it you can't have it with the way the grade is. >> So there's some work that needs to be there. There's probably I mean I don't know. I'm not a concrete guy, but you're probably going to do a hundred to $150,000 worth of concrete work somewhere in that area. So to me, for five or six million bucks, you can have a th those necessities today. >> What about parking? Do you think that needs to happen? >> You need some concrete parking there. Yeah. >> Not all of it, but part of it. >> Some of it. >> I'm just trying to get I'm just trying to >> So if we adopt this plan and say that this is our dream barn, >> right? Because that's what we're looking at. This is the dream. This is >> if I could have everything, this is what I would have. >> And we say, "Okay, so we're going to do I'm not going to pick a phase." So phase, we can say, "Okay, phase Z has all of these things. Nope, we're going to get this. We're going to cross all these things off." And then we say, "Okay, let's go out for bid and figure out or yeah, figure out what it's going to be." So >> the council will make a phase. >> Yeah. Look, I guess what I'm saying is is if we're all right with this being the dream barn, whether it's, hey, we're going to cut out all of these things and this is what it's actually going to be. >> The only downfall of that is in two or three years, four years, the next council, maybe they like the >> dream barn. That's true. >> And they might spend the money. >> Well, they'd have to have >> I think Wait, but I think that's the whole point, right? Is that we're saying, "Yep, this is the dream barn." and then council in 5 years very well could do exactly that and then we're paying for the splash pad and the things that we maybe would have cut out. But I think that that's the beauty of the whole thing is that's the way the cookie crumbles if you will is that that council may adopt the plan exactly as is or they may change something and they have the ability to do that. So, if we're all right with the dream, we're why can't we just accept the dream and then if we're going through the phases? We pick the phase, make the changes, and move from there. I guess I'm wondering why we're beating it up at this moment. >> I think that's kind of what we're trying to get to here is that's why we got phases. It doesn't mean to say you got to do all that phase, but you got a master plan there that is showing you where those phases are and you don't build over stuff that you know in a later phase. So if we do say do the splash pad phase and we leave out the playground, that doesn't mean to say it's left out forever. It could be come back as a later phase, >> right? Or you could flip the splash pad off for more park. >> It's just up to when that happens. >> I think as long as you got the the road map there, then you've got what what what you need to make the whole thing work. And it gives us the opportunity to look at getting some funding and some grant money for this as well because it's, you know, something that we're we're realistic about. we're adopting this and this is what we think it's going to cost. So I think that's always good when you're applying for funding that you have a plan. So, I guess I'm wondering like from like our standpoint here, is there a concern, and this may just be me reading the room wrong, but is there a concern that we say, "Yep, this is the master plan." And then, like you said, Scott, in 2 years, half the council is brand new, potentially, >> maybe. Let's just playing the game. And then they adopt it exactly how it is. And it isn't something that like we would have done that way. Is that what the hangup is? So then >> my my hangup is is that generally whether it's a long-term plan or whether it's a it's putting something in the budget, >> that's the impetus to why would you not vote for this? >> It's the plan. That's that's how things are presented. It's on the long-term plan. Of course you're going to vote for this. It's in the budget. Of course you're going to vote for this. there's always this push to because this is the plan >> and and that's why and and maybe it you know maybe I'm looking at it and overreacting from that. There's a lot of things on here I don't like but I mean we do have to all play in the same sandbox. So >> would you be more com comfortable is not the right word. would be >> I as long as we're open to the fact that when we start putting these pieces in just because this is on the plan doesn't mean that there's some responsibility to to go that direction. >> You're not your feet aren't set in that and this what it is what it has to be us fine-tuning this thing and we're never gonna get there. >> No. And I don't think we should, right? Unless we're going out for this funding, like >> it doesn't necessarily matter, you know, if we pick apart >> itty bitty pieces. So maybe my question is for you, is the plan too detailed for you to be comfortable to accept it or is it