Okay, you're up. >> Okay. Called over to the irregular Thursday, November 13th meeting of the city council. Stand for the pledge. I aliance 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. >> I need a motion and a second for the for the agenda. I'll make a motion. >> Scott, Dave, any discussion changes? >> None. Okay. [clears throat] Uh, all those in favor say I. >> I. >> All those opposed say no. Carries five to zero. Um, Recap the close session. >> Recap recap for the close session. >> How we close? >> We had another close session last time. >> Oh, that's right. >> I didn't put it off. >> Well, we can move it. I mean, >> no, it's right here. >> Huh? >> Yeah. >> To read that? >> Yep. It's got to read that. Do you want to bring it over for you, Mayor? What do you want to do? What? >> No, I've got the >> the packet should be >> two or three of there. >> Yeah, I can read it. >> Thank you very much. >> Oh, that's right. We had two of them. >> Yep. >> Okay. On October 28th, 2025, Dayton City Council will close meeting pursuant to Minnesota statutes 13D.03 for the purpose of considering strategy for labor negotiations, including negotiation strategies or developments or discussion and review of labor negotiation proposals. Persons present at the closed meeting were Mayor Dennis Fischer, council member Scott Salonic, Sarah Van Hastton, Stephanie Henderson, uh David Fashant, city administrators act out, assistant city administrator Emmy Bentine, city attorney Schmidt. During the closed meeting, the city council considered a labor agreement proposal from the Minnesota Teamsters Public and Law Enforcement Employees Union local number 320 presenting essentially supervisory employees at the conclusion of their consideration of the terms of the labor agreement proposal from the teamsters. City council directed the city administrator as to how to respond to the proposed terms during ongoing negotiations with the teamsters. That was a lot that said virtually nothing. Okay. Second one. On October 28th, 2025, Dayton City Council held a code of meeting pursuant to messa statute 13D0.05 subdivision 3C3 for the purpose to develop or consider offers or counter offers for the purchase or sale of real or personal property located at P 0912022430041. Persons present at the closed meeting were Mayor Dennis Fischer, council members Scott Salonic, Sarah Baston, Stephanie Anderson, David Vishant, city minister Zach Dow, city assistant city administrator Amy Benting, city attorney Amy Schmidt. During the closed meeting, city council considered the offer for the purchase of real property. City council gave direction to the city administrator on how to proceed with the ongoing negotiations. All right, that's the recap. We need a motion, a second for the consent. >> Can we pull an item out now or do we wait till after? >> Actually, yeah, we probably should have done it before when we set up the agenda, but we can do it now. >> Can we pull out item J, please? >> Absolutely. >> Out of consent. >> Okay. So, we will pull J out. I need a motion and second for the rest of consent. >> I'll second. Dave, Stephanie, and then any other discussion? >> Just one little comment. The uh on G the donation for modern enterprise, it seems a little cheesy the way it's worded. We got a $15 donation. It's It's actually a fee for having a unit in the Holly Dazzle, I believe. >> Holly Dayton. Yeah, it's a optional fee. So, this one, it was miscommunicated when we received the check. Okay. >> Um, and I thought, hm, this seems odd to be accepting this as a donation, but we will do that going forward for all of them this year. And then I'll check with our attorney and Zach on how we actually because I don't think we can accept an optional dollar amount without acknowledging that it's >> actually a donation. So, it's not just attach a fee to the unit, >> you know? >> Right. Yeah. I don't Yep. [clears throat] Yeah, >> we'll have to fix that. >> Yeah, >> that's good. Do you have anything more on that on consent? >> No. No. >> Anybody else? >> Stephanie did it for me. >> Oh, you're welcome. >> Anybody else have anything for consent? >> Okay. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> I. >> All those oppos say no. Sends us pass five to zero. And I'll move Jade after um cross services. Is that all right? >> Sure. So, you want to do open forum and then the updates, >> right? Just go through that stuff. >> Um, okay. So, that gets us to >> open forum. Do we have anybody here for open forum? Okay. Open forum limited to three minutes for non-aggenda items. State your name and address. No council action will be taken and items will be referred back to staff. Uh Keith Grover on the 13th in Fernbrook. Um I know um in meetings past we've had some discussion and some worry about Three Rivers Park District purchasing more property in the city of Dayton and I share that same concern. Um I did a little online survey on Henipin County's interactive web page. just looking at the different properties that they own and I came up with 236 acres which seems like a huge portion of Dayton. So I I I went online to see how many acres there actually were in Dayton and and that amounts to like 14 a.5% I believe if my math is right. Yeah, I've heard >> of the city of Dayton that actually belongs to Three Rivers Park District that takes off the tax roles that uh money that we're missing in per perpetuity, right? >> And it kind of bothers me. One thing that jumped out at me that I I clearly wasn't aware of and maybe you folks were Three Rivers a year ago, almost a year ago now, they bought the land on the south end of French Lake that used to be Bogs's property, I guess. I wasn't even I wasn't aware of that. So, that added kind of a another whack to wake me up. And I think I think you guys are on the right path to holding their feet to the fire to make them show to you why they should be purchasing more property in Dayton. But I think we're I think we're at the limit. I mean, Elm Creek Park is a big park, right? Three Rivers owns it. There's a fairly small portion that's in Champlain and I think an even smaller, if I remember right, portion that's in Maple Grove, but the largest portion of it is in in Dayton. And I think we really, really need to look hard before we let them purchase any more land in Dayton to lose that tax base moving forward. 14 and a half% is a big portion of our city to have in a park. Some of Three Rivers has some pretty cool amenities for people to use, but most of that land is it's not used. Most people don't see it. I mean, I've lived >> even right. Some they won't even let you walk on. >> So, I mean, I've lived in Dayton most of my life since I was a little kid. And I know what some of these areas look like. They won't let you go in there or even look at them anymore. had done some really crazy things that I' I've noticed. South of us towards Maple Grove, south of our farm, there used to be a huge blue heron rrookery back there along Rush Creek and Elm Creek came in there or three rivers or whatever you want to call it came in there and they bulldozed the path back for the nature center and they built all their cool little trails back there. Well, there aren't any blue herand there anymore. They chased them all away. They were literally, if you walk back there, there were thousands of them. These huge nests, they look like eagle's nest, [laughter] but they were blue herand. They're they're not there anymore. I watched them on along Fernbrook Lane between Elm Creek Road and the southern edge of Dayton. I watched them put a fence up, a smooth wire fence, [cough] like a barb wire without the barbs, just the twisted stranded wire. They put the fence up. I wonder what are they fencing? You know, these [snorts] people in they're not going to keep animals in or out that way. And then a [clears throat] few years later, I'm driving by going to work and they they're taking the fence down. I thought, well, they should have never put it up in the first place. Well, the next day when I went to work and came home, guess what? They put it back up again. They moved it into into the park 10 or 15 feet and they put the thing back up. We all paid for that, right? They put it back up. But if you drive there today, there's no fence. They took it all down. Again, I just there's so many things like that that they do that just irritate the heck out of me. Taking all that off our tax base and then having all of that land out there that no one can look at, no one can walk on, no one can see. So, I think you guys are on the right path. Keeping their feet to the fire and just not turning over anymore, of dating to them without a darn good reason. >> Thank you. >> Thanks. >> Thank you. Anybody else here for open forum? Anybody online? >> Um, yes. So, we do have someone who'd like to speak. So, you should be able to state your name and address and um say your concern. >> Hello. Um, oh boy. >> My name is Eric Supple. Live at 11534 Brabburn Trail in Dayton. Um, can you hear me? Okay. >> Yep. >> Oh, yeah. [laughter] Um, so I just wanted to uh speak up tonight um in regards to the recent um poll that was put out for the naming of I guess what is currently referred to as Park Service Area 21 um that's been kind of constructed through the summer. And um I just feel that the the five names that were narrowed down are could be better. Um candidly I did not um submit a um a proposed idea. I regret that at this point. Um, at first I thought maybe these were the only five submissions considering area 21 was still considered as one of the voting options, which to me seems like a very inappropriate um name that doesn't really meet any of the criteria listed as far as community relevance, creativity, or originality, excuse me, nature inspired themes or positive connotation. Um, a couple of the other um, of the five include the word sunburn. And although a creative play on names for Sundance and Brayburn, they certainly don't offer a positive connotation when you think of a park and relate that to Sunburns. Um, and then I think when you include the naming of uh or include the farm word in it, Dayton Farms Park, Sunburn Farms Park, it also implies that there's maybe some sort of farming component or farm component to the theme or amenities of the park. And I think accuracy should also be what we think of when we try to name this park. So, not trying to make it an overly um difficult [clears throat] task, but I uh I guess I'm just proposing that the naming process or how the final naming is considered um takes this into account and maybe reconsiders um the proposed names that we have on the table at this point to have a better long-term name for this park um that's um nearby where I live. Thanks for your time. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> Anybody else? Nobody. Okay, we'll close open forum and move to staff consult council updates. Yeah. >> Yep. Good evening, mayor, members of council. Um, two quick updates. House of Representatives camp investment committee was here today. Um, thank you for the mayor and for council member [clears throat] Fashion for showing up for that. I really appreciate it. Presentation was really good. Questions were really good. Um, very very thankful for that able to um be on that bonding tour. We were on the Senate bonding tour last couple of years, but this was the first year to be able to get the House bonding tour. I will call call out Representative Doo for getting us on the bonding tour. However, he was not present today and I was very disappointed not to see him after he said he was going to be here. So, I will call him out on that. Reminder that our council work session is next Tuesday for the South Water um system discussion. If you have any specific questions that you have that you want us to address or touch base on, please let myself or Jason Quizberg know so they're able to make sure that we get anything and all things addressed right away. Again, we know this will take multiple meetings. I don't mean to be that as a threat, but that's what it's going to take is multiple meetings to make this big of a decision. And so, we don't expect a major major answer at this meeting, but it is a good discussion to have. So, >> and that meeting is open to the public. >> It is open to the public. Yep. So, it's not a closed meeting. It will happen next Tuesday at 5:00 um here in the cuddle chambers. And I don't know if we'll do as a round table or if we'll do it at the dis whatever but it'll be basically just a discussion item. We'll have a small presentation which um Jason and his team is putting together um and myself and Marty will be there as well. So >> thank you very much. >> Are we going to um given the Met Council's response? Are we going to discuss that at some point? >> The A3 district. Yep. So that will be so John and I are meeting with the Met Council next week. I think that's what Wednesday I think is the day that we're scheduled to meet with them. We are going to make sure that all of our comments that we understand them to be to make sure that those are addressed and then the council will see that on November 25th at the council meeting. And that is our plan. Um and then hopefully be able to say here's where we're at. Here's what the ideas. We understand the general direction of what the council's at from what their approvals for the A3 um district were. So John and I are going to work together to make sure that we get the direction of the council while also trying to meet the recommendations and requirements from that council. So, if you have any major concerns, please let us know and we're happy to include you on the meeting. If you want to meet with my council with us, you most certainly can. I remember what the time of the meeting was, 1:00 or something like that in the afternoon. It's a virtual meeting. So, if you want to join, fantastic. Um, but I I can say that I personally know where the council's at with the A3 district and where we want to be at. Um, I think I understand the general concept, but if I'm off, let me know and I can touch base. So, >> I have a question. In the work session for water, are we talking all things water or are we just talking Dayton? >> Just just the south water system for Dayton. >> Do we have an update from Maple Grove? >> Yes. >> Okay. Will we be obviously given? >> We will give you as much as much as information we can beforehand. Um I know that Jason was working out of PowerPoint and we're trying to finish it up. I don't know if that'll come out on Monday or if we'll, you know, walk through it on Tuesday, but we'll do our best to get it out to you as soon as we possibly can. >> Okay. Just update. It'll just be in a PowerPoint or PDF format. So, it's not anything crazy or any staff reports, but >> that's perfect. Thank you. >> Yep. [clears throat] Thank you, >> Amy. >> No update. >> No update at this time, >> Chief. >> Mayor, members of council, uh, engine 21 returned today. >> So, that's getting put back into service as we speak. >> Awesome. >> No update from the PD at this time. >> Jason Scott. Oh, I should have brought this up uh earlier, I guess. Uh in the consent page seven, the minutes say budget is set at 36,51,000. I believe that should say tax capacity. >> That' be tax capacity. >> We're not matching Maple Grove yet. >> I'm Are you looking to short to approve? [laughter] >> I like the way they're >> I will fix the minutes. Thank you very much. Uh, and then, uh, I've already told you that I will not be here next Tuesday. So, that's all I got. >> Nothing. >> Um, I have nothing. >> Uh, nothing from me, J or Stephanie. >> I think that Oh, graphics on the vehicle for the fire department. We have an update that they are on the vehicle. >> They're on the vehicle. Cool. >> So, just kind of closing the loop. That big loop. >> What' you closing that big loop. >> I Yep. Wanted to close her up to know that it was done and >> Yep. done as of yesterday and then finish up today. So >> awesome. >> Okay. So then we are on to cross services presentation. >> Yeah, I think so. >> Yep. >> The console probably just pulling up the PowerPoint here. Um here >> cross services here. Thank you very much. >> Yeah. Uh mayor, members of council, thank you for having us here tonight. Um my name is David Fairing. Um this is Pat Schwelby. Um I we're here to just share a little bit about Cross Services. So thank you for time to tell a little bit about our story. Um I have been aware of the organization for a number of years, but um joined the board earlier this year. It's been just a tremendously uh fulfilling experience and we just wanted to share with you a little bit about our story and then um we'll talk a little bit about some potential next steps um when we get through it. >> Great. I am the um chief of operations at CrossS and I've been there for seven years. So I'm excited to fill you in a little bit what's going on. Uh first of all, our mission is to meet basic needs and enhance the well-being of individuals and families in our community by providing essential food services along with compassionate, supportive resources. Um as far as history, we are 48 years old. Um hard to believe. We were born in 1977 and um we moved out in our current warehouse where we're located in 2004. And um are most of you are you all familiar with where we're located? >> Okay, great. Um something that I think is really kind of amazing uh this past year we had over 20,000 visits to cross services. Um the services that we provide, we um our main service that we do is food shelf and providing food for our families. They get to come uh two times a month and uh self shop which is awesome. They can come and pick their own items that they want. Uh we are a drop in. Uh they do not need to make uh appointments and what's wonderful about that is that um there's no technology barriers. So, we have such a big diversity of of people um that we want to eliminate any barriers that we can so we can get them in the door. Uh financially, we have a uh peace of mind program. It's our financial assistance. And so, um these are people that are coming in, crisis is driving them, what's going on in their lives, right? And so, loss of job, are you sick? Um taking care of family members. And so many times we might see some people then are um you know needing to pay one month's back rent they can sustain but because that crisis maybe they had to do a car repair and they're living paycheck to paycheck and so then we're able to um take care of that um rent bill so then they can get back on their feet and they just are able to move along. Uh we have a shop inside of our warehouse and um so people can shop there. It's very affordable. Uh we have vouchers for those that can't right now. Lots of coats and hats and mittens. Um hint hint if you have any that you want to drop by for us. They all go out for free to our families. So um really grateful for that. We'll probably give away I would say somewhere around um a thousand coats this year and we have wonderful people that uh drop off those donations and you are so welcome to do that. Um we have some family programs peaceful dreams uh program and that's we believe that every child should have a bed and um the recent statistic I heard for out kind of in our uh northwest quadrant out here uh one in 20 children do not have a bed. So that means they are sleeping with a sibling on the floor on the sofa with parents. So our goal is to um get them a bed to sleep in. Um and then we have a scholarship program enrichment programs for kids after school. So they can be in sports and music and dance. And a big one is to get them in driver's ed because if you can get another driver in your family, that's a potential income source. When mom and dad have the car home, then they can go out and um possibly have a a job. We give away backpacks in August. We collect them in November. And um we give away about 1,200 backpacks this year. And then we have a birthday on holiday shop. So we're getting geared up in December. Our families will shop for their toys for their kids. And again, we probably have about 1,200 children that we represent um that [clears throat] uh birth to 10 years old get gifts and 11 to 18 get gift cards. Our service model, so um we collect food from various different ways. We're so fortunate. We have a really robust food rescue program. We pick up from 20 different locations and I have two 26ft box trucks that are refrigerated and two full-time drivers. They leave about a quarter to 6:00 in the morning and they're going out to the grocery stores in our area. So, we pick up from Sam's Club, Costco, Walmart, Trader Joe's, Buyer Lee's, Aldi, a couple of Cubs, Targets. You kind of get the idea. So, grateful for that. Um, which brings in great food. I purchase food, so I have to fill in all the gaps, all the basics. Um, we like to make sure we have multicultural food and I purchase those from our, uh, food banks, Second Harvest and the food group. And then, um, we appreciate all the donations. So, that helps fill our shelf stable food, um, on our shelves. And we're just so grateful for all the drives that people have, uh, for us. And we're in in big drive time right now. We have an advocacy program where we have family advocates. And so when our clients come in, they are going to meet with an advocate, learn about our program, how to get on the food program and then what are all the non-food things that they might need supported and what can we do for them. Um we believe in a dignity model. So we want them to come and self shop for themselves and have their own grocery shopping experience which is going to empower them to shop and um it gives them back the opportunity of choice. So they're in cross because of different things going on and many choices are being taken away from them. So if you can come and have a normal experience it's kind of a decompressing thing. Go shop, pick the things that you like in your family and you want to cook with. So uh we're very happy that we can provide that. Um I work with two food banks like I said um in which to uh have better buying power, purchasing power. Those are all those grocery stores I was talking about where we pick up. And guess what? We have two quick trips in Dayton that we pick up from and we're so excited about the new one. Have I don't know if you guys have stopped at the truck stop, but it's awesome. I've been there a few times and gassed up. So, so grateful for that. You guys are a big piece of that for us. Um and they are wonderful um donors to food that we pick up. We go there every single day to both those places. um