generic building here, parking lot is here, you know what I mean? Is that what you're thinking? >> It's too elaborate to feel comfortable with >> is that's kind of what I'm getting at. Okay. So >> I know how it works. Well, I'm >> think that's right. >> Well, then that's kind of what I'm asking. I don't want to say like are we planning from the traumas of the past, but that's kind of what I'm getting at. Is it do we feel like our feet are cemented if we say yes to this plan that it cannot be changed or it will be used or that's not the right word. Presented in a way where we have to do all of these things no matter what. Even if in two years we're like absolutely not. We're not doing a splash pad. It's open space. Like >> she almost almost going in. >> Sorry, I'm going to >> I understand what you're getting at. I just >> I I'm just trying to find a way where we move forward. >> Look at the CIP. What's coming up in the next 10 years? >> Oh, no. No. I 100%. There's a lot of things on there where I'm like, who in the hell ever thought we were going to have that? They were like, so I I get that worry. And I don't mean that as a negative thing. So maybe this beautiful master barn that we have, >> does it need to be more generic than it is? Does it need to say building like and not have a beautiful building with this, this, and that? You know what I'm >> Yeah. >> Maybe some of the other things. >> I say pick out the things that you would like to enhance the park today in the next two years and do that and just see what happens with that. But we do want to have a general idea of what the other phases will look like because otherwise we're going to run into the same problem that we continuously do where oh yeah, someone will know what we're going to do with that later on. And then we do things and we're like, well crap, why didn't we make that stage three times as big? Why didn't we >> make that water tower this or like you know what I mean? So it's that forward thinking of and again maybe it's more generic than what we've gotten here. This would be great if we had, you know, a bucket full of cash sitting here to to do this entire thing right now. I'd be right up there like, let's do this. But maybe it is. We pick a phase. If this is the phase that we want to see in the next 5 years, we leave it this detailed and we fine-tune that phase. But then the other phases, we leave more generic, but say park or splash pad here, parking lot here, and like maybe we don't get so granular like bioluminescent path. we say path. You know what I mean? So we're not stuck in all of those really expensive details that we may not want to do, but then at least we know where the things are supposed to be. So we don't do something stupid that limits us in the future. It gives us the flexibility to move forward and say park splashpad/splashpad area becomes just park or becomes splash pad park or >> kid play area >> kid kid area >> or kid. So kid smiley face. >> Here's where here's where you might have a uh a problem getting getting too vague versus too detailed. >> Yeah. >> And and what the mayor is saying is exactly spot on. I've worked on campus plans for colleges and they adopted a master plan and then the the neighborhood sued them because they said, "You're going to build it just like this." Oh. >> Mhm. >> And so it was all in the in in the language that they adopted the plan under and they said, "This is our this is our guy. We're going to follow this." Exactly. So that does occur. But if you don't show enough detail and you go to get grant money and funding money, you're not going to get grant money. >> The one area where you could fall. If you don't show detail, grants don't >> you're not going to get money. >> Yeah. >> No, but I think you would >> Where are you at? >> Where am I at? I'm not >> forget about >> um >> I understand that we all understand that dollars aren't going to happen. >> No, I'm saying for me what Sarah just drew drew out here was get the stage covered, enhance the stage a little bit, build your building, do your little splash pad and playground on that side. And for now, that's enough. That's your that to me that's phase A. >> Mhm. You can have all the other you can have all the pretty pictures you want on phase CD FG because what about the plan that happens? >> Yeah. So my comment would be would you like to adopt the plan without the phases notified? >> We can tweak the phases too later. >> The phases can always be tweaked obviously that's understood but I just want to make sure the >> I'm not I'm not adopting this plan. That's that's me >> and and Okay. And >> I know this is how it'll work. >> But I'm telling you this. >> How do we go forward? >> Beat down my throat until this happens. >> Been there, done that. >> How do we go forward with this? >> Plan. >> Okay. But are we going to get to >> What would be different on that plan? >> All I want is these three things in phase one and everything else can be way out there. But how is that different than this? How is that different than just what this is? >> Are you just saying rip the >> number one? I don't like any of this elaborate stuff, the pergolas and all that. They're useless, >> right? Well, >> they're just glitter >> when we implement that. >> That doesn't need to be there because you're not spending $20 million no matter what ever. >> Right. So, all I'm getting at is is and I agree with you that it's used as it can be used as a weapon plan. we have to do something here and I just and that's what >> and and I guess from my standpoint I'm okay as long as we all agree that this is not >> a a final >> a battering ram that that that the pergolas we can leave off if that's what we choose to do cuz 20k on a pergola it's like um yes so I I how do we get forward >> I'd remove the phases. >> If we can remove the phase, if they took out the phases and just had these first two pages and we can make a say that the the phases will be determined like next time, >> would you be okay with it? Then if we took off the phases and just kept this this first just this first page and said we're adopting this as our plan and we will work out the phases next time. Would you say yes to that >> if you put a limit to your expenditure? million bucks for that plan, >> but we will be limiting it as we have no choice. We have >> so cult there's there naturally is a limit. I mean there's no way that city staff can come forward and say let's spend $6 million and I'm looking at it and go we have $2 million in the bank and no referendum. So I mean I I can't physically spend $600. >> So >> you guys recommended approval of the of the thing. >> Yeah. Based on the fact that that's what feedback came back from residents. That's, you know, that's what we have from our professional services plan together these days. >> So, the pricing is more of a >> The residents put this together. >> They just Yeah. the residents said, "Yeah, maybe we'd like this or that." >> The pricing is more of just an indication to us that this is what these things may cost. So, if we literally went, >> "Yeah, >> here's the plan. Get rid of all the phases because we'll decide the phases as we want to go for funding." And this is all the plan is is right here. I'm okay with that. >> Is that okay? And even like remove your We can remove the bioluminescent sidewall. We Whatever details you want to remove the cheaper thing out of that. I don't know. >> Actually, I think it's really cool. >> I think it's cool. >> I think it's super cool. But I mean, I'm just trying to pick things that may be like extras. But if we just >> to your point, if we call it path >> Yeah. And then we decide at the time we go, "Hey, remember when they said that was an option? What does that cost? It's part of the phase that we're looking or part of the area we're looking at. Then we decide we want to put this piece in this phase, this piece there, and that piece there. That doesn't have to all be one >> block of area if we don't want it to be. And to your point, Scott, if you have three things that you're like, let's break ground tomorrow. That could be our first step. And then we can figure out all this stuff >> at that point. >> At that point, and then again, fine-tune it and say, this is what it's going to cost. Then you go out for grant money and you say these are all of the things. This is just the dream barn >> at a bird's eye view. >> And that's how that's how this >> this process works from our side of the table is you've got that budget and you can take a million dollars and try to get money for a splash pad. And if you can only get half a million then you build a half a million dollars. We do it all the time. >> Yeah. But that gives you a starting point to negotiate money. >> Yes. >> To get get what you want. >> It might you might actually get a donor that'll pay for the whole thing. You never know. >> But you got to have a starting point. Yes. And you got to have a negotiating point >> to get their money, >> right? And to make sure that where you're going to put that donated splash pad, it makes sense for the whole park. And that's what we're doing here is this is the master plan >> and we decide pick pieces of it. And if some of it never gets built, maybe it never gets built, but if part of it does, at least then we know that it all fits on the space that we have. I feel like I'm yelling and I apologize. It's really exciting. >> There's if you have uh enough background information uh for things in the park, money comes from strange places. There was a splash pad picture in there, and that's in Beaver Dam, Wisconsin. uh Watertech. There's two splash pad manufacturers in Beaver Dam and they saw that plan and they pay for it. That circle one up there and it's their exper experimental ground. So when they make new equipment, they put it in there. >> We never knew that they were going to pay for