our community drives from all different types of um places within the community and um we couldn't do what we what we do without them. um the need. So one in three motans are financially insecure and so um one of the things that obviously we provide is having those household visits come out and if they can grocery shop um with us and take away a whole cart of groceries which might be like a hundred pound it's probably $200 $300 worth of groceries that they're saving that money goes stays in their account and can go out and pay their insurance bill or help pay towards their rent things like that. So that's real value and we want to make sure that um we can provide that for our families. We have uh one in four that don't have stable housing and so this past year we served 557 families that came for some type of financial assistance last year. Um one in five cannot afford to buy the food that they need. And so um this is the amount of food that went out to our families last year. 1,931,000 plus. It's kind of staggering, isn't it? Uh 26% of our households with children are food insecure in Minnesota. Uh 38% of our um families that we serve are children. And then nearly 33% of motan seniors are economically insecure and one in four individuals um at Cross are seniors that were served. I don't think we're going to be able to get into this today. So see if we can move on here. Um so how we're currently funded to kind of get an idea um we 93 cents of every dollar donated goes into our programs and so um our community um you can see that it's a pie and it's built of many different parts here. Uh the biggest percentage of um our funds come in through individuals. Then you're going to see that's at 40%, you'll see uh 13% from corporations and businesses and uh community organizations, grants, etc. events, faith communities, and other [music] type of things. Um in kind uh food donations last year, I shared that number with how much uh went out. We kind of average that a grocery bill for a families about four $475 um for a month. Um, our inind clothing that we received for donations and that was distributed was 19,000 pounds. Um, we sell our clothing for $3 a pound. It's cheaper than like a garage sale. All those funds go back into programming for the client, so they benefit from it. Um, and we have vouchers for those that are unable to [clears throat] do that. Um, volunteers, looking for volunteers. If anybody wants to come on out or you want to do a a small group activity for your team, let me know. We have some fun things you can do. Um but it's um last year we had 37,000 hours of volunteering. And currently um we have about 240 volunteers a week. That's what makes us hum and how we can get everything done that we have to do. um the demand, everything that's going on. We are up 29% in clients since last year. So, we're really feeling it for lots of different reasons. Um economics, rise in food prices, all those things drive families to come to cross. And we sort of see it about 3 4 weeks after whatever's happening out, you know, in society and economically. Um those are the things that drive people that are on the bubble drive them over, you know, that they just need a little more support and help that they just can't quite make it. Our service area, so food, everyone from the state of Minnesota is technically welcome to come to cross services. I'm in compliance. That's just one of my titles that I hold at cross to make sure that we are operating properly that we the way that we need to. Um and so we are open to um anyone who can come for food is fine. We had 92 cities represented out of the state that uh people came to us. Non-food services um those are reserved for our six local cities as you can see Champlain Corker Dayton Maple Grove and Rogers. And those are going to be all of our financial assistant programs and the things I had kind of described before for you. Chad um Lanners is our executive director and um he had another commitment tonight so he sent me and um anyway I think a lot of you know Chad he's amazing a lot of energy fun to work with um and I so if you're interested to um want to come on out for a tour Chad and I would love to take you for a tour come on out and um actually see our facility and what we're doing it's it's um it's pretty awesome and uh if you want to host to drive, let me know. I shared a little bit about volunteering. We have a few different volunteer opportunities for groups or individuals and you can talk to Tracy. Uh other than that, thank you for letting us uh present tonight. >> Yeah. Um again, we think we appreciate the time to be here. A lot of what we're trying to do is just continue to raise awareness um on a multiple fronts. So, um I think what we find is both just a lot of everyday citizens in the communities that we serve really aren't aware of the services that are available to them. Um and so that we want to make sure that that is is out there and understood. Um and then secondarily looking to uh we'd love to have you guys just come see the scale of the operation if you've never been. Um it's really something to see. I think it's pretty powerful to see in action. Um and then also, you know, as we think about how that evolves, just helping to be an advocate, um again, just on the awareness front outside of the individuals, but so your local um just any community organizations, um businesses, you know, we run off of fundraising and then very importantly that Pat uh articulated, volunteers are what really makes kind of the operation go. And so um that's what we just would love your partnership on over time. So, >> I have a question actually. Um, [clears throat] how would we connect residents to you guys? So, do they something online? Do they just come in? I know you said there weren't those that barrier. So, I'm just wondering requirements and how would we connect our residents or how would they get um their your services? >> I brought some little cards for you. I'm going to do some leave behind. So, I'll grab those out for you. Um, our website of course and they can just drop in. So it's basically come during our hours and it's 9 to 2 Monday through Friday and Thursday until 7. Those are our client hours. So they can just drop in. We'll take it from there. They can meet with an advocate. They can find out all our services, how we can help them, and they will not be turned away for food. >> Okay. >> Thank you so much. maybe tangibly like on your website or in any like city publications or things just if there's ways to um >> link them to us. >> Y >> that would be great. Is that something we could put get some cards up? >> Yes. And now it's clunky. >> Yes. >> I figured there was some sort of like barrier. >> Not because we don't appreciate cross services. It's just because it has to be all or nothing. So it's going to be >> how do we get around >> and how do we figure out where it's the cut off for who we should be >> right >> know for the holy day we're doing a food drive as part of that and not forcross. >> Yeah. So we do things on half forcross like we'll do I think we do the coat drive too as well. Is that part of it as well? >> For the PD >> is that well I think that's for the PD. Is that for something else? >> I don't know if that's >> uh I think it's separate the drive >> that's not cross. Oh, it's a competition between different people. >> I'm just thinking that um you know, like you had highlighted, a lot of these kinds of services people are in need of, especially right now. And you don't know it's an option unless you know it's an option. And so just making sure that we're connecting the residents that we can. Apologies. Um so I appreciate the cards and thank you so much. >> Great. >> Thank you. >> Um I just had a quick question too. Uh sorry. Um, when I first saw your location, I wasn't sure is there do you have to is there a religious requirement? >> No. >> Okay. Cuz that was one thing that I wasn't certain of. Um, and so I think there might be some residents who are also not certain if they have to be. >> Um, and are LGBTQ families welcome? >> Absolutely. >> Because they are not welcome everywhere. So, >> thank you. >> Everyone is is welcome. >> I appreciate that. >> Yeah. Thank you. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Uh back to item J. >> Yes. >> You want me to go first? >> It doesn't matter. I just have a general statement. So, if you want to go first, you definitely can. >> Well, I have a general statement. Oh, >> um I'm going to I'm going to make a uh a motion right away. Basically, is where I'm at. I want to make the motion that we do not accept this res resignation and uh allow this individual to extend a medical leave of 90 days. I can say more but I won't for now. >> Yeah, this this is frustrating because we have nothing. Um, >> and the resignation letter was a halfs sentence text >> and I'd certainly like to know a lot more, but >> I don't know how we do this. >> Can I maybe make my statement and then we can move forward? I careful what you say. >> I agree and I'm probably privy to more information, but that's okay. Um, I just want to express my concerns. um especially with this situation and um I'm trying very carefully to not out anyone although I have permission to say what I need to say. Um but I think that personally I am not in the position to accept a forced resignation from this department or any department. um this individual does not wish to resign. Um I also think that this particular situation warrants um more investigation into how we got to this point. Um, and I think that, um, you know, again, this sets a precedent for our culture as a city and as a department as far as firefighters um, feeling safe to seek help when they need it. And I think that we I want to say owe, but that's the only word that comes to my mind. We owe it to this individual to do our due diligence and make sure that the way that this was handled is in alignment with um you know the the state statutes in alignment with you know [clears throat] there's nothing that was nefarious. I'm trying again to not out any individual, but I guess I'll just say that when a firefighter seeks help after diff like difficult calls and is cleared for duty by their treating physician and we decide that we don't believe that that's true. I think we owe it to them to investigate fully into how it was handled and what exactly was done. And telling them to resign or we will terminate you should not be the answer. And I don't think that giving a 3mon leave is adequate time to assess somebody's ability to come back and perform their duties. And so I would also be in alignment with extending a leave that was denied while this individual continues the work that they've been doing. Um, as well as an investigation not done by us, maybe by our HR firm that we pay for into how we as a city handled the situation and what liability we have placed on the city by what we've already the process we've already done, I guess. That's very vague and I apologize, but again, I'm not trying to out anybody, but I think it sets a precedent for where we stand on mental health in general, especially within the fire service. Um, so I guess that's my two cents. I guess I struggle with the whole thing because, you know, we're in a in a public meeting and I think we're >> walking ash >> a really difficult line for HIPPA violations. We're talking about somebody's uh medical history and treatment and I'm really uncomfortable having that in an open session. I don't know if that can be a closed session because there's seems to be such a limited opportunity to for that somehow. Seems absurd to me that this has to be out out in public and um you know this certainly in my view also warrants more information because what we had in the packet isn't isn't much to go on. So I guess that's my two cents on it. >> I will clarify. I had permission to share everything that I did beforehand and Scott's here tonight so he can attest to that. >> So, >> well, and the problem is a few of us are, you know, clearly in the dark. Um, I I I just seen the text and I knew there was more to the story or had to be more to the story. So I I just All right. So you've made a motion to [clears throat] not accept the resignation and give this gentleman at least a 90-day extension. >> What is the path forward? because allowing a 90-day extension, while I agree with you that this individual should be afforded that, especially with the severity of what we're talking about, I'm not sure that I agree that there is a a path forward where we aren't exactly in this spot again in 3 months. So, like what is the what is the path forward? What is the 3 months for? And at the end of it, are we in the same spot we are and we're just prolonging an inevitable end, I guess, is my question. >> Well, >> and I don't know that you have a definite answer to that. So, I don't >> It depends on how deep into this conversation we we want to go because I do know a few things. Uh I did do a little little bit of research on this. Um I guess to me whether or not I I do not know what's in any reports 100%. Um I do have one report that was given me by this individual. Um I've also uh sat down and talked with this individual and the reason that he is not or that this is coming up is one counselor gave or one counselor gave a uh ability or >> be careful what you're about to say. Zach or Scott cuz again >> I think what you're hinting at is the process that was taken and why did >> I'm not sure of that. I don't know what process it normally would go through. Well, I think that's why HR should be the one to handle these issues and to make sure that we did follow the correct process because I have legitimate concerns that we may >> we may have followed a process we thought or believed was the best forward, but I don't know that I don't know that it's in alignment with disability protections, etc. like I don't know that we are not not at fault. Does that make sense? And I don't want to say too much, but I feel like it warrants look into the process that we followed. What is the next step? What can we do? And maybe that is a three-month extension to figure that out and to figure out what the next steps are. Right. Well, >> I think what you're talking you're talking two different things here than you're talking two two things. I want to deal with extending this individual first >> and I don't have a problem if we dig into what happened and and where we should go forward. I don't have a problem with that. >> I just think that gives a clear path forward as far as if there's no if there's no path that we're going down, the 3 months doesn't mean anything. Do you know what I mean? So, like if you don't have a road map for that 3 months, we're just delaying 3 months and we're going to be sitting right back in this spot. If the intention isn't to figure out, >> maybe yes or no. >> I would I would hope not. I >> I don't know how we figured that out here. I think >> we can't figure that out here. >> We We just basically have to think act on what what's in front of us. And >> so, we deny it and then we grant the extension. He was not afforded. That's what I'm getting. and then we can handle the other stuff while that extension has happened. Right. >> Well, number one, I don't know that he was denied an extension. I I don't know that answer. >> The email from Zach that I get was provided said that they would not be giving an an extension farther. Resign or we will terminate you. So, I think that we as a council need to say that we are okay with the extension because the policy says three consecutive months or three months out of the calendar year. >> So, if we don't say yes, we're granting a 3-month extension to that. >> It doesn't have to be given. I guess are we directing them to give a 3 months instead of the resignation? >> I do I do want to clarify one comment that I had in my email just to make sure that it's clear what my email said. It says the fire department allows up to 90 days of unpaid leave. You've been out on paid leave since July of 2025. The city extended the leave to allow time to complete the fitness for duty test or fitness for duty assessment. Has able to return to active duty at this time, we elected, you know, you elect to resign from your employment or we can move forward with formal termination of your employment. >> So if we don't accept this resignation, >> I'm assuming the implication is he stays as part of the paid on call, but is he stay on leave? that is something I have to work with um ABDO and HR on. So >> okay the um I will say that I did work with Abdo and HR on that email and everything part of this process um that I got brought into um I was not not at the beginning. So I will say that the beginning process was not handled by Abdo but this part was with myself and um we by doing a resignation all of the information is not given to council which is maybe where we're at. If it was a termination item, um, then we'd be able to share more information to council for that action item. I don't know if that's the best item for that employee or that person. Um, that would be up to them and I I don't know. That's again, that's what they're that's up to them and and the individual city of the Rome if he wants to have all that out there. I don't know. Um we acted I acted on the behalf of the city that was trying to be best for both the employee and the city itself but if the council doesn't want to accept it um part of the personal policy and council stopped to my office today to see what else we could do and part of the personal policy is to extend 90 days for a medical leave. >> Mhm. >> Um which council can do. I cannot do that. That has to be a council. >> The council can do that based on a medical leave. So >> I could have I could have told you that. So, council member Sonic stopped in to ask what we could do and >> I don't also want to say that I don't think Council Member Henderson's comments aren't real either that we could be in the same situation in 90 days as well. And I I want to make sure that's clear too. And I don't know I don't want to paint false picture that we're going to be in a different spot. we're in a different spot and we have more. >> But I just want to make sure that's clear that we may be on the same spot and I know >> this is a touchy subject to talk about in a public meeting. So >> yeah, >> it's very hard. >> We've had a few of these and it just is hard. So >> So the motion on the table is what, Scott? >> To not accept the resignation and give him another 90day leave. And how will we address we'll address the process because I think it's we're in uncharted waters. >> We have Yeah. So myself and HR will be handling the issue if the 90 days are extended. It'll be HR and myself and obviously Amy because she's HR. So um Abdul will be spearheading the process because we are in uncharted waters as well. be as as employment we I've never had to handle this issue. So that's an HR thing and >> that's why we have an HR firm to do that. So >> Yep. >> You're concerned the process that occurred or is going to occur? >> Both. >> Yeah. >> I'm concerned about both processes. Um, >> well, >> uh, >> I don't know how we I would like to find out a lot more about what we're really talking about. And I don't know how >> in the end there's a a test for, um, your ability to come back. >> Fit a fit for duty assessment. >> Yep. >> Right. But I have concerns about the nature of how we mandated that, decided on that and forced that as well as oh god, >> how does something like that get resolved? Would would individual council members talk to the HR group or how how do we how do we >> um I don't mayor mayor and council members I don't know the answer because that's it's this is why it's very yes touchy. Um I would say that that would probably be the first step but I'm going to I will if this is the discussion item and that's where the direction I'm going to have to follow up with HR tomorrow and or Monday figure out what our next steps are because I want to make sure that I'm following the process too. be because that's why we have an HR firm and that's what I've used. >> So what happens if >> um if if we don't go farther with Scott's motion and I'm not saying where we should go with that yet. I'm just curious though if if this item is tabled then what is the what happens with the employee? >> We would have to grant an extension no matter what, right? Yeah, you'd have to grant an extension. I mean the so the as a city minister I can grant x number of days which is 30 days. That's what I can grant it as an extension of leave without going over my authority. 90 days is what the council can do up to a year of 90 days extensions. So um so including all of the leave, you know, if that makes sense. But after that we need to make a decision. So that's based on the personnel policy. So, you're asking if it's possible that if this employee um if let's just say it was accepted doesn't mean that they can never be employed again, >> right? >> No, I understand that part. >> Same thing with the extension. It can get extended again and it can be >> looked at in 90 more days. I'm just well clearly there are wide variations in understanding of this situation across this table right some people know a lot about it I know what was in the packet essentially and you know what little I hear on the street so it's really hard to make an informed decision on on what's in in front of us and that doesn't make me very comfortable >> and in this situation. I don't think unless you have knowledge of the individual or that conversation, we legally can't share with you what that information is. >> Yeah, understood. I I'm quite familiar with how HIPPO works and how you get on the wrong side of that. Uh it just you know we're in this weird void when we're asked to accept something and especially the way it's written it's like how can you not say well what's what's this all about and the answer is well you don't get to know but you still have to decide you mean when you just said that were you referring to HIPPA or were you referring to a um disciplinary >> Yep to HIPPA Okay. >> So, there's a professional that did an evaluation that you won't ever get to see. That's not anybody's information to have. So, you're either trusting a professional to do their job or you're not. >> Which professional? The first one or the second one? >> Because we didn't trust the first one and we mandated a second one. >> I only know of the one. >> There's two. All right. >> I just it's it's messy and I just don't feel like we've done our due diligence. That's my thing. >> So, if the council would like to if um I want to address council fashion's point of the what if we don't what if we just table it. Um we would have to have some sort of extension of the leave. I think that's what we I as staff I prefer that because that gives me at least direction that we're following the personal policy as best we possibly can. Um, knowing that this situation is already sticky enough, I'm trying to follow as policies as best as I possibly can. So, >> one or two less sticky, not more sticky. >> I'm I'm trying my best. >> This is always good. >> Try my best. >> I'll second Scott's motion. >> Okay. Any more discussion? >> All right. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> I. All those opposed say no. That carries five to zero. Yes. >> On to less sticky things. >> Okay. Um item K. >> So this is a public hearing. >> Yep. >> Um we have approval of resolution 76. This is the transferring of the local board authority and appeals of equalization, power, and duty to Henipin County. Go to that open book like we've talked about previously. So, it's kind of to be more transparent, give residents more time, um, and not have the false hope of coming here, having a change, and then having to go to Henipin County and having it reversed anyway. >> Yep. >> Cuz they don't care what we say. >> I do want the council to know that Maple Grove switched open book this year, and they've been local board for >> which was very surprising to us that they switched. >> So, they have a whole separate board of specialized. >> That's correct. So, >> wow. >> And they I'm guessing the county also didn't listen to them either, which is why they were like, "This is a waste of everyone's time." >> Possibly. I don't know. [laughter] >> Any questions for staff? >> Um, so does a public hearing? >> Yep. >> We'll open the public hearing. Is anybody here to speak to this issue? Anybody online? All right. Yes. [laughter] Not because I know anything about this. is because we don't know anything about them. This >> name and address. >> Keith Grover. >> Try to try to speak in the mic. [laughter] >> Speak up. >> Speak in the mic. Thank you. >> Um so that we're knowledgeable enough on this subject to know whether we should be speaking up or not. Can you be in a little more give us in a little more detail on what's going on? What I've just picked up by reading the the packet and and listening to you folks just for a few minutes here tonight is that the board that folks here from the city that people would come to that would complain about their >> valuation >> valuation of their property >> classification. Um >> you guys have made a decision on some folks and the county has overturned that decision. Do they do >> all of the time? part of the time >> that one parcel [clears throat] they did multiple, didn't they, with a guy small farm? >> Yeah. Um, you know, for the most part, the the the disputes that we see already get handled by the counties and and I think almost every one we've looked at was actually decided in the property owner's favor. It's just there's been at least yeah classification that they overruled us on. And I think there was um >> there was one valuation I believe >> there was one valuation that >> that was the LA just this last year was that it >> and that was just so blatantly >> wrong but anyways. Yeah. So that's the deal. >> Okay. So the the procedure then would be we wouldn't do it here anymore. >> Correct. Where would people have to go in order to >> So on residents tax statement it will say that we're now an open book and that you'll go to Henipin County. It will say the date. it will say the the phone number that you call. >> Um >> they um you would still reach out to um the assessing office um and hopefully resolve it before that open book and then you don't necessarily have to be in person because they can read it in. So if you worked it out with the assessing office first, then they read it into the meeting. So you don't necessarily have to drive to wherever they hold that meeting. Okay. >> And you get more time, too. Correct. You do get more time. Yeah. There's less time if I remember correctly. >> I I would just my opinion. I've never gone through this before. Probably should have a few times, but I just haven't. Um I would think that you're going to get a whole lot fewer people questioning that if they have to go to Hannipa County rather than talking to you folks here in the city first. And I was that's why I was just curious as to what percentage of of items that you folks decided on that they actually overturned down there and are we just beating people to the wolves or >> or are telling people that you know if they're intimidated about Henipin County courthouse. >> I don't think they don't go to the courthouse. >> Well, they go to county office. The first step still currently and in the future would be to work with the assessor. >> And most of what we see the the assessors come forward with their book of of properties and and say and read the addresses into the record and so on and say they've come to an agreement with the property owner and this is what it is. And so it's there's no action taken by us except to accept it. Right? And then there's a couple every year where there's a, you know, a different kind of a dispute that they haven't been able to resolve and then we make a a determination on it, but then it goes to the county. So, it's more like our work is a recommendation, which we did not understand in the past, and the county is free to do whatever they want with it. And so, we feel like we're giving people a false sense of hope when we say, "That makes sense to us. We'll we'll change it. We'll overrule it, whatever." and then they go on to the next step and it just gets tossed out. >> So be more efficient. >> Many people have came here anyways to to get us to overrule. It was >> um I mean over the years it's been a a few but I don't know that we we overruled many but um the ones we have a good percentage they tossed. >> So all right thanks for the information. Thank you. Okay. Anybody else? Okay. I will close the public meeting on this. Um, I need a motion and a second. >> I'll make a motion. I'll second. >> I have a question. >> Go ahead. On the at the end of the resolution, it it says that um you know, therefore, be it resolved that the Dayton City Council hereby transfers its authority to Henipin County Board indefinitely as provided for in Minnesota's statute something something. Um indefinitely. Does that mean we don't get to revisit this in the future? >> Um indefinitely just means until you want to revisit it. It's a It would be a simple reverse resolution and you could go back to um >> Yeah. And definitely mean does mean means that we won't have to approve this every year essentially because otherwise we'd have to approve it every single year >> or you would have to pick a time frame and then make sure that it's revisited and then >> [clears throat] >> um so it's not indefinitely like it can't be reversed back if that was the desire of the council. Yeah, I'm I was just reading it as meaning more like permanent and >> you know things change so it may be something we would want to read. >> No, I just wasn't putting a time frame on it. >> Mhm. >> For it to be in effective. >> Any other discussion? All right. All those in favor say I. >> All those opposed say no. >> Carries 5 to zero and we are on to item L. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of the city council. Uh, tonight you're asked to engage in a discussion, um, regarding an interim use permit for home extended business at 13401 Zansbar Lane North approved in 2023. Um so uh subject to the conditions listed in resolution 28-2023 which was also in your packet um staff has conducted annual inspections over the last two years as uh required um per the interim use permit approval and has not found the property to be in complete compliance with all of the conditions of approval to this point. Um follow-up inspections have occurred and it city staff has been working with the applicants to bring the property to compliance. Um [clears throat] just to highlight a couple of the items that were in the staff report. Um nuisance issues. This property is subject to the nuisance code uh within the prop within the uh city code. Um the there has been uh routinely accumulations of junk on the property or what is classified as junk per the city code definition. Uh whether that is associated with the business area or out in the uh residential portion of this property. Um this has been an ongoing uh issue and uh the applicants have stated that they are working on resolving this issue. Um there's also been some identified construction activity going on on site. So that is uh to um answer to some of the issues regarding nuisances as well. Um staff has also found that uh there have been business activities operating within these storage units. Um and staff has identified those areas. Uh since then the applicants have removed those tenants from the property. However, there is potentially um still one um operating there, a landscape company and one of the units. Um though uh to this point I have not had any uh physical evidence uh captured regarding that. Uh just knowing that there has been utilization of space on this property for a business to come uh ga grab its items. potentially employees are parking on site um and then uh heading off to a job site and then at the end of the day coming back um and dropping the things off and leaving. Um and the other uh thing that had been ongoing is related to the commercial vehicles. Um from my understanding this was approved prior to myself being in this position. Um and looking back at the minutes of that discussion at the planning commission level, uh there was a question raised of whether this needs to be a part of a condition of approval to not allow commercial um trucks or vehicles to be stored on the property. The planning commission came to a consensus that while this is in our city code that Zanzibar is not utilized for commercial traffic, so there's no need to be as a condition of approval. um yet uh in your packets you can see within the photos there has been uh storage of commercial vehicles on the site as well. Um so those are those are things that are ongoing. I will say that uh two weeks ago on October 31st I did follow up with the property owners um and uh walked the site and uh shared pictures or photos of the existing conditions today um and tried to highlight some of those areas that I had mentioned regarding um the commercial or the construction activity, excuse me. Uh also within your packets you uh there was kind of a timeline related to when the previous owner had owned this property and utilize the space for storage of u trailers, vehicles, whatever it may have been at that time. Um as well as kind of an a timeline for the aerials that uh show when the property ownership changed. um a a date which is the 2023 um was the essentially taken 2 weeks prior to them coming to the planning commission for a public hearing to request this intermuse permit. Um and then 2024 was a year after that that had lapsed and uh uh the site is shown up there. So, uh staff did uh believe that a month ago I provided an update to you in a uh um a weekend or weekly update uh regarding the ongoing uh working on this property. And uh staff under the direction of the city council was requested to um put this presentation together. Um ask the property owners to come in and discuss uh the existing business that is occurring on the site. um they're here to answer any questions that you may have and uh hoping to get a little bit of an understanding of uh what to expect moving forward from both the city council and the uh property owners. So uh with that, I'm happy to answer any initial questions and as I mentioned, the applicants are and the property owners are here currently. So >> anybody have any questions for staff? >> Do you know about how much time all this has taken? So, I I first went out there, I believe, in uh September of 2024, and I'd say that uh I've done six off the top of my head, it's probably seven um inspections related to just followup or if there's any time that I get an inquiry from someone driving by or whatever, asking questions or raising a concern, I'll also go out there as well. I'll say that uh it doesn't take me too too much time to go out there and do a walk around or meet with the property owners. It might be a half hour to an hour at most. Um, but uh those would be the the times. And uh I will say too that uh the latitude that uh that staff has worked with the property owner of those six or seven um inspections that I've done, I would say four of them would have been routine like standard operations for city staff to go out there and conduct. Um, so I'd say that there was roughly three additional inspections that occurred. Um, but uh, yeah, that to answer your question, yeah, >> there has been fire inspections as well. I don't know if the chief has numbers on how many times the >> assistant chief or the chief's been out there, but I know there's been a multiple of fire inspections as well done at the same time or whatever. >> Mayor, members of council, yeah, that's accurate. We've been out uh Chief Astrup's been out uh a few times uh in conjunction with community development with John and and Hayden and that um property owner has been responsive in that capacity to making those changes for us. Um I I I have recently for what it's worth is I did issue a $500 fine for burning complaint. Um they were issued a burn permit. um went went out um they did not burn the pile that they said they were going to burn according to the burn permit. Burn permit was um taken away and pictures were taken of the uh stuff that was burned. Um so there's a bunch of uh inappropriate material uh in that burn pile. >> When was that, Gary? Do you like a month? Like how long ago was that? I'm just trying to get a timeline. >> Yep. I so this is the second fine that I've issued to the property. Um issued a $100 fine I think a couple years ago if I recall. Um and I work with Zach on this on this time. Um this is in the last month or so 45 days. This recently. >> So recently. >> Yes. >> And Chief Hendrickson, could you just clarify with me in terms of assistant chief uh Astrop uh attending the site and doing an inspection on the buildings? Um letters were also issued in that regard. Um and uh follow-up inspections were um carried out to verify that those fire safety hazards were resolved within the buildings themselves. >> That is correct. Yep. >> Any more questions staff? >> Not for staff. >> Okay. You come forward. name and address. Um, do you want the address? >> China. Yeah. >> Where do you live? >> Where do you live? Yeah. >> Oh, we live at 10100 Hillside Lane West in Minnetonka. >> Okay. >> So, first and foremost, I thought home extended businesses were for people who lived at the home and that's what made it a home extended business. Is that >> Yeah, that is our uh along the business is also owned with us by our son Noah and he lives at the property. >> He does. He doesn't live in Texas. >> No, he doesn't live in Texas. He lives at the property. Okay. >> And uh I just have to ask I I don't know what you're talking about about the most recent >> Oh, I do. >> Oh, you do? >> But we didn't get a >> I didn't get anything from you. And we sent the uh notification to the property address. >> Oh, got it. Okay. Because it's supposed to be a home extended business. You're supposed to live there. [clears throat] So that's why. Yeah. >> I think that came up originally at the >> Okay. >> That's your son >> and he lives there. >> Got his driver >> etc. >> Okay. So, you're on a path to cleaning this up, and it sounds like staff is at least seeing a path forward. [clears throat] >> Yeah, we're obviously uh interested in complying with whatever needs to be done to move forward. >> Yeah. >> With the least amount of uh current on city time as possible. >> So, I know one time cuz they're not supposed to be commercial vehicles there and they're there all the time. Um, for the record, I live Kitty Corner from you, so I see them all the time. Um, at least once, right before an inspection, the semis were moved into the woods so that they were not visible. The inspection by the city happened, and they were moved back out into the property after the inspection was done. >> So, exactly like that. But there was there was several that were moved uh into just because they were lacking places to move them. So, we were under pressure just to get rid of them, get them get them out, whatever. And as you can well you can see that picture like any everything that >> uh he has stated so far we went we even went one step further which you wouldn't even know about uh particularly with the fire department when they came and inspected they suggested they suggested that we would fire extinguishers everywhere. Uh it wasn't a requirement and I'm like well we might as well just do it just to get amp it up a little bit get everybody more comfortable. So we did that. That's why they've had multiple inspections for fire extinguishers and just inspecting units in general. Uh any of the large semis of which we're there are we we were okayed for semi-trailers. >> Uh >> what do you mean you were okay for semi-trailers? There's not supposed to be commercial traffic on Zanzibar. >> We our original IUP allowed for us to have four trailers that were originally there. They were just the trailers, not the semis. >> Because they were originally on the property, they did not require a commercial vehicle to take them on and off. So, they were okay, those four trailers. Then, they're no longer there. >> And but we were fine because >> well, my cameras weren't working apparently as much as they should. Uh like the red truck in there, everything that is. So, even if there was a suggestion of the IP like, okay, let's just get rid of everything that's even possibly anything. exactly what you're saying. So, we got rid of all of it. So, there aren't any there's no semi-trailers there at all anymore. There's nothing. So, we got rid of everything that we thought or the is uh stating is we just got rid of everything. Uh it's just it was easier to to do that than make a problem out of it. Um there was a few things that got got pushed in. There's a um I think you just had this in one of your other city your meetings. Um there's that's not a trailer. It is a held storage box or whatever. >> Yeah. >> Uh that's still there. I think that kind of got grandfathered in. Um I don't remember what else, but I mean everything else that is >> You still have Do you still have a tenant that's problematic or >> No, we actually just got rid of the last >> problematic. We had some problematic people and we did >> Why were there people there at all though? We were never allowed to have businesses run out of here. >> Well, if you understand how to get rid of someone, a tenant that's problematic. >> Well, I'm guess I'm I guess my question is why were they there in the first place? >> Because >> we rented storage space to people, >> right? And they all unit to someone from doing it >> and then they come in and then they start doing something that we didn't allow them to do and then we say, "No, you're not allowed out." And then they don't comply and it takes a while to get them out. My understanding was your IEP was to allow like storage of recreational vehicles. >> It was allowed to allow storage >> storage >> and we did make some leases for the interior spaces for people to store things. >> And is that allowed in our extended home business? >> I don't recall that being one of the >> mayor members of the city council. I'll just clarify that it was uh permitted for indoor and outdoor cold storage. Um, essentially I think the intent of the planning commission, the city council at the time was to um have this type of home extended business reflect what would you what you would normally see at a uh at a a U-Haul storage facility. >> I was on the planning commission and that was not our intent. It was for the storage of recreational vehicles. That was that was the intent. That was always the intent from the planning commission. And I wasn't on the council at the time it was approved because that was with the business that was operating out of there prior to your taking on ownership of this land. They stored recreational vehicles. Traffic upped a little bit in fall and there was a little bit more traffic in spring and that was it. And it was always neat and tidy and clean and there were never semis and there were never commercial vehicles and there were not businesses running out of there. It was the storage of boats and trailers. That was it. came in in fall, left in spring, and that was what was approved at planning commission at the time because I was part of that conversation about should we explicitly say no commercial traffic and we said, "Well, we can't have commercial traffic on Zanzibar, so we shouldn't have to add an extra thing, but it's already not allowed." And then here we are. And once again, you guys are here, not your son, who's the one who lives there. So, it doesn't seem like it's his business. It seems like it's your business. and you don't live there. >> We are the managers of the business, >> but you don't live there and so it's not an extended home business >> and he is the owner of the business as well. Okay. A really a really good point here too is um you're making a blanket statement like you know all about the property for any length of time which apparently you don't cuz I literally have been one of the the main people that's how I met the owner and that's how I bought the property is because I knew the owner from me renting my position my spot in the property with my construction equipment my skid loaders my trucks >> all which was illegal and he didn't have the right to do that >> but okay so you're wrong. So >> he did he have an IEP for that? >> No. >> No, he didn't have anything. He didn't have an IUP for anything he did. >> Yeah. But he shouldn't have been doing it. >> When I took the when I took over the property and I called the city, I always call the city [clears throat] first and all those guys just randomly does stuff and hope for the best and ask for forgiveness later. Don't do that. I know it's a waste of time. So when I bought the property, I called the city. I made several requests on what can I do? What can I do for a fence? What can I do for this? What can I do that? They actually approved