this thing. But it showed up on a master plan. It was a little dot over here and we said it was whatever a million dollars a half a million dollars and they were like, "Oh yeah, we'll do that and we'll put the equipment in there and we'll change the equipment out every year because it's our playground for our people." So yeah, there there might be some other funding source than grants or or something that pops up because somebody sees it. I do want to let know that the council so I did receive a call from the park district earlier today and they noted that the uh LC Stevens master plan was on the agenda and they said we'd be happy to help um with funding sources if it's something that we can utilize for our trail >> or some sort of trail head. Um whether that's parking, whether that's the facility itself with bathrooms and restrooms. They were happy to do some funding sources with us and be a partner. Um, and I thought it was a, you know, kind of a cold call phone call from them, which was nice, but they did, you know, notify that, hey, we we're willing to help on other programs and funding to make sure that things can happen and and help you guys out. So, they're trying to be a partner as well. So, that that kind of >> but you need a plan to show people. >> Yeah. And and you need dollars on a piece of paper so you know, well, it we got this thing over here, this shelter that's $20,000, you know, would you sponsor that? >> Yeah. because now you got a list to work off of. So that's what the master plan is for. And and that's where like the mayor is saying, it gets in the language because uh it's not a master plan to that's a construction documents that's built. It's a master plan for a roadmap for the dream bar. And so that's what the in an adoption you you talk you're adopting this path to move forward. You're not adopting a plan to build this is it gives you guidance >> to build a plan. >> Yeah. >> And then phase one like Scott's saying phase one we want this this and this. >> Yeah. >> Let this piece this piece this piece. That's our plan. >> Okay. In the next meeting let's figure out what phase one is. >> Okay. But then if if we agree to that can you say yes to this right now today? Yeah. Okay. >> Then I make Oh, you have people wanted to come. >> Yeah. Um >> yeah, if you're Yeah, we'll let them come forward and you have to come up to the mic if you want to speak to the mic. Please >> tell us how much money you want to kick in. >> Maybe this is the funding for the splash. >> I'm sure enjoy. >> Just see name and address and then you can spew talk into the uh >> other seats. >> Thank you. Do you should I fill that out first or >> No, do that again. >> Okay. I'm Tammy Lockach and um my husband and Jean and I just moved up from Illinois and we love Dayton so much >> and we did see this and we were very excited and so we're like >> can I get your address for the record? >> Oh yes, it's uh 14579 Kings View Lane North. >> Thank you. >> And where in Illinois are you from? >> Uh northern part Lake Villa Gurnie area. Totally. >> I used to work in Walkegan. >> Oh, I'm from Albangquin. So, >> okay. Awesome. Sorry. This is Chicago and you're like, >> right. Exactly. >> Okay. Sorry. Continue. >> No, no, that's fine. Um, and when I tell people like Villa here, they all think I'm saying Lakeville and I'm like, no, different one. Um, so here's just just some thoughts. Um, we completely love this idea. Overall, it's fantastic. Um just thinking though that if you guys um accept a plan like I think like when you were saying five six million dollars total would be I think most of the homeowners probably could break that down in their head and it would be a doable amount. Um, and I get the whole master plan thing, but as a taxpaying person, if I saw that a plan was adopted for $16 million, even if you're just saying like, "But wait, wait, wait, we're not we're not going to do all this." I would be like, I I just think a lot of people would just dig in their heels and see that big number and go, we can't even afford a small portion of this, so we can't look at this like an over. So, just a thought that if you were going to think five or six million, maybe your sky in the pie needs to be adjusted to be eight million, you know, or maybe even 10 million, but 16 million as a total. It's it's just kind of out there. And also just as a business person, um I was thinking that if you built this structure that could hold weddings and gatherings and baby showers to go out to the public and say, "Hey, we're going to start with this really cool park area and this building which will start generating revenue to help start paying for some of the other things that we're bringing in." That that could also be something as a taxpayer I'm like, "Well, yeah, let's get started. We know this sort of thing is needed in the area and it's going to be a source of revenue while we build. So >> it would be a source of revenue. >> Yeah, I