me for a 250 foot long, 70 foot wide building in the back of the property. So, if I would have went through with that, you guys were going to suck with that big that huge building in the back of the property, which I could have done because you everyone approved it. The person that I talked to on the phone is like, "Yeah, no problem." Like, "Oh, okay, sweet. That's that's great. I love it. I love it." A like dating itself. We plan on moving here and you know, fully within 6 months to a year. Uh, and the openness of the community was was why I like it. Uh, saying the pledge of allegiance when you, you know, you come in and have a meeting. Awesome. I don't I don't remember the last time I said the pledge of allegiance. Great. So, I think when we I don't know. It just it just seems like there's a lot of there's a lot of um mixing up. There's not a lot of uh seems like there's a lot of turnover in your in your group uh in the heading the council and everything else. I I totally get that you guys, you know, you I think it's a really hard job personally. >> Um especially with the last >> I guess so you understand that the hair trigger that we're at. >> Yeah, absolutely. >> As long as Yeah. And >> I have a question before we move forward just cuz again this is my first kind of rodeo through this so please bear with me. The business itself is storage, right? >> But each out building is its own piece of the sort. So you're leasing the building to someone to store their things or someone else's things. >> Yeah. The the buildings are the buildings are divided into separate units >> like bays been out there. Yeah. >> They each have a door. We have separate leases with the people in them for storage. They they are storage leases like mini you know like mini >> you can store whatever you want in there or is it just vehicles limited >> limited limited >> just asking >> yeah I mean our lease clearly states it can't be pollution or whatever they are not allowed to work on vehicles in their all the things that are in our IUP are in their lease we've shared the lease we shared every lease with Tori who was here um before that was part of our deal as setting this up. We shared all the leases of all the people. They were approved that we had with everyone. They approved all those leases. It was everyone was okayed. We have had some turnover. We have had a few problem people. Yes. Admittedly, they've been problems for us. Big problems. We've gotten rid of them. We're being much more diligent. We have had some problems with nuisance nuisance rubbish on the property. Yes, we have. We also have a construction business and admittedly we have used um Noah's house there to use some of our construction stuff. Busy season, we piling it there. We're going to cease doing that. We won't do that. It's been an eyesore for the community. We understand. Moving forward, not going to do that anymore. We've cleaned it up. We're going to continue to clean it up and get it nicer. I think Hayden has seen a lot of what we did the last time we were there. We're going to continue to clean it up and moving forward, we're really, really plan on making it much nicer. We just improved the fence last week. We're going to be putting in asphalt and we are in the middle of a demolition project right now, which I know he's got some pictures of, but we do have intentions of really making improvements and making it all much nicer. I know it's been a big eyesore and um that's not the way we want it. >> You know where I live, right? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> I will be calling every single time I see a violation. >> Okay. >> It's okay. >> To this point, I haven't. I just am mad. But now I will be calling >> this or you think are we ready to >> um >> wrap it up? >> Yeah. I guess my only comment around it is I I think you need to be real clear on the situation you're in at this point. >> Yeah. this this we won't be having a discussion next time. I think that the business you've been running is not the business that you were approved to run and you're making steps to clean that up, but it has to stay clean. It can't be for a week or 3 months. If if we're back here again, it's to pull your permit. >> Okay. >> That's where I would have went with it. I mean, no, I'm willing to put a time frame on it now. Unfortunately, we should have done this 6 months ago because then your time frame would have expired here as soon as we get cold. Um, so I'm not sure how we do this time frame thing. There's no to me there's no way you're going to get this cleaned up unless you bring in extra help to get it done. Um, >> which part do you want cleaned up? >> Because what you're seeing in pictures, I think, has been cleaned up. >> Yeah, this is passed. >> These are not that is not a current picture. >> Mr. Mayor, members of the city council, if I could just clarify that discrepancy. This aerial photo is from the end of August of 2025. Those photos that are in your packet um as a part of this agenda item are from October 31st, 2025. Um, so those are that's the discrepancy. That is the most recent aerial photo that we have um on this site. Uh, but those October 31st photos within there um reflect a different scene. Um, there are still uh minor compliance issues that uh I've noted within that packet as well. And then I'll just say as well for the interim use permit revocation um typically once they are found out of compliance uh they are issued a basically a 60-day notice to bring that into compliance. So if there is any uh any struggle with understanding what a practical timeline would be just for reference that is what is uh within that ordinance. So >> okay so that there you got it you got 60 days. What sort of do you feel that there's anything out of compliance currently? >> Yeah, and I I'll follow up with that. There are uh there are things that I've mentioned over emails as well that are still ongoing. Um and I'll follow up with an email again with this and um but essentially the the limitations are the conditions of approval within that resolution that I've provided. Um so those are the things that would continuously need to be um maintained compliance with throughout the year. So that that with is which is that list and um we could certainly follow up again with that uh with that kind of list of what is current because I'm sure that things have changed since October 31st. As you guys have mentioned, you continue to do work out there. So things are constantly changing. So >> yeah, we have I mean we still haven't got rid of the concrete from the silo that we >> That's part of the demolition. >> Part of the demolition. We we do have a permit for that. Um there's going to be more demolition. Uh the other silo is still going to be removed. Uh we're going to have, you know, pile of concrete or something which I don't know how that falls into anything. But um as far as like the general tidiness of the area, uh you can currently you can go there now if you'd like. There there's nothing doesn't look like that anymore. So when you see the commercial vehicles coming and going, we do have a demolition I mean we have a demolition permit for taking those silos down and we've got trucks coming in and out to take that concrete out of there to move that stuff and an excavator and I mean we've got a permit for stuff that's going on that has that's separate from our interim use permit. So, >> permit that comes from >> it's it's an administrative permit issued by Metro West. Um, as I as I've mentioned, um, there are there is construction activity currently going on on site. If you have any specific questions, you can feel free to call me um, and we can walk through that. Um, and I'll also say too that the last the last walkound that I did and I believe it was July or August, um, was when I had found continued things out of compliance and that was when I had mentioned to Greg who was there at the time, um, that ultimately this is where it was going to end up. Um, that we were going to have this conversation and then I went back out there and um, on Halloween and it uh, was substantially different. Um, so those it's that those types of those types of conversations and you know going through the process and letting them know that it was going to come to this point um that uh potentially provoked them to make more improvements at that point. So um that's just a some context. >> Hayden, I have one more question and it's yeah kind of a yes or no, so I'm starting to pigeon hole you. Have you gone out there for an inspection at any point and the property was completely within compliance? There was no issues >> of all the 20 items within the resolution. I can't say that there was 100% compliance. Now, if there was minor nuisance related to junk within the yard or something like that, it was um made as a comment towards that. And I would say that uh there were two occasions that uh I felt that there was substantial compliance with that. But to say that it was 100% uh clear and cut compliance, I I don't think that I could say that at this point. >> What about the flood plane issues and storage within the flood plane? >> So that is a little bit difficult to monitor as things move daytoday if they do within that site. Um there's a clear understanding uh with the property owners that essentially what we had limited it to was if there were campers, trailers like uh maybe a farm trailer or something like that. those types. Um I would say that a boat was within that category as well where those types of things that uh in conversations with the DNR when this interim use permit was approved um were classified as not injurious to the flood plane area. Now um with that being said, there have been times within this uh these inspections that there have been vehicles placed back there that would have essentially triggered that issue with compliance for the flood plane. This is a tricky area uh with the flood plane because there was a waterway that was installed at some point within this time and uh Jason could clarify if I'm wrong at any point. Um things had changed regarding the flood plane area, the actual area. However, it has not been officially delineated on the site. So the information that we have to go off of is that information from previous that is actually more disruptive or disturbing to the property itself than what is likely actually out there. But without doing that delineation, we cannot make assumptions on where the actual flood plane area is and we have to go off of what the existing information we have. Um, >> one of the conditions of the IEP was that I hire an engineer to find the BF or the base flood plane elevation. I reached out prior to that deadline to at least five different firms and got no response back. Nobody wanted to do this project for me. Um recently, more recently, I did through um one of my surveyors that we work with in our contracting business reach out to another a person after a person and got a hold of someone who said that they put me in touch with a uh surveyor person who said it would take a topographical survey that would cost us about $20,000 to get that done to get a that that wouldn't even give the BF. That would just get a topographical survey of the area that would be given to FEMA to possibly get a BF for the area because this is a zone A which doesn't have a base flood elevation given for it. But recently I did reach out to the DNR uh engineers and ask for them to give me a BF for my lot which is zone A on the Diamond Creek and they are uh able to do that apparently and I will be glad to share those findings when I get them with you. So that is where I'm going with it now. >> And it's likely that's going to open up. >> Yeah. >> Quite a bit. >> My guess is that it will change the area that is outlined based on Henipin County's information. Um and as the applicant had mentioned, um without that information provided, we just go off of what is existing and we delineated that area on site. Um and it's uh it's pretty substantial. So, I'd say that it is from that north uh building, that souththeast corner of the building going back to the northwest corner of the back building is kind of that that rough estimate area where um all vehicles stored on the site should either be within a building. Um I would say that uh if it is within a building that is within that flood plan area, it's not treated the same as if it was outside. Um uh but if the in the event that there weren't being stored indoors, that area would be that offlimits line. >> How um so public works is right there. Um how much is would that affect that? >> How much is the is that flood plane review going to affect? Well, I mean, right now, if you were to look at it, how much does that affect public works? >> The foot plane. >> Yeah. >> It's like the your corner of the just the top corner >> Okay. >> of it. Like if you take a quarter of it up there, >> the foot plane >> where the creek goes through, it's basically cuts it off the the previous owner sold that portion to the city. So, the ball field uh your entire city works there. That's on that. No, it's just it's just like the corner of the building on the floor plan. >> Mr. Mayor, I know I know what you're getting at and I can certainly provide that information to you in a map. Um I just don't have that information right now on at the top. >> In the end, you know, the the requirements that Hayden's talking about and I guess to me if you got 60 days to comply with that issue >> and has to stay compliant. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Mayor, members of council, go ahead. >> Um, my only comment is I was out there recently for a medical um, within the last 45 days and we continue since fire has gone out and done inspections periodically since uh, the issuance of the IEP. Um, as they indicated, we've had multiple businesses rotate through and they seem to continue to rotate through. um as Hayden has gone out and done investigate or inspections and we've gone out there with them, but then it seems as though that there's different lawn care companies or gutter companies or whatever. Um the person that we attended to was an employee of somebody at the time and that was I'd have to go back and look at the date, but I'm guessing in the last 45 days just for information. So Gary, do you have concerns then as far as like this business continuing as it's operating? Not maybe necessarily as what it looks on paper, but do you have concerns moving forward that if these people are coming and going or maybe in these buildings doing what whatever they're doing with their businesses? Do you have concerns that that is a risk like for the fire like for calls or oh goodness what have you? I just wonder like what from a fire perspective, do you have concerns about that and compliance? >> Yeah, I mean from a a business perspective, I mean we're looking at this as the IEP is designed as a storage facility as a boats, recreational vehicles, and so forth. Um, since we've started with the IEP, um, after it was approved, we've, like I said, we've had lawn care companies, gutter companies, um, people that are working on their cars within each of the stalls, if you will. Um, and they seem to some leave, but then some return. And that could be I I don't know why. Obviously, you said that you've had some issues with some, but we continue to see that. So my concern is if I'm assuming that that facility is storage of recreational vehicles and boats, but I have a boatload of fertilizer, which we've had in one of the buildings, um, for lawn care and so forth, then that's a different type of fire if the fire were to start um, and so forth. Yeah, I think what he's referencing is the people we've we've just recently removed within 30 days or less within the 45 days that Gary's talking about too. Whatever was requested by Zach every time they've been a request for something to be removed or I mean like I said, we even, you know, ramped it up a little bit more with the the trailers, removed them. You you can look next, you know, look across look at across the street, you can see they're not there anymore. Um, and they haven't been and they haven't returned and etc. Exactly what you're saying. So, we've been more careful with our selection of the people that go in. Any car guys that said they were going to store their cars there and then, you know, I'm not there every day, so I don't know. >> Um, >> your son is though, right? >> Yeah, >> he lives there, right? >> He does. He does live there. And then not only that, but when Noah is a drone, he works right our drone company. So he has contracts in Texas. >> He goes to where else? New >> Zeal. So that's why sometimes not there and they just go against what's going on. >> So I think that's the hard part is that just the nature of this kind of business. >> I can only imagine that it is really hard to keep people like this is what you're supposed to be allowed to do and keep people in line of this is what you can and can't do. And then again, if you're not there all the time, it's really hard. Even if you are, it's really hard to keep people to that. And so I think that just the nature of this business makes it really hard to say that you know for sure that you're going to always be able to comply. >> Even Yeah. Even these storage places, they >> not supposed to do certain things in it, but routinely. >> Correct. And I think that that makes the nature of the business makes it hard for me to say, >> which is why they shouldn't be in this zone. I mean, that's why it's they should be in industrial zones or business parks, not in neighborhoods or agricultural reasons. This was supposed to be for the storage of recreational vehicles >> like cold storage. >> Well, what what I think the biggest part uh and I'll I'll say that for my is um me saying yes to everyone. That's my problem. I I like to help everyone out. You know, they they have a situation. They're like, I need this place. I need to store this stuff. Whatever. Uh, and then I just like, oh, okay, cool. They seem like nice people, right? And then I don't do the like the couple who like and I can't even tell people. I mean, I've I've been asked for uh manufacturing, um, the vape things, the people that do vape, uh, which is essentially marijuana on the site. Uh, I mean, any number of things. So, and I pass it by my wife now because I'm like, what do you think? And she just says, no, for sure. Um, so, uh, I would say it's more my problem and we we again, >> it's not your problem because you don't live there. It's your neighbor's problems because we have to deal with it. >> So, it's supposed to be the storage of recreational vehicles and that's it. If >> I mean, if you'd like to come over and look at it yourself, I I'm more than happy to have you come over. I mean, I I I know what your property looks like. It's great. Uh, new building, right? Looks awesome. Um, I mean, if if you'd like to come over and take a look, come on over. I I have no problem with that. >> Go ahead. >> Mr. Mayor, members of the council, I was just going to uh kind of reiterate the direction that we're going with this conversation that um from my understanding and uh just looking for kind of uh confirmation or if there was any uh um disagreement with this, but if uh if I could just ask, would the 60-day allotment um be something that the council is interested in u moving forward with? And uh I'll obviously follow up with the property owners after this meeting to talk about what uh we would need what they need to do um to get into compliance. Um and if they are not, we'll document that and bring that back and post notice for a hearing and revoke the permit. Is that uh >> 100%. Thank you. >> I mean everything else is good enough. We're just talking a lot of fluff here. But you know what? Stay compliant. >> Cool. We're over it. So that's a few days it's over it. nonpart >> and just the nature of the business, I don't know that there I have definitive proof that it will stay in compliance. >> Well, >> and that's where I'm hung up on. Again, I agree with you like this type of business would be better suited for a different zone, a different area. >> Well, I think that's that's accurate. And again, I think I got to point you back to the the IUP that, you know, the conditions there are the conditions that you have to live by. I mean, we all agreed to that when you got it. So, the the types of business that are allowed in that IUP are the things you can do. And um manufacturing not on the list. So, I know you said that that isn't something you went anywhere with, but it's you know, you have to you have to comply with what you have or you I don't know what the other path is. you know, you come back and ask for a different one. >> Well, no, I'm not talking about that. I mean, I I'm fully on board with that. I mean, you got to you got to get and keep your act together on this. >> Or we're going to have to pull it. It's that simple. >> And I I literally just installed like nine extra cameras that actually work. So, I can identify like I can be offsite and still, you know, daily, weekly, whatever. I, you know, look around everywhere and see if anybody's I've had random people park stuff. I don't even know how they got there and I I couldn't identify who it was. Couldn't find out who it was. So, we still have to get rid of the vehicle. I legally can't, you know, get rid of the vehicle without proper channels. Right. So, what I've done lately is I've just put a new building because it's now it's inside the building and that's what it is. So, and I'll deal with it on my own. So, >> okay. So, I'm okay with the 60 days. Sounds like you're okay with 60 days. Sounds like you're not. >> Yeah. 60 days is is fine for me. >> So, you got your three. >> So, if we say I and I'm I I know we need to move on and I apologize, but if we do I get it. It was supposed to not be a midnight meeting. But if we say 60 days and they're compliant, I don't know that it's sufficient to just say, "Okay, that sounds great." Because >> Hayden 70 days. >> Yeah. Hayden's going to go back out there and peak a month and a half after that and we're going to be out of compliance. So then it's gone >> and we're going to be out of compliance again and then Hayden's going to spend all of that time going back and forth. The fire department's going to go I I just I the nature of the business doesn't give me any >> we've been battling this thing for a couple of years. >> Listen, I agree with you and that's what I >> likely in 60 days we'll be battling it again and there won't be no battle. It's over. >> It definitely won't be done. So >> okay. >> I mean you can have access to my cameras if you want save. >> The cameras don't mean anything. you just be compliant when the inspection comes. >> I wouldn't want to run a business like this because there's no there's no real control. It's not a stab at you guys. I'm just saying that there's no real control over this type of business and when it's in a a residential agricult. >> I'm telling you there's these storage places all over the eggland. >> Yeah. And the ones that are in like >> I hear you, but I've personally witnessed huge burn piles in the back of the property. I sat at public work at works and watched it and went, "What the hell are they burning back there?" So, like I'm just I I don't have a whole lot of faith. I wish you the best of luck. I don't think your business model is going to make you be able to comply long term and in 60 days when you're compliant and then in 90 days when you're or 90 days when you're compliant and in 100 days when you're not, I think we'll be right back here. >> I just want to be honest about it. >> Yeah. >> And then that'll be it. So, >> if we are, we are. That's just the way it is. Okay, that's perfectly fine. Then I will go along with your 90 days. >> No, 60 days. >> Previous um Mayor Council just to make sure it's clear, Hayden will send out a one notification that'll give him the 60 days notice. That's basically that starts our 60-day timeline. If it's not done in 60 days, then we will come back for a vacation. >> And there's a lot of echo in this room. So, >> I apologize. 60 days. >> 60 days. All >> good. Okay. Thank you. There's no action or anything. Just discussion. So, you're good. Okay. >> You're good. Good. Okay. Thank you, council. >> Good luck. >> All right. M >> Hayden, >> there you go. Thanks. >> We're only an hour behind schedule, guys. >> I'm sorry. >> We were supposed to be done five minutes ago. >> I do. I do appreciate the dialogue. >> No, I know. I appreciate you answering my pointed question. >> Mr. Mayor, members of the council, uh tonight you're asked to uh review a concept plan for a Greyco office facility uh within the Greyco industrial area and their planned unit development um along uh West French Lake Road. So the overall site is currently uh uh roughly 27 1/2 acres. Uh the expectation that be a portion uh which would be the west or the east portion, excuse me, uh would be uh subdivided and uh have a uh office facility, office campus um built upon that area. Um the property is zoned I1 uh light industrial and is currently under a planned unit development from from the previous buildings that were approved for Greyco. um is in the current staging area as well for um sewer service. So this is a very high level plan and just a highle overview introducing the project but is roughly a 33 12,000 square foot uh footprint building um among three stories uh totaling about 100,000 square ft in floor area. Um access would be off of the current uh drives that are existing on uh West French Lake Road um connecting into the uh other two facilities to the north and south of this area. Um the one item that uh we were able to at least calculate on a conceptual level, this has not been uh finalized by any means. Um but uh the parking count currently is 277 spaces. I will say that uh at the full use of this facility um the city of Dayton should anticipate or could anticipate between 250 and 300 um jobs at this uh site. Um and uh likely the so there's a couple of things related to the parking that I we um discussed at length with the planning commission um that uh was uh related to some flexibilities that are allowed within the code. Um, so the standard for uh office facilities is one space per 200 square feet of office area. That doesn't include common spaces, stairwells, maintenance areas, things like that. Um, the uh I1 district and the parking regulations do offer flexibility based on maximum uh anticipated employees at the site. Um, while this could likely be looped into a plan unit development flexibility request, at this time I don't know if that would be necessary. If we find that uh per the employee count at the max, um, the parking would meet that. Don't know if a flexibility for the PUD would be required at that time, we would consider that consistent. Um, stepbacks and other elements like that are undefined at this time, so I'm not going to get into that. But here's an overall view of the site. You can see that there are existing storm water ponds here. Um, French Lake right here and the building would roughly be within that area um of the site on the western or eastern portion. And they do show a future um building um as well not a part of this concept plan and would not be a part of the initial um applications or future application requests such as the preliminary PL or excuse me the uh um site plan review conditional use permit for commercial within the shoreland area. And I'll get into that a little bit. just some renderings of the facility. So, I already touched on parking. The other uh portion um that I wanted to bring up at this point is that a portion of this property is within the shoreline district, which is identified as 1,000 ft from the ordinary high water line of French Lake. Uh meaning that there are additional standards to be adhered to. Um identified conflicts at this point would be the building height as there is a requirement within the shoreland district for buildings not to exceed 35 ft in height. Um this has been flexed previously amongst other industrial facilities that you may see around um French Lake and um not a requirement or a required standard in the shoreland district zoning ordinance. That is a model ordinance provided by the DNR. that was an added uh added restriction I guess uh for lack of a better term by the city of Dayton when the shoreland district was most recently adopted. Um so I have been in contact with the DNR about this and that uh the resident the 35- ft standard is only a requirement for residential districts per the DNR. Uh the other thing that I wanted to mention too is that this is a requirement by the DNR is that the area within that boundary cannot exceed 25% impervious surface. Um so the applicants have been informed about that information to adhere to that uh to the extent possible. Um because that is a DNR requirement. Uh flexibility per the planned unit development in this regard would not be allowed. um they would have to request a variance at that point. And uh the planning commission did provide feedback on this and that uh they felt that there was there was enough leeway in the conceptual design to avoid um overreaching or going over that impervious surface maximum within the shoreland. Of course, um because only a portion of this, not the entire site is required to adhere to the uh shoreland district. It's only that area that's with within that 1,000 ft of the ordinary high water line. And this is just what to show you what that uh rough estimate is of that shoreland boundary. So tonight, as I mentioned, just uh to introduce the project to you, the applicants are here to provide any context and answer any questions that you may have. Um there's no need for a public hearing. This was a site or a um >> this was one that I uh stole from the planning commission um presentation from last week that I did not update that. So you don't have to hold a public hearing. They already did that. Um but uh all comments are advisory and non-binding. And I'm happy to answer any initial questions you may have. >> I do have a question actually. You said that we had um there was flexibility for previous industrial buildings for the height. Do you remember what the height of those like? I guys want to compare to this. >> Sure. Yeah. Uh I would say that the one that comes to top of mind is uh the invent building or the capital partners project that you may recall that was roughly 50 ft um in height. Uh and I'll say that uh in talks with the applicants um there have been discussions that 50 ft is generally the height of the main roof line of this building. Um however they are uh kind of weighing options of whether there is an additional wall that uh they may um install in the top the roof of the building um to add more screening to that uh surrounding um area for >> the equipment. >> Equipment. Yep. >> So the equipment doesn't count for height but the wall would >> I Yeah, I would say that the equipment is considered an impertinence and not subject to those. So yes, uh I wouldn't say that uh you know actually I take that back. An area handler could very well be 9 ft tall for all for all I know. So >> but that doesn't count. >> That is correct. >> But the wall counts to block. >> I would say that it's uh yeah it's the structural wall I guess that uh might make that definition. >> Splitting airs I know but it is planning and zoning. When we say wall, it's like a legitimate like part of the building or is it like a railing like what? >> So, actually um they did provide this >> screening. >> Let me go back. You can kind of see where that >> ID is where up in this. So, there's the main roof line >> and then if you go back in here, there is a recessed line. That would be that uh that I guess screening area. >> Okay. because the equipment I mean my dad does the heating and sheet metal or he did um and it's ugly. It's not pretty. So having screen Yeah. >> I mean it may add also safety too for people working on it like if you have an actual barrier so you don't >> Well, I think it's >> far it's pretty far. You're not going to you have to work real hard to find this [laughter] >> but not harder and make it hard to do the wrong thing. I don't know. My husband does safety so that comes to mind. I was allowed to run around in unfinished building sites as like a 10-year-old with any without any supervision. So different now. [laughter] >> So in the past when we've when we've um these were just part of the PUD that we went above the >> correct. Yes. >> Yeah. Uh well I'll just make my two comments while I have a second here. Um it's I find it a little bit odd that we most cities or many cities that I'm aware of require screen screening for mechanical equipment and we don't apparently but I certainly would think we would want to encourage that and then not penalize them by saying now that now your building's taller. >> That part doesn't make any sense to me. >> Yeah. I'll just say that the 50 ft is uh the flexibility is regardless of whether that wall will be there or not. And I will say too that uh in most circumstances and I believe if I'm not mistaken within this city code as well for I1 districts especially that screening is from the street rightway um typically there isn't a concern with a 50-ft tall building and seeing rooftop equipment. So that would be where the uh where the distinction comes. If it's ground mounted, there are requirements that uh the equipment be screened. And then uh if it's rooftop equipment, it kind of comes down to um the overall height of the facility and what you can see from the right of way. Um the other thing I wanted to comment on was the parking piece. Um it's in in the staff's recommendation that there be a parking study. And you know, I I'm kind of questioning in my own mind the the ne necessity of that. Um, you know, they they obviously at the as they get this building further along, they're going to know how many people they're going to put in it. They own that entire campus. I I just I don't know why we need to make too big a deal about the parking. >> I think it was a a misuse of words within that staff report. I think what I was going for was essentially just show us that there can be more parking added if need be. Um we don't want to find a situation where they are um over or underparked within this uh specific lot and uh don't have any room to add on if necessary. So, more so a proof of parking that if need be, additional area is um I did also raise the uh option that uh in if there was ever need be and there this property was subdivided and there wasn't any more room for added parking within this being that they would own both sites, they do have the opportunity to uh enter into a cross parking or shared parking agreement um essentially offsetting those types of concerns. So, um that was not uh elaborated uh very well within the staff report. Um and it should have said proof of parking rather than a study. >> Okay. Thank you. Um the last comment I had around this was um we're encouraging storm water reuse for irrigation and I would just like to echo that we would like to strongly encourage that um reuse of the storm water. >> Sure. That was my guess is that was from uh engineer Finley and then and Stantex team >> was on page 138 of our packet. >> Any other questions for staff chair of our EDA apparently wants to ask some question or >> is there EDA shar up here? All the way up there. >> People online can't hear you otherwise. >> We need your We need you into the mic. >> We need you in the mic down there. >> Right down there. >> Down there, sir. >> Get the good mic. >> That one's better. Well, my question was kind of directed towards the uh applicants. Are they here tonight? >> Name and add. >> Has any conversation been brought up to higher than building limit >> to >> Sorry. Can you repeat the question? >> Have you wanted anything higher than the 50 59 ft? >> Okay. We can we can yeah when they come up we'll we'll have >> you state your name and name and address into the mic for the record please sir >> name and address into the mic please for the record. >> Do I home one or shop one? >> Home Tim Hutner 13531 Balsson Lane. >> Thank you. >> Okay. >> We all know each other. So >> for the So it's on the recording. So, so you've never talked about anything any higher than that? >> No. >> No need for that. >> I'm done. >> All right. >> Thank you. >> Um, all right. Appling can come up. >> Anything you want to say right off the bat here? >> Name and address for the record. [laughter] >> All three of us. Uh good good evening mayor, members of the council. My name is Martin Secott. I'm the design architect on the project with HA architects and engineers. >> Uh Kirstston Musman, facilities manager for Graco. >> Um Nate Pearson with the Tegra Group. I'm the owner's rep to Graco. >> Addresses. >> Oh addresses. >> Okay. Sorry. Uh 11880 Fern Brooklyn North Dayton >> 1320 Oakland Drive, Golden Valley, >> 249 Chicago Avenue in >> All right. Um do you do you have anything you want to say to add to what's been said already or >> No, I think to the the Thank you for giving us the opportunity to be here. Um I think to the questions that just came up um we haven't considered anything taller than 50 ft. Um the building size is we're still working through the final count for employees but um generally it will be in range within 5 to 10% of what was in the concept package. Um and that a lot of that size is driving the parking. Um the final headcount and this will all be included in the the final issuance for the um the land use application uh is planning for future growth. So day one much of the building or parts of the building will um just be open for for growth and providing uh Graco the opportunity to grow into it. and the parking is being planned for that kind of future state. Um so the 50 ft is really driven by three stories. Um the floor to floor heights that we need getting parapets and then the as was kind of mentioned the 59 ft is getting to that rooftop screen for the mechanical units which that is actually set back from the face of the building. So from French Lake Road it's actually not really visible. Um, it's really providing screening for further away from the property across the lake and even on Graco's property. So, happy to answer any other questions you all have. >> Anybody have any questions? >> I don't have a problem with the screening either. >> Yeah. >> Matter of fact, I like Dave's idea. I would I would prefer it. >> Yep. >> I think it looks cool. >> Yep. >> I'm happy. [laughter] Well, I think we're all happy that that uh you've chosen to locate this building here in Dayton >> Park here. Y >> good. It's going to have Well, where's the G going to go? >> It's on the other side there. It's right there. >> Oh, it's on the side. >> Cool. >> We are still working through this. So, when we when we go for the the final land use application, things will be massaged a bit, but it'll be in this this flavor. Great. Yeah. All right. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> Thank you for coming. >> Okay. >> We don't need any acceptance or anything council. This is just comments. That's it. So, >> on to uh N. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of the council. I'll just note um since this might be just new territory for some of you uh the Telkom um development site which is uh Dayton Fields fifth edition uh per the um ordinance within the subdivision ordinance they it there is a requirement that uh they record the final plat of that property within 60 days of approval except um otherwise noted by or authorized by the city council to grant an extension as they continue to work through their wetland delineations, their watershed approvals, and uh some revised comments uh provided by city staff, including engineering. So, um just basically this is a resolution approving an extension um to that 60-day deadline to allow them some more time before they uh move forward with recording and um filing for a building permit and so forth. >> Are they getting hung up with the watershed or just various what what usually doesn't seem to happen. >> I don't I don't think so. Um that there I think that there are essentially finalizing um also purchase of the property as well that goes into that too. So there's a there's a couple of moving parts that uh have been uh kind of alluded to. Yeah. >> Okay. >> Okay. Any questions for staff? >> Mayor Council, these kind of things will be on the consent agenda moving forward, but we put on this agenda so you know what it was so that you understood what it is. You may see these things on the consent agenda moving forward, but we wanted to make sure you're aware of what this is doing because this is likely the first time you're seeing this. So, >> that's appreciated. Do we anticipate this happening more frequently or just because of >> probably because we want to be more thorough with our reviews and making sure that we're following um all of the state statutes and laws? But I don't it really depends on what our process is too because if we require more things to be done prior to final plat approval, you may see more extensions of us asking for final plants to be extended so that we get all of the approvals before. So we're not doing this. So, >> and what I'll say too about that as well is that if there is ever routine extensions being requested by these developments at that point, I think it'd be time to look at that subdivision ordinance to see if there's a standard um amendment that we could just resolve that. Um whether I've seen it I've seen it uh many different uh timelines. So, um there's there's options there as well. Yeah, because I mean if it if 60 days is just not sufficient and 100 90 days just allows people to get everything done because I get there's a lot of moving parts particularly when you have watersheds involved and you have multiple agencies who all have to sign off and blah blah blah. So if 90 days makes more sense let's just change your ordinance to 90 days. >> Yeah, you just can't be more restrictive or less restrictive than state state statute state law. So >> and what's state statute? >> I don't know off the top of my head. >> Oh it is 60 days. Okay. So so we can't do this. So we will Okay. >> Yeah. I said you may see more of these movements. Just so you're aware. Just want to make sure that >> Y. I'll second. >> Okay. Scott, Stephanie, any more questions? >> All those in favor say I. >> I. All those opposed say no. Curious. 