think that's kind of assumed. >> Yeah. >> Yes. >> That's it. >> Thanks. >> This plan would be about 200 a year for 20 years. Are you willing to do that? >> Uh for 16 million. >> $200 >> per house. >> Per house. >> Oh, it's going to be high. >> Huh? >> Pretty sure it's high in there. I'd have to do the numbers, but I'm pretty sure that if if I have to numbers, there's no way I'm gonna put a number up there right now. >> It's gonna be >> I won't give you a number earlier if not give me a number now. >> Thank you. >> That number will hit Facebook, >> but I'll >> thank you. >> As long as we all just >> Yeah, mayor council. So the idea from my understanding is that um just to recap is that the master plan would basically be removing all the numbers out of the master plan um removing all of the what I call detail the phases and essentially just breaking it down to a high level plan of what the generic plan looks like with names and whatever else if we could generic um we'll generic those bioluminescent sidewalk could just become sidewalk. Um, but that's my understanding is that we would remove basically the dollar amounts and the phases and just keep it to high level pictures of what we're thinking long term and then keeping it to kind of what what are those areas >> and even things like so instead of ropes course style play area just play area and yeah >> 250 >> so 250 >> but yeah I'm wi with with with those price tags taken off and yeah >> that's my understanding from the council's perspective of what we'd like to approve tonight and I think that that's fine that gives us somewhat of a road map of what to do next and where to put things and and what the council wants to do with it. So, >> are you okay with that? >> This is how this got here in seven days from the parks commission. You can we can talk about this in seven in 14 days again. >> Sure. Okay. >> Sounds wonderful. >> Yeah. >> Can't wait. >> I want to know what we're going to build for 2026. >> We'll plan that next time at the next meeting. >> We'll duke that out. >> It's going to be a busy meeting. want to be here late. >> I'm with me. You're either way. So >> So are we ready to make a motion then to that effect? >> So in me. >> Okay. I make a motion to >> Do I need to repeat all of that? >> I think just keep it to the high level ideas. >> High the high level without the details and without the dollars. >> No dollars and no phases because that will seem like that's what we're committing to and we're not committing to those phases. So, one thing I'm going to ask MSA to do is, can you guys send us a new one without all those details with the sidewalk and stuff like that? Just have it listed as sidewalk or splat pad or playground or whatever. >> No. And no $20 million price tag. >> There's no price tags on the >> No price tag >> period. There are no price tags period on the master plan. >> I'll make that motion. >> Great. >> I'll second it. >> Complete waste of their time. >> No, it's not. Any uh >> well, we should have put and that's >> we should have put a price down number there. >> Um All right. Any more discussion? >> All right. All those in favor say I. >> I. I. >> I. >> Oh, I guess that I'll put that down as a N. >> 3.9 votes. >> And all those opposed say no. >> Motion carries. >> One. Thank you so much. >> Yeah. Sorry we put you through that. >> No, I'm I'm glad. I'm not sorry. >> This is okay. >> Like she uh seat down here. >> Um Okay. So, we are on to a >> close the meeting. So, what we will do is >> I ask that you read the comment. We'll go into close session. We will close the meeting after the close session because I don't want to close it and open. >> I open it back up. >> Say it again. What did you just say? >> I just asked you to just read it so we can go into close session and we will adjourn after the meeting. Yes. Close session. All right. Motion to close meeting pursuit. This is a lot shorter than what we >> what we normally have to read. Um motion to close the meeting pursuant to Minnesota statute 13D 03 for labor negotiation. >> Second or >> a motion. >> Make a make a motion. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Oh, a second. >> Did you just second it? >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Good. >> All those in favor say I. >> I. >> I. was supposed to say no. Okay, we're we will go in close session. Yeah. So, Go ahead. >> Okay. Um, we go right to a motion. We're still in session, right? >> Close session. >> Oh, yeah. We'll close the close the closed session. >> Back in open session. >> And we're back in open session. >> I make a motion to approve the asking contract as written. Okay. >> I'll second. Um any more disc >> more discussion if you have? >> Yeah, I guess. Yeah. Any more discussion? >> All those in favor say I. >> I. >> I. All those opposed say no. >> No. >> Motion carries 3 to one. Okay. >> And if there are no objections, we will be adjourned. We're adjourned.