5 to zero. On to item. Oh. >> Good evening, mayor of council. My goal is to get this back on track. We won't be, but that's because we're [laughter] all behind. You got it. I'm leaving. >> Everything's good. General fund cash balances. These are very um um cyclical, which is very good to know that we're on the same path. We are above where we're at normally at this time last year, which is based on our budget. Has nothing else to do other than that. Um so, um we're doing really well with our budget. That's fantastic to see. Um general funding, >> sorry, back up to that one. I just wanted to know what >> what drove that spike. >> Um which uh the >> the green I mean the top spike. the top specs are actually being higher than the line that we normally are way below. It has all to do with when we got our dollars and when we spent them. >> It just I've never seen it. >> Okay. >> That high. >> Yes. >> Well, it will go down faster. [laughter] >> So, it it has all to do with them to get the dollars in. Um >> we didn't have a suddenly a tree. >> We didn't find a money tree. >> We did not find a money tree that [laughter] I'm aware of. I've still been searching for one. We have one in the back. We've replanted another one, so maybe it gets bigger. [laughter] Um, general fun statement. This is generally why you're seeing that larger spike is because we are $336,000 under budget from expenditures at this point than we normally would be. Um, which is good and we are slightly below budget obviously with revenues and that's just based on timing. Um, we'll get the second half uh taxes here um in about 15 [clears throat] days. December 1st, we typically get our second half settlement. So, you'll see that on the actual audit, but for now, we are under budget just because of that aspect. Um, I'll touch base on a few different things that maybe we didn't touch base on before. Um, number two, the fines and forfeertures are based on the fact that we have not had as many fines this year that we had budgeted for. I'm not overall concerned about it because then it reflects another side of things. Um, engineering and legal, we've had more of those than we anticipated, and that's just based on projects and what we've had for legal um, things this year. fire suppression is way underneath and that's based on the fact that we have not um hired the two full-timers and that is also based on the fact that we have not cut our check to the fire relief for their um relief pension. We did get that in I think it came in it's comes in on the 15th supposed to come in on Monday then and that's $122,000. So that'll be cut to the fire department um fire relief right away. So they'll be in um we'll be that 231 will actually be about $100,000 just in FYI. Any other questions right away through um cash balances by fund. Uh I don't see any major major concerns here. These fluctuate each and every year. Some of the ones that we touch base on number fours are all based on when new development goes in. So if we see development, we typically see an increase in water and sewer and um developer escros and storm water funding. And those are all related to new development coming in. Whether that's related to commercial or industrial or um residential development. It also has to do with water and sewer obviously have to do with what our usage was. We had more usage obviously in September when it started to stop raining, but uh the beginning of the year was pretty wet. So any major concerns overall? One thing I do want to note, I note this every time is fund 342 is funded by the first 75 homes every year and not tax levy like it's supposed to be. That's the bond right now. Currently, we have enough money in that fund to be able to pay at the last payment already. So, we don't have to then we basically can forgo one year of 75 homes. My goal is to continue to use 75 homes every single year until one year before that payment is due and then we don't have to do the 75 homes for the last year. And that payment, the reason why it's um one year ahead is because we have that large assessment that came in from Scanel when they purchased the property. They paid us the million dollars worth of assessments, which was assessment plus interest, which is about a million dollars. Um, and that has to do with I think it was the Wicked Industrial Project that was down in um industrial area by 94. So >> that's why we're one one year coming. >> Can you um fund 401 capital E equipment? >> Yep. >> I guess I don't understand why that one always stays negative. >> So that one's negative until we have all the funding sources available for that. So that is because we sent the money out early for the engine that we purchased in 2023 and the chief's gone. uh 2023 is when we purchased that and physically paid for it. So, we got a $250,000 discount for paying for it early, essentially giving the money early before we received it. So, that money hasn't technically been recouped. Um and we'll talk about the long-term plan. One of the big funding sources is the $475,000 that we have next year for the tanker that was going to be used for a new tanker. We then put the money into the engine and we have to le for that in the future. So, that will help out that 8.89. Um, it also has to do with the fact that we haven't got the second half of taxes yet in that fund either. And so because of that timing, we're always off by one half of the year of u payment. So I think the number is 750 I believe into that fund this year. So if we have $375,000 that's technically not in that fund currently that would normally be there. So that's based on timing as well. So between those two things that's almost exactly your 900,000 bucks. Okay. >> Thanks. >> Yes. A great question because again it shows negative. Why are we negative? And we don't like funds being negative and talked to the finance guy. He doesn't like things negative. So, makes sense. Any other questions? Good question. Water fund. Um, overall very healthy water fund. Again, we're going to have some really, really big large items that we're going to have to purchase over the next few years and really talk about this one next week when we talk about the South Water System. So, um, again, there's not a whole lot of major items. Um, number four is probably the biggest one that's over budget and that's based on just utility rates. Last year we ended up paying um the update should be off of um 630 or 9:30, not off 6:30, but we ended up paying the Maple Grove one slightly late last year and we didn't pay a payment. So, it's not reflective on here, although the numbers almost exactly the same um through last year as long as we took apples to apples and not apples to oranges. Any major questions? Overall, overall, this fund is very healthy, which is good. Um but we do have a lot of things we're gone. One of the biggest things you'll see in the miscellaneous revenues is we are at $2.9 million over last year and that is all based on the federal grant that we have requested dollars back from. Um so we're at 2 point I think it's $2.9 or $2.8 million worth of grant money back from the federal government. We have about $1.2 million left. Um we did request that two 3 weeks ago but since the federal government was shut down we don't get the money. Um it is open again so maybe I can try on Monday. That's my goal. Um, but we will ask for I think it's about 800 $850,000 I think we got to ask for again. So we're getting close to that $4 million which is good. So we're fund overall again very healthy which is good. Um I don't have any major issues here. I mean there's no huge differences. Professional services just varies based on what we have going on in the in the department overall but anything I can and then professional services is also where I pay Met Council from too. So that's that council's any comments, questions, concerns, complaints, sewer fund or any other quarterly report to keep us on task. We're on time. >> Okay. Your dreams. >> Thank you very much. >> That's possible at this point. [laughter] >> We're doing it. >> Do you have a time machine? >> Nope. We're doing it. >> Okay. On to item Oh, you need a >> Nope. I don't need anything. Just >> Oh, good. >> Nope. You guys don't need anything. Just want to make sure you guys accept it. Based on >> item P, long-term plan. >> So, as for discussion, I want to make sure that we do note two things I want to make sure to touch base on and then anything else you guys want to touch base on. I do have the funds in front of you. I did not make the change for the LC Stevens one cuz I was trying to get this done before the packet time. I apologize. You'll get a new packet next week. If this is all good or two weeks from now, um I do need to update LC Stevens phase 3 from 1.75 to 1.5 million because that's the direction the council gave at the last culture meeting. I forgot to do that in the updates. And then I did just re label three, four, five as best I could. I threw some numbers in there, but those totals only equal 12.5 million. I don't know if the council really cares that much. They're all planning numbers anyways. And um technically it's a little adjust my guess is going to adjust based on how much is in the fund is my assumption, but that's maybe a different item for the council to talk about, but I want to make sure that we're all on the same page when I'm putting numbers in here that this isn't authorizing us to spend the money. We haven't bought a $20 million park for the record. Um and um we >> want a new city hall >> and we have not purchased a new city hall. >> We should go. >> Um I'm not against it, but just kidding. Um 12.5 million worth on the park. So is anybody have any problems with that number? That's a total so far. I don't hear anything. Okay. >> It's just a mythical number for now. >> It's all a planning number. Again, this all based on what we're thinking about and it can be adjusted and all of those say TBD. So we don't even know what we're doing yet. That seems good for that park dedication one. Pavement management. I do want to make sure that it's noted that 2026 2027 are the ones I want to focus on the most. 2026 and the pavement manage fund management fund is like $3.2 million. Um we do not have 3.2 $3 million to spend. $3 million $22,000. We do not have $3 million $3 million $22,000 to spend. Um my thought is we might have to kick a project down the road. Um of the projects that are on there, the only one that wasn't really planned for is 126th Avenue for reference for 126th Avenue for the council is that is what was the development name of that one? >> Stonehart Bridge. >> Stonehart Bridge. That's off of 125th Avenue. >> Pulled off of the >> It was pulled off that one. And the reason for that being pulled off is because that one is black top curbing and it actually has su curb or storm water in the uh road and you can't redo that easily. I'm going to use easily as the term for engineering term purposes without major major buckles. So, our thought is to if we're going to redo that roadway, we probably should redo it correctly and put curb and that actual concrete curb in there because that's what we have on every other road that has curb and gutter. Um, and this one does not. So, this one has gutter but not curb. So, I'll have the engineering just talk about that one more cuz that's maybe I butchered it. >> No, it's just a very unique one because the herb curve height varies. So if we feel if we remove it and do something uniform, we're going to have water trapped on one side or the other. So it's going to take a little more dialing in. So we we've actually collected a field survey on it. So we have good information so we can put a design to it, see what the best solution is. That project might have to be kicked because I don't have we don't have enough money to do that project without doing a larger um either assessment process or something to get the >> revenues or push it out a little bit. So the difference between just repairing the road versus doing what you're talking about is is not that significant or it is. >> We don't know yet, but it it very well could be because if we're going to put in a constant height curve to make sure we're not backing water up in people's yards, we'd have to drop it down. And if we drop it down, we might have to remove under all the underlying materials. Now it's a full construct. So >> we'll look at it closer again. It's just we were hesitant to just do a standard fix to it based on our visual inspections. We collected some field data so we can take a closer look. Correct. >> So that one might be an item that we need direction staff needing direction from council on what we'd like to do with that specific project. The other ones were identified on the pavement management fund or the payment management plan for the 5-year plan. And so we think we should continue with those ones. Good. looking for direction on I'm going to I'm going to specifically pick 126th Avenue because we need to know some direction if we want to keep it in there. It's just a planning item. If we want to move it out because we think it's going to be too much of a project. >> How bad is the road? How I mean >> it it could be delayed. I mean it's not it's not an imminent concern. I mean, it's one thing if we're flush with pavement dollars, but if we're if we're pushing our luck, it seems like we should >> if we push it out as long as we as long as we can. >> Yeah. >> Until it turns into gravel, but >> yeah, it's not in great condition, but it's also it's not I don't believe it's a tremendous amount of effort to maintain it for usability at least. >> And there shouldn't be much in the way of traffic. I got I got from the mayor and just two more push it out. >> Yeah. >> Yes. [clears throat] >> And then 2027 for pavement management. I think everything else there looks pretty good to me. Um I don't think there's anything major that's there. And we would only do a couple of projects like the territorial road improvements. We would only do those with the developer. Um, and so there's no point in we can continue push it out if you want to, but we'd only do that project if there was a developer. So, it's just kind of replaceable at this point. That's what I have for my requests. Otherwise, I'm looking for direction from council. We'd like anything else changed, adjusted, moved for any of the funds. >> For any of the funds? >> Any of the funds. You pick one and we'll Yep. Adjust. Talk about the reason why I'm bringing this to you is because I want to make sure we can have another discussion on the 25th of November, too. But I want to try to get all of those things buttoned up so that I'm ready to go on the 9th so you guys can approve a project and a plan that you guys are comfortable with. >> Can Can you walk me through I'm I'm I'm losing track of what we're doing with the engines. >> Uh fire department. >> Yes. Okay. >> I mean with respect to the tinder. >> Yep. >> The the tanker. >> Yes. >> It seems like we're planning on having four engine. Go ahead. Just walk. Um so currently in the um city we have two engines. Um we have had three in the past. Uh we sold engine God I might have the wrong one. I bet I think it's engine 11. We sold that one in order to pay for the new engine that we're looking to and that's an engine tender. And so that is basically additional um capacity of water on the engine. It cost minimal more dollars to hold that much more capacity. I don't know the numbers off my top my head. I can get them for you if that's what you're looking for. but it holds a substantially more amount of water than a normal engine would. Um, and so that's what we purchased back in 2023. We removed an engine out of the um fleet. We removed a heavy rescue out of the fleet. Um, we said we will allocate dollars for the future tanker that we had looked at replacing, which was $475,000. We allocated those future dollars to pay for that um engine and said we'll just pay for it over time. And then, you know, we may expend the dollars currently, but we'll get them back um as we continue to go down the road. So, that's the engine that's currently being built. I think a delivery is planned in 2027 from my understanding. Um >> that's the one we're calling the tender. >> That's the tender. Yep. So, that's an engine tender. Yeah. So, then at that point, we will have three engines again in the city. >> Um I don't know exactly what all of that means and such, but that's we'll have three. >> I think we had three only because we we purchased that one in 2019. >> Yes. So, we have we had three before. Um, we've now down to two. We'll be back up to three cuz it'll be an engine end tender. The idea is to have one backup as well. That's kind of what engine 21 is going to be used for. That's the one that's currently here that's used out of this station. That'll be used as a backup so that if we if and when we ever have something that happens like this one happen now or something gets hit or it's out on a valve replacement or something, we have another engine that we can slide in that doesn't cost us anything. Our goal is to keep engine 21 as a backup. That's the one we spent $40,000 on a new engine for. So, the idea is that we don't want to [clears throat] get rid of that. Um, and so hopefully we can hold on to that one as a backup for anything that may happen so that we aren't down an engine in the city. Um, and then the only other one that I'm aware of is that the is the ladder truck. I'm not aware of any other engines specifically. The tanker we do have as well. Um, and the idea was to sell the tanker once we got the new engine tanker. So, we don't have another >> And that's still the plan. >> And that's the plan is Yep. And unless there's something direction of from council that says hold on to the tanker. There is some advantages to having a tanker because there are quite a few areas still in Dayton that don't have water capacity. Um mobile home park area um areas of Dayton that we may want to tanker is probably worth $125,000 something like that. It's in good shape still. Um it's not you know bad at all. We bought it from Farmington um or through McQueen from Farmington. And I think we paid 150 grand. >> So something like that. >> Something like that. I don't remember the exact. Maybe it was 160 and we got a $10,000 discount cuz they took too long to give it to us and we asked for a discount. But um overall we'd be basically net neutral on that one if we were to [clears throat] get rid of it. So >> So I have a question. It says replace engine 12. No, wait, hold on. Replace engine 21 >> 2030 >> with a grass rig in an SUV. Yeah. >> Uh, rescue 21. >> Rescue 21, excuse me. And then we're replacing engine 21 the following year. So, 2030. >> Yeah. And that we should probably change the replace engine 21 to just purchase new engine cuz then we we'd like to keep engine 21 on as that backup because there's no way we're going to get the money we have into that thing back out of it. Especially when we just put a rebuilt engine in that thing for >> Right. It's been a lot of maintenance. >> I don't disagree. Um, then my other I want to say grape, but my other issue here it says purchase a grass rig for station 3 in 2028. >> Okay. >> For 100,000. >> Yep. We should probably push that out because there's no reason to have another grass rig if we don't have a station. So, that should be up. >> Yes. Yes. And I agree with you because if you flip to page 23, um the fire training facility and station 3 don't happen until 2031. So where would we store another >> just didn't push out when >> my guess is we didn't take those out when we moved that out and that would have been was that last year? I think it must have been missed last year on the long-term plan. I'm not I'm just trying to like get the timeline all together and >> that should be pushed out. Good catch. That should be pushed out. I'm going to make that adjustment now. That should be pushed out to 2031. >> Yeah. >> With the station 3. So, very good catch. Thank you. >> And is that I guess maybe for my own like lack of knowledge. When we say station 3, we're thinking it's we purchase it and start building it in 2031 because it would take you a substantial amount of time to build it, especially at this $20 million. So, >> why would you purchase? I mean, you could have it all this like to be delivered. I guess I'm wondering like timelinewise. >> We don't have a timeline. >> Well, okay. That that that that's fair. I'm just I mean, 2031's a ways, but I not that far, but I'm just wondering like you wouldn't purchase something and not have somewhere to put it. >> I.e. [clears throat] the ladder truck. Like, where where are we going to put that either? Mhm. >> That ladder truck will go here, but I think there's a discussion on that ladder truck coming. >> Well, also I'd like to discuss the training facility because I thought we asked that and it just continues to kind of like move a year and show up. I thought that we said it. >> The only reason we did that and that was discussion we had last year was based on the fact that we're asking for grant dollars for that. So, it's not in the plan at all. It looks like we're not planning for it at all. we can ax it and then we just would >> I don't think he's in there only to to I mean >> yeah for grants but >> to be honest even if we get the grant >> it's fairly cash flow and we'd have to re >> reschool that out that conversation out but >> but I definitely don't >> okay that's >> so yes so I'll stay on that item because I think it's important to do we want to ax it >> ax what >> the fire training facility because then I won't ask for grant money for it if it's not >> I I think right now we're So the grants you're requesting are from where? >> Um right now it would be either from FEMA from the state or the federal government at this point. I'm not actively like out there pounding pavement trying to >> the state one's always going to compete with our other requests. >> Yeah. And that's why it's item five, I think, on our list this year. >> Yeah. >> I think Yeah. >> Give me the gavvel. Let's chop it. >> Yeah. So, I got Wanda Wanda to take it away. >> Yeah, I take it away. >> Take it away. >> I guess I'm on the fence about it because we talked about it that it would never move forward without >> essentially the whole thing being a grant and, you know, would we say no to that? I just think that if you're going to build an if we're planning to build a station three, nothing says that we can't integrate some sort of training area into that station for our people, but I don't know that we are going to be at a point where we're going to bring in all these other communities and it's going to make all of this money. Like I just don't see that cash flowing. It doesn't pencil. And so >> if we're going to put money into something, I think that it's better to put into that station three and make that something we can continue to grow into and give space for that training for our people with it not being the intent of us renting it to others or hosting our own trainings for other departments. Like that's not the key function. And especially if we're looking at spending $20 million and I guess >> we're not. But >> I I I totally agree with that. But I mean, while we're playing with Monopoly money, um, I just feel like that money could be better spent on other things that better serve our department. >> So, Nick's the training. >> Nick's the training. I feel like I had to say that. I appreciate you letting me spew my stuff. >> So, just cl I'm asking it. I just want to make sure. Do you want to add something on the fire station 3 or just say accident totally not even have it on? >> Accident totally because I think that that would all be encompassed in the money that we have there for the third station. >> I I meant just in the description. Sorry. Not in the money. >> No, do not put it in the description. Yeah. Okay. I have direct. >> And now Ken, you brought up >> I brought up a ladder truck. >> Ladder truck. >> Um, I personally don't think we need one. We talked about this. Y >> I think most of us agreed to do this because there was a a cheaper unit if we did it at this time. Uh, every community next to us that borders this has got one. and we uh use mutual aid. So, what I don't like about I don't like how this whole thing was sold to us because there was no penalty guaranteed. We're not on the hook for a nickel, but now we are on the hook for 250 grand if it doesn't get sold. So to me, if we're looking to get rid of this thing and all of a sudden in two years it's going to be on the ground, the time to be looking to get rid of it is now. >> And that was the only reason I voted for it was because I didn't see any downside. >> I did go back and rewatch the meeting and the motion did specifically state that there was no financial liability. So whether that was not conveyed correctly, but the motion that Matt Tro put out literally said that in his motion and so I believe that that was the understanding of the council at the time. And so >> I appreciate that. Um so yeah, and I agree with you and I I guess I think back to to the last meeting we had where Jerry >> Jerry Yep. >> came in and he himself in that meeting stated if everybody around you's got one, why would you have one? And so like I >> and the first the first study and the first fire study talked about it but they talked about it out at like 20 years. I mean it was way out to the end of the study, >> right? >> Um I don't think the second study brought it out. I don't I don't think it didn't address it at all. Well, and and I would be supportive of us saying that we're not just going to, you know, quote unquote use our neighbors for something that if we find that the ladder truck is being utilized repeatedly that I would be supportive of saying, okay, so if you're coming like you know some monetary because again there is wear and tear. We have mutual aid to help each other not to benefit off of others resources if you will. So, if we get to that point, I would be supportive of talking about some sort of um give back monetarily to the communities that are bringing that truck and using it in our city. So, we're not just using our neighbors. >> A question I have is how many times has the lighter truck come out in the last year or in >> not many. It's a highly underused >> our neighbors. I have We'd have to ask. I mean, we're h happy to do that. >> I can't tell you how many firemen tell us, "Oh, you're going to get a parade on it." Yes, that's [laughter] utilized when needed. Yes. Infrequent. >> So, yeah. So, I'm >> I will need >> It's going to be handy. >> It's going to be handy on occasion. I just don't I just >> So, my question is, do you want to move It's called an aerial truck on the um on the uh >> long-term plan. Do you want me to So I think I got I have direction and I understand the direction. So do you want me to So that's a separate we have to make a separate motion and I want to make sure that that is a separate item on the agenda. So I think we'll bring that back on November 25th just so that you're aware so that the council can make an official motion on that specific item. That way we have direction specifically and not brought up in a meeting. And I want to push it out if we can push it out to the end of the plan. Is that something that council would be agreeable to that like we maybe we would need it later on in 2036 or do you want to accidentally on the purchase the aerial truck? That's what I'm me. So if we push out the end of the plan it's 20 2036 2035. >> Yeah. >> I I know that I can see it both ways. whenever something shows up in the plan somewhere. I mean this this thing showed up originally it was at like 2028 then it was brought back to 20 five or six and then >> just because it's off the plan doesn't mean it can't come back up next year either too it's just I get it. So I I'd be okay with moving it out. You're saying whether we should just totally nuke it. So my question is would you rather have it moved out to 2035 like the end of the plan so like we can still have a okay we're going to plan on buying one eventually >> or would you rather just nix it totally >> the issue that I have is with all of the things that are on here coming up in 28 to 35 >> we can use 80 million bucks and not cover it. >> Do you have that? Well, now we're talking monopoly money >> and sooner or later you got to decide what do we need and what do we what do we want? >> Yeah. >> I think you're what I think the better term is what's your priorities because depending on who the person is you have different priorities. >> I don't disagree with that. >> Yeah. >> I mean it's going to come down to >> so what can we have and >> I would get rid of it for now. I mean in two or three years when there's another council it might be back on there. I mean, >> okay. >> So, I got one one with chopping it. >> I'm okay with chopping it. >> Two with chopping it. >> I'm okay with moving it. >> Moving it. >> I was okay with moving it. >> Moving it. >> Oh, >> Look at you. >> Oh, look at you. >> You speak last. >> You get to decide something. >> Oh, damn it. >> You're the swing boat. Um, >> I don't see a need and I do agree that if we just push it out, it will more than likely be right back and become a necessity when and if that third station happens. And so for those reasons, I say remove it completely. I also have one other thing on there, not to beat up the department, but we have um in 2029 a $90,000 for a fire marshal vehicle. >> I think that that should be better aligned with the 5-year plan that we have yet to see. And I don't think that um even with the 5-year plan we did see um that is not in alignment with that. >> Was the fire marshall in 2028? Do you remember? >> It was farther out. >> It's well >> it was 5 years. It was it was not in the five first five years cuz I had that question because I asked >> the position that we had doing these things blah blah blah blah what changed because all of a sudden it's not needed. It was desperately needed and then it was shoved out 5 years and so it was not until 2030. It was pushed all the way. >> It was 2030. So we don't need to purchase a vehicle in 2029 for that. And I also struggle with we have two vehicles here all day long. We don't need two command vehicles on a scene. We have plenty of apparatuses to whatever. And so there I don't see a reason why the assistant chief's truck could not also be used for the for the fire marshal. I don't see the point of having three vehicles just sitting around in the parking lot. And so yes, the command vehicle can stay, but if need be, our assistant chief can hop on a truck and take a different vehicle. We got plenty of apparatuses with four wheels. So, I don't see the point in spending $90,000 at them on something like that in my opinion. I also have questions about the replacement of the chief's pickup truck in 2027. I think we talked about that and how it does not idle the same way a police vehicle does, which need to be replaced more often. And so, I struggle with um how many miles do we have on that vehicle? Um, and does it need to be a full replacement in 2027? >> You're talking about the assistant, >> correct? >> Yeah. How old? >> We had this conversation before. It's a couple years old, and there was the thing about it idling outside, but it doesn't idle like a police vehicle. Idles all day. They never then ever shut off. >> Fire vehicles are not like that. You drive it here, you park in the parking lot, you take your thing. And so I don't think that that's a valid argument for me to warrant spending 90 to $100,000 on a new vehicle. Um that feels very steep to me and I I just I question any more information before I'm okay with that being in 2027. >> Yeah. So I'll I'll I'll speak up for that one only because we are trying to do a 10-year turnover on vehicles and so you get the most money with the vehicles for 10 years. That's typically how it works. I'm not saying we can't keep that vehicle for long cuz we can. I'm sure the miles aren't that high on it. It's the years of it. And typically after Niss is no different than on a personal vehicle yourself, you get so many years and then it's worth so much money or you can run that thing into the dirt, right? And you get nothing for it. So I'm fine with either direction. We've tried to change it to having a 10-year replacement just cuz we get the most money for that. >> What do you expect the turnover on that truck to be? >> Turnover? What do you mean? >> So like the amount of money that you're going to get for it. Can you ballpark that? Because again, we're still in the hole. Like the math doesn't matter. Well, no matter what, >> no matter what the vehicle, the math doesn't matter. [laughter] >> Agreed. But if we're saying we want to replace it in 10 years cuz it's going to be worth $30,000, we're still spending $60,000 out of the budget to get a brand new one and then we're just doing the same thing over. We're still spending the money. >> Yep. It's just the fact that we can try to get as much money for it as possible. Doesn't mean we can't push it another five years cuz we can. the pro the issue that you run into is then it's not worth you use a $30,000 assessment or it could be 15 $10,000 and after it's 15 years old it's going to be worth to me a >> run I don't think it's going to be worth much anyway and I don't think it warrants a brand new vehicle I'd run yeah there was no issues with it I don't see the need to replace it >> like I said that's the difference in what was on the plan is now a different idea so >> well now is I mean when we brought this up for public works vehicles too. I had a similar question like I but like that was you know you're salting and whatever like the the bodies >> I would I would highly recommend public works vehicles being placed every 10 years because of the salt and >> that makes I guess that's what I was saying there's not a lot of stop and start and then police vehicles like I don't like that makes sense to me I just feel like the fire department is fundamentally different and the use of the vehicles is fundamentally different so I would be comfortable do we know what year that ve that pickup is >> 2017 that's why it was 27. >> I would be comfortable shoving that out a couple years farther because I just don't >> It's not the same kind of use. >> Exactly. >> It's one thing for like they're not all the same. And so just to have a a single >> 2030 number 2031. >> No, you got to go farther. 32 is 5 years, isn't it? 1 2 3 4 That's 15 years would put it in 2032. >> 2032. At that point it may just >> I have at that point it may be it'll be a full it would be a $90,000 purchase and that's fine with me. I just >> it doesn't make sense. >> 203 I just want to make sure 2032. >> Yeah, I'm okay with that. I just wanted to ask have we ever looked at um leasing those vehicles the way that we are doing the police vehicles? Yes, but it's more expensive because of the number of them that we need. Because the vehic the police vehicles, there's so many of them that I was going to say the fuel number >> the volume of them that we need. It ends up being way more expensive for us to do the police vehicles, if you do the fire vehicles. I mean, you can do it on in that same model, but then you're replacing them every >> four years. >> So expensive about them. >> Um, what do you mean? Well, 90 grand uh for a pickup. I assume we equip it. >> You got to equip it and stuff. And I don't know. It might not be 90 grand. >> Equip it with what exactly? >> I would assume lights and >> new equipment there, but still. >> But you can't see. >> I I I don't know why it's 90 grand. >> Okay. So So that number could easily be 60 grand, >> 40 grand or 60, whatever the number is. I don't know. >> Yeah, it's just 90. And I assume that they were especially >> they're now 2032 they probably will be. >> Well, that's that's actually >> 2032 they might be 90 grand. So I don't know if we want to change the number but >> and then it sounds like I need to So I'm going to go back to fire marshall because we went to the assistant chief replacement pickup the fire marshall vehicle. We want to nyx that one. >> I say nyx it because >> until we know >> I think one of our people we currently have will be our fire marshal. >> So I got one. >> That's where I would go with it. Yeah, >> that's where we were hired to >> do next. Yeah, three. Okay. >> And then uh for me, didn't [snorts] this is just a question. Didn't we not already buy a boat, a rescue boat? >> Yeah, I was wondering. >> Yeah, I had a similar question about the boat and also how often and how often does it get used? >> So, we have uh maybe >> Stephanie might know more about the use of it and I I don't. Um, so what I will say is that we did buy a new station one boat and that's a river boat specifically for the river that's up at station one. Um, right here now we basically have one of those inflatable >> Y >> boats. I don't know how often it's used. I'll be honest with you. >> Why wouldn't we take it from station one? >> Um, we've always had two boats. I >> I know. >> But why why does it need to be replaced is my question. What does the replacement mean? >> Replacement mean Yeah. We >> Is it No, sorry. I should clarify my question. >> Get rid of the air one and put one that's got >> We have We have the speed boat though, don't we? We have the >> speed boat. Speed boat. But >> we have a river boat. >> There's a river boat. >> River boat. >> Is that the fancy one that Santa rode in? >> Um, yes, that's the one. >> She's fancy. >> That's a river boat. We got a super deal on that thing. >> I think it's neat. I listen up the river. I think that's fine. >> Yeah. I don't know. I'm going to default to the cheap cuz I don't know why we would replace it. I don't know how old that one is and I know that they would know more than I would. So, I don't want to answer it. >> I guess it I guess there's a reoccurring theme of oh, we've had it for a while. We should get a new one. And I just don't fix what's not broken, I guess. And if it's not causing us substantial um maintenance. I just I don't I don't understand. And maybe Well, I can't say that. I'm going to be polite tonight. Um >> well, it may get to the same. I mean there's also these extrication tools again. Uh >> well that >> until we get until we get an actual we don't know that we can get them fixed for little or nothing or >> I understand >> they can stay there for now as far as I'm concerned but we're waiting for >> we're waiting for uh is that the deal? >> Yeah, there should be station two and station one extrication tools. Okay. >> I apologize about that. Um I tried to copy them up and replace them and then I >> So we would have them at both places. We currently have currently have them at both places because you have to have them on both engines. >> We're waiting for a go some work with Jefferson fire on the on the $40,000 one that we talked about two weeks ago. >> Yeah. So that's down to like 30 whatever cuz you guys approved a few of the thousand worth of stuff and it was a couple of the quotes or whatever that a couple of those were approved and then >> everything except for the >> whatever the it was like 35 grand or something like that. >> Something like something like that >> for the battery. The boat is on there only because it's a planning item. If you guys want to push that one off, I'm fine with it. I think it should stay in the plan because it we will need to replace it eventually. >> I Nobody knows the date. I >> That's why 2028 was used. If you guys want to push it to 20 30. >> I guess I would just like to know what the age of the boat is. I mean, cuz that one's been here since >> it's been here a long time. >> A long time. Like before our time being affiliated with the department. It's been here a while. Although I again, it's not a used every week, used every month. or >> No, my husband did a river rescue. >> Oh, they they didn't use the one down at station one. >> They used both of them, I think. >> I think Yeah, I think they were >> I think they had both of them out. >> Yeah, they went >> scooped up a couple kids in the river. >> I like my sound effect. >> That was last last year. So, I think Yeah, we had the the river boat that was >> was a year or two ago. Yeah, but we had the river boat at that point. >> It would have been July was on the rescue. >> It just seems odd to me that each station has one. But >> I mean, I understand. Well, >> again, >> I was trying to make an argument of location, but I guess I don't. We go and I would just like to know the age of the boat. I think I don't know that I want to like shove it down to the wind, but I would like to know the age of the boat and what we were replacing it with. Is it like insane? Is there a reason why we would want a different boat? And then I can get on board with that. But just saying to replace it because it's been here a while doesn't sit right with >> I don't know the answer to that. >> I mean, no, that's a chief question. Nope. And I guess that's my question before we >> say anything positive or negative. I just want to make sure that it's on the plan to replace it. I don't care if you guys move in a different year, but I think it should be replaced eventually. >> Yeah. A agreed. Agreed. >> When that date is you saying moved out to 30 301 >> 31. Okay. So I got two for 31. >> I'm good with that. >> Sure. >> Three for 31. >> Sure. >> Sold. Anything else? Um Marty this nursery thing >> um >> which page are you >> do? >> Um this is on the next page from 404 for the nursery talk. >> I've said this in the past and it just strikes me as odd that we can produce trees then we can buy them. Um are you do you not believe that? Do you think we can? I think from what I conversation I've had with the Henipin County Forestry Department, um they buy their seed stock and they produce their trees for around 75 bucks, whereas we're paying currently 400 bucks per tree. Yeah. By the way, um I just met with uh I don't remember what her name was, but she said that they will sell those. They they have a a lot of trees they sell at at cost. Um I would assume you already know about that. She said that we that that tier one inventory we were doing or we did. Does that ring a bell? >> I got nothing. >> No. >> Huh? >> I I remember it and she actually reminded me that we had done that and she's waiting for tier tier 2 requests for trees. >> Um done that besides you. I want to say it was sometime last year, but um where we had where we were. It's an inventory on our parks. >> Um yeah, I don't know. I'll uh >> I'll follow up on that one cuz I don't I don't remember that. >> Ash tree inventory. >> Nope. It was just an inventory of all the public areas um that they would grant >> I'm pretty good at remembering that supplement. >> Uh yes, >> the ring bell now. I know that there is a grant for inventory entre >> and she said we applied for it and caught it. >> I don't I'm not recalling u ever approving anything. That's >> No, I don't recall. I found out about this grant from Henipin County just recently. Uh we haven't applied for it as far as I know in the past. >> Okay. >> Unless somebody did it on our behalf and you know >> I I I I'm almost positive we talked about it. It kind of doesn't matter. But anyways, that's a source for trees. Um, and and uh she said that they don't get a lot of requests for that because they require an inventory first. >> Yeah. >> And she said she looked right at me and said Dayton's the only one that Dayton and and uh whatever. There was one other city there. >> Heck yes. I don't know what we did, but we did it. Didn't you have land on there for this nursery thing tour? >> It's going to be a public workshop. So, >> going to suggest >> Yeah, that's where it's going to go. >> There's a whole bunch of back there. >> We figured a site out um beside the shop there by the mound there. Um Henipin County looked at that and thought it was a great site. Um we're going to put a tree nurse uh um some gravel beds in there and then an actual nursery for the ones that we don't get in the ground that year. the tree stock is going to be uh grant funded. Um so there's a lot of grant stuff that is available to through the DNR and uh Henipin County. So I'm not 100% sure what the city input on this is going to be, but I'm pretty sure that we can get about 80% of this paid for with grant money. >> Okay, cool. >> Oh, um I just thought of something. You're going to need some fence to keep the deer out of there. [laughter] And guess who's got some >> I got these guys to keep an eye on that. >> Um I think you already covered this act, but the park the >> 2026 1.5 million on on the stuff we just talked about. Yep. >> Was that just simply because we threw the 1.5 out there? You guys haven't gotten prices on anything, right? That >> you guys gave us a 1.5 >> upper limit. That's what we're gonna use there. And I didn't update it when I was updating all the Elsa Stevens >> to-dos and such. >> Um, I have a question on page 17. Um, the land purchase for a community park. >> What do you mean by community park? >> That would be a large >> like a like a complex. >> So, we're actively putting money. We put money away this past year. We're actively putting money away for that >> for about the last 5 years we have. >> Yeah. >> Well, that's news to me. >> Um, currently our balance is [sighs] >> I did this calculation cuz I think the mayor asked the question last year when we were going through this. He said, "How much money did we put away so far?" Because it's varied every year. >> No, it's always been 150. >> No, it has not, >> hasn't it? >> Nope. did my research last year and the first year we put away $250,000 that was 2018 and and we put $150,000 every year after that and so we're at 2025 we're at $1.3 million >> I see 1.3 you said >> 1.3 is the current balance as of the end of well when we get our tax money in the end >> so the construction of the phase one in 2029 >> yeah that would be that would have to be done by referendum more than likely because there's no way we're going to have >> we don't even have the land >> million dollar. >> Well, then I guess that's kind of what I was getting at. Is that realistic? >> No. >> Um there would be a partnership with CDA. They have mentioned that they would >> Right. I just >> I don't know um how much of that is that's up to the council. You guys tell me the direction you want to go. >> These are very loose plants. However, we can leave it at that. >> Agreed. But anything that's in that fiveyear I took a little bit closer look. You know what I mean? Oh, I I focus in too. But yeah. >> Well, >> who's the who's the ultra focused? So, we need to make sure those are like really hammered out. Everything after that is >> really after you get past 5 years, it's really >> fluffy. I operate in a long-term planning world, but we're like 15 years. The five-year plan is like the Yeah, that's like and then 15 20 >> more like like two was like like that. >> So I need to narrow my focus >> and even two was like >> can very quickly be adjusted but one is like ultra >> anything can be but >> nothing can happen if there's no money it's not happening. >> Oh agree. But I was just like oh I guess I didn't realize that after that um joint session we had with the parks commission and we like really looked at what it would cost to do something like this. Um, I didn't know that it was still on the plan. >> Well, and and at the time >> I'm not upset about that. I like that it is. >> The direction was just I think the direction was to staff was just keep your eyes out. >> Eyes and ears out. >> Yeah. I guess I just didn't know we were actively putting money away for that purpose. And I'm I'm very happy to hear that. >> Um, >> it's not very much, but again, >> I'm assuming it earns interest while it's sitting there waiting to be >> It does. I did not calculate any interest in that number. >> That's [laughter] fine. Well, purely the number >> we don't need any adjustment. I just wanted to clarify that >> that is what that was. >> Um >> so, >> okay. Well, >> go ahead. >> Um in 2026, we have um 200k for the um the area 21 park, the second phase of that. Yep. >> And I guess my question just is, do we own that whole park now? >> Um we will own three of the four corners. The fourth one we have been told is going to be done with the DCM farm second edition possibly when he comes in with the Sundance Greens 12th. Is it 13th? What? I don't even know what edition we're on. >> 12th 12th edition. So we don't technically own the fourth corner yet. We own three of the four and developed two of them and not the third. >> Yeah. So how do we go? I mean there isn't a phase three for this and we can't really develop plan that >> my suggestion would be to move it to 2027 my suggestion at least one more year out because we can't develop it next year without knowing a plan. So it takes one year to plan one year to develop it. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. It doesn't sound like we could actually do it anyway. So >> yeah, we would not be able to do the full park. We could do another quarter of it, but two and a half acres is probably not going to mean you're getting a ball field basically. few other >> even then you may be compromising because you don't have that one. >> Yep. >> Right. >> So I'm fine. Do you want to push 27? I think it needs to be soon because it should be finished. But >> for sure >> 2027 seems like a reasonable number and then we will revisit it next year and if it's something that we can push out another year, great. If not then let me know. Does that seem reasonable? >> Okay. Sorry. I want to make sure 2027. Okay. I need to make sure I got three people that vote in 2027. >> Okay. Sure. Yeah, that's fine. Strong feel. just well I just want to make sure that I got direction because if I don't have a majority then we're not on the right page. So >> these on that same >> well in the same fund but um page 21 are how much of this was covered by grants? >> Oh sorry which fund are you? >> So you have the water trails access historic village you have water trails construction phase one. I think we're still hoping for money. >> So, Water Trails phase one is completely covered by grants. >> We have National Park Service, we have a federal grant. Um, both those total 850,000 or 950 >> 950 >> 850 is the federal grant. $100,000 from National Park Service. Water trails access point at the historic village is covered by the DNR. >> Yeah. >> Oh, that's that's right. >> That's 100% covered by the DNR. And then the water trails access point on Gooden Park. That's the one we talked about that the LCCMR money we will utilize through his park district and then the city which we should I I need to adjust that a little bit because that'll actually be covering out of the federal grant or the National Park Service dollars instead of out of our money. So I need to adjust that a little bit and I'll adjust that now. So but that will be paid for by grant. That's about I think our I think our contribution is 200 grand. That's what I mentioned. Um and most of that should be covered by the grant. We might have a small amount of dollars from the trail fund but a very very minimal. So, we'll have three access points and basically we'll be out we'll spend $100,000ish, maybe $200,000 of city dollars for those three in andout launches. >> The trail on Pine View, the 350, even though it's a 2028, that 350 seems kind of light given what >> that might be. Now that I look at it, that probably has not been inflated as it's been pushed out. So, take a look at that. Well, and the southern part that was put in, as I recall, was closer to I thought it was closer to 6 or 700. >> No, that was like 130. >> 140 grand. >> It was a lot less, but it was also a much easier section. >> Oh, maybe that was if we had done it on >> Yeah, if we did it on Yeah, if we did we want to call it the west side of the roadway. >> The only problem with that was we didn't have we didn't have rightway on one of those properties. >> One property we do not have, right? Yeah, we do not have we have some heading north on the east side. We don't have it all the way. You're correct. >> Um and that one I I mean it it until we know what's going to happen with that intersection. >> Yeah. So that was supposed to line up with it, I think we should push to 2029 in my opinion because that's when the plan if and when we get an intersection improvement at that intersection. We will only do that trail extension if it's actually a safe crossing because there's no point in putting people to an unsafe crossing and then now you have a you either run or you you don't run. >> Um and then the >> So I'm going to change it to 2029. Is that a good 29? >> Yes. >> 29. >> Sure. >> Okay. Sure. >> The >> trail along North Diamond. We had talked about that a while back. >> Yep. Um, I don't remember exactly how it was resolved, but it looks like we're going to try to coincide with the the the updated uh river. >> Yep. >> So, did that 300 I I noticed sometime last summer and I forgot to ask about this, but >> there's power lines there. >> Um, >> we are planning on not going down north on the road to where you're thinking. We're gonna try to go between the h homes. >> Yeah, we talked about going between the homes. Oh, and that did happen or that was >> We've had discussions with the property owner. We do have a willing provider of an easement on that side. However, we have >> not willing >> um owners on the opposite side of the road for the landing, if you will, on the crossing. So, that's that's been the whole >> that's what the hold is. So, that's why we need to push to 2029, but we should probably get the follow up on that, Jason, and get that easement secured so that we're good to go because we do have a willing seller on that side. And we want to make sure that we're lined up. >> And the problem is we don't have >> on the south side. So next to Vinewood, there's very small corner of two properties that needs to be lpped off to get the landing safely in there and they're not willing to provide these. >> Yeah. >> Okay. at at any cost or >> we haven't got into further negotiations. >> Sure. Okay. But >> it's just they're not being hard negotiators. They just said no. >> They flat out said >> Yeah, they flat out said >> it's hard to negotiate. I need to say >> Yeah, it's kind of hard to overcome. Um I don't think I have any other questions. Anybody else? >> I This is just for clarity. Um, Marty Public Works. Uh, >> gotta beat you up a little bit. >> A little bit. I mean, utility body sign truck. What What is a body sign truck? >> Um, okay. So, it's a bigger a bigger truck. You You probably seen the utility truck go by with the crane on it and stuff like that. It's that style of a body. Okay. >> Um, there'll be some uh a crane on it for pushing in the signs and pulling out signs, that kind of thing. You will have the panels in for storing all your panel uh for your, you know, your securing devices and stuff like that. It was probably going to have a transfer uh tank on there for some diesel since we have a uh a new diesel generator at well five. Um so that will give us some extra capacity to fill that if we need to as well as fe uh filling trucks and skid steers on site. >> Okay. Thank you. I just wanted because it was an expensive truck, so I was just curious what it was. >> It is very expensive. >> But I also noted that it was I liked this. It was a replacing in 1999 to the previous comment about like not just replacing something because it happened to hit a time on the calendar, but because it >> 30 years old, it needs >> because it has in fact worn out and we need a new one >> and we bought that one used as well. >> So, thank you. >> Also, I had to beat you up. I mean, someone I feel like the fire department just got hammered on. I felt like we had to share it around a little bit. >> Some years Marty gets hit pretty bad, but >> every year. >> Well, and I mean, it's out in 2034, but I'll just say I don't understand why we need an armored vehicle, and I'm never going to say yes to an armored vehicle. >> The reason for that is we added it last year so we can start looking for grants for it. That's why. >> But why does the city need an armored vehicle? >> There you go, Sergeant. I know what it is, but >> so we've been seeing it used by agencies in the area more and more frequently on a barricaded suspect call um which happens more frequently than you think. Uh involving a weapon, it provides the officers a capability to go get the truck, roll it into the driveway and like give commands from a safe distance or a barricaded suspect inside of a vehicle and stuff like that. So, I know Maple Grove has it, Henipin County. We've been seeing a lot of cities um purchasing them more and more often. >> Maple Grove has a budget of 48 million. >> Yeah. [laughter] But that I'm just speaking to what it is. >> Yeah. No, I just I don't like the militarization of our police. >> I would prefer not to have an armor vehicle either, but again, we have real life and what we want to believe. Is that frequently used or like I don't be a direct number but like is this like it's going to go out twice you know and I don't think it be a perfect it >> it'd be hard to say with us you know what year 2032 or something like that but >> oh 34 >> 2034 I >> hear it used quite frequently in other cities on calls just with anything involving a weapon or even a vehicle where people aren't leaving the vehicle as a way to get vantage or communicate with the person in a safe manner. So, >> that makes sense. I guess I was just more or less um you answered my question, but more or less looking for the is this something that's going to sit there and not be used and it's like that once in a perfect storm or would this be something that it doesn't have to be used every day or every month? But, you know what I'm saying? Like there are certain vehicles like for the fire department that get used twice a year. >> Yeah, I think the chief would have to answer that once it gets closer. And um >> I appreciate your answers. putting you on the spot. >> 34 ext you [laughter] >> sorry. Just kidding. >> It wouldn't be fair if I didn't have some kind of a comment, you know. >> Okay. >> Not a big deal. Uh the the um field marking thing does what we have work. Even though it's 20 years old, >> it probably only [clears throat] gets used three, four times a year. >> No, it gets used a lot more than that. >> Way more. >> All the way through the spring, summer, and into the fall, that thing gets used at least once a week. >> Oh, >> yeah. >> There you go. >> We have a lot of fields to mark out and it's ball fields and soccer fields and lacrosse fields and uh football fields >> and it's falling apart. Say again. >> Is it falling apart? >> Um >> or is it functional? >> It's starting to show its age. We got We got one uh we got two at the moment. One stays in the old village and that one is very old. Um that's been here longer than I have. Um >> Oh, wow. >> This other one, the newer one, um again is starting to show its age as well. Um, so we want to replace the one in the old village with the one that we're using at this end. >> Take the one that one over. >> Put the new one up here cuz that's where the most usage is. >> I'll let you off the boat. >> Thank you. >> About about a GPS controller for >> Yeah. >> What the hell is that? >> Uh, seating, right? >> This is kind of a wonk. >> Yeah, this is kind of >> I'm not 100% behind this just yet, but it's something that um you can >> the thing will mark it the p the the liner itself, you program it into the the machine and it remembers it and you just let it go and and it'll do that. It also when you do your fertilizer, you can put that onto the fertilizer spreader and it will, you know, automate uh your your flow of your fertilizer and stuff like that. >> So, it's a it's a dualpurpose thing. >> It's a toy. >> It's a toy. >> Yeah, it's >> we don't we don't need one of them. It's probably trying to make our more efficient here, Scott. >> Well, it's 60 grand. >> I don't disagree. I mean, I'm not saying that I want to spend 60 grand. >> Hire an employee at 80 grand. Why would you do [laughter] that? >> Oh, let's buy it now because it's going to be more money for 10 years, right? >> I would rather that though spend 50 grand to make one of our fire engines into a showpiece. >> Well, that's for So that's for fire station 3. >> I think I think it's 50,000 for sure. original engine one refurbished showpiece. $50,000. I >> think it's 19 >> 40 something >> 43. Yeah, it's old. >> Um, and it's basically just a piece that would be able to, you know, it's kind of a cool piece that would happen. >> I know, but it's $50,000 and there's other things we could >> Again, that's a that's a random guess. That's a we don't have a clue number. The tech college at one point um said that they would [laughter] help to restore it and [clears throat] they would use their um students, but we didn't have a way to get it. There was the problem or that's what I was told. >> Um when we first cuz they used to sit outside at the old public works building and >> Yep, >> man. Uh, but at one I was told cuz I asked about why we were just leaving it out there to rot and get worse and I was told that the college had said that they would work to restore it and use their students to learn and so I'm wondering like I understand this is again 2031 but is that still an option? I think I was told the problem was is that we couldn't get it over there and something about being able to get it into their their shop or whatever. >> Yeah, we would be able to do that now. So I'm just wondering is that offer still on the table and like >> I don't think it's ever not going to be on the table to be honest with you. If we ask the college I mean they're always going to have people that are working on it hopefully. >> So are we then saying that maybe this is materials? Is that what this 50 >> Yeah, this is a I say this chief and I both looked at and said what's a number that seems reasonable and we just do 50 grand. It could cost $5,000. I have no idea. Okay. >> We haven't done any research. We haven't asked anybody. We haven't done anything. It's just a number cuz it's so far out. I was just saying if you're picking on Marty for the efficiency thing, this is not that much. >> Yeah. No, I agree. >> Yeah. Correct. No, I don't. >> One of them actually to Amy's point saves time and an employes time, which is actually And the other one is just a is a toy. So, one of them is not it wouldn't even be a toy. It would just literally sit there. >> They sit there. >> Yeah. >> Supposed to be something cool to show to our history of where we were at at >> sit where it had sit. Uh it would sit well if we did fire station 3 whatever that would be$20 million fire station whatever [laughter] that would be the building around it. >> Yeah. >> Um it would be something like a piece like they have in Monaceel. I think that's the same thing. >> Curiosity then it be registered with state and uh >> it would be cool >> like we require res [laughter] >> licensed. >> It'll say fire on it I'm sure. Um, I think it's very similar to the Monosello fire station that they put up that would have I think it's a glass area that they have and they have a very similar old style and I think it even sits on a little spinning thing. I'm not saying they might have a spinning thing. >> Yeah, I think so. I'm not saying we have to have that thing, but there >> I mean if there's someone who wants to hand us the cash for it, I wouldn't say no. >> But do I want to spend our money taxpayer money on it? I said I don't maybe the show piece is something we work with the college and say that maybe that's >> what I originally asked for parades that's why I had inquired about it. >> The $50,000 will not restore to be able to run on par. >> No, absolutely. >> Although we can try it. >> Manpower we sure >> any other comments on the long-term plan? >> No. Dear God, >> I will send out uh Do you want me to send out another version of this in PDF so you can look at it? Do you want to just say >> we have a cliff notes version of like these are the things that we changed? Oh, I tell her or something. >> Uh, no. Cuz I just did them as then. Never mind. Go ahead then. That's fine. I was going to make sure that we we encompassed everything that we talked about. There's a lot of move this than that. Just making sure. >> Let me tell you the two things we axed were or the few things we fire marshall vehicle, aerial truck got axed. Um, we moved out the assistant chief vehicle. We moved out the boat for station two. Um, we that was pretty much it on that >> fire training facility. That's a different fund. So, I haven't got to that one yet. >> Talked about the nursery. We adjusted the park to 1.5 million for 1.75 million. We moved out the second half phase two of Sundance Braver and Trails Park, whatever that comes to name to be. Um, that's the 2027. Now, we have a community park overall. Um, we talked about and the next one would be talked about trails and how many dollars are put there. Nothing got changed in dates that I'm aware of. Um the 410 which is the training facility fund that got removed. Um and nothing else I think got changed on that one for now. Payment management we talked about we moving 126th Avenue reconstruction out to a further year whenever that is. I do we have a date we want to move that to 2020. I don't want to add to 2028 cuz that's enough knowledge in that that year. >> 2028 is never going to happen 9 2030. Do we want to say kick it down two year? I mean >> take it off completely I I don't know what your thoughts are. >> What were we talking? I'm sorry. >> 126th Avenue reconstruction. You guys talked about that could be kicked down the road, but I didn't get a date. >> It's the only one I'm missing. >> Jason, do you have a general idea? Five years kicking down the road. >> Uh, I mean, we'll be re I don't know if this will matter or not, but we'll be re-evaluating the streets the end of next year. So, I'll have a new plan coming into 2027. I mean, there'll be some carryover, but we could also reconsider it as part of that. >> So, do you want me to move it? I'm going to move on 26. I don't want to have it on next year's plan. So, you mean just kick it to 27 or do you >> 27? Cuz I mean, even if we kick it out to 30, if we if we have it in mind and and things look good, then we can pull it back. But >> 20 is fine. >> Okay. >> Any other >> That's all I have for changes. >> Are we good? >> We have a uh replace asphalt parking lot fire station 2. >> We don't have any as Yeah, we >> That's this parking lot here. >> Oh, that's okay. >> Yep. And so that would only I think that's yeah >> um that would be what 2029 and that only way that would we would do an asphalt parking lot is if we don't have any plan for doing a city hall. I mean I don't want to spend that I don't want to spend a million dollar in this building and then move out. I don't want to spend 200 grand on a parking lot here and then go hey see you later. We're out of here. You know >> parking lot wouldn't cost 200 grand. That whole parking lot back there was under 200 grand. >> Um Yep. And again 200 grand is a 2029 number. I don't know. >> Is it big shot? >> The asphalt back here. Yeah. Yeah, it's pretty pretty well. >> Rough shape. Yeah, >> she's in she's she's pretty well taken care of. >> Got to drive in certain areas and not in others. >> Like I said, the only reason we do that, that's why 29 is so that we if if we have no direction for a fire or a new city hall, we need to add. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Are we good? >> Yeah. >> All right. >> Thank you. On to item Q. >> We're only an hour 40 minutes behind schedule. It's good. We're doing great. >> Amy realistic with these time stamps. I'm just [laughter] going to throw it out there. You know who you're working with. >> I know. >> All right. >> Not okay. >> Anybody got a question on payment of claims? >> All right. Give me a motion to second first and then we can >> I'll make a motion. >> I'll second. >> Okay. Uh go ahead. >> I I just had one question. Uh on page 179 there and this is charged to admin. It says annual membership fee 2026. I was just curious membership to what >> what is how much is it? >> 1,800. >> Good question. >> What page was that? >> That is I know what that is. Yep. So I know where that is. So that is my pure compass group that I'm part of this year for um C basic continuing education and then my meeting once a month with the administrators in the area that I meet with and that's through I did it through last year and it was really great to have this year because I was able to bounce a lot of things off the city admins and I would like to look at it next year again. So that's the request request slash payment. >> That's all I had. >> Anybody else? Mm-m. >> All right. Any Oh, we got a motion. Second. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> All those oppos say no. >> Motion carries 5 to zero. Item R. Maple Court. >> Do you want to present it or >> it's up to you? It's like be longer to walk up there. So, um, [laughter] as the councils were, uh, Quick Trip, uh, opened or started in early October on Maple Court. Uh shortly there thereafter we started receiving complaints about uh semi-truckss that were parked on the street and were prohibiting two-way traffic. Um staff did go out there, I'm going to say a handful of times. Um one of which we noticed uh trucks parked on one side of the road. Um there's a photo that's provided. Oh, actually we've got a slide of it. Um, so it's very, you can see where um, trucks on both sides of the road would prohibit traffic, two-way traffic from accessing other businesses on Maple Court. >> So, are they parking there because the stalls are full? >> Um, when I was took this picture, there were empty stalls there. So, the theory is is that it's just more convenient to park on the street and run in there and run out again versus backing into a space. >> Sure. I make a motion to >> I would make a Yeah, I'll second. >> Okay, I'll give that to >> Dave and then Scott. Any more discussion? >> All those in favor say I. >> I. >> All those opposed say no. Carries 5 through zero. And if there are no objections, we journ. Okay.