Call to order September 23rd regular meeting of the Dayton City Council. Stand for the pledge. >> I pledge algiance 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. >> Need motion a second for the agenda. I'll make a motion. >> I'll second. >> Any discussion changes? >> Was there um I just have a few edits. Um so I just need to correct the language for the franchise fee ordinance item L. Um it should be instead of just listing franchise fee, it should say and adopting new gas franchise fee um for Centerpoint Energy. And then item O I just wanted to note is the payment of claims that we just have the incorrect date listed. So it is for September 23rd and not the 9th. >> You want I I'll correct item K as well. um should be an approval of reconvance, not approval of acquisition. I know we talked about that during the um agenda meeting, but um it should be an approval of recvance. It's only because we're reconving it from the county at this point. So, thank you. Any others? All right. All those in favor say I. I. >> All those opposed say no. Passes four to zero. Okay. And now we are on to recap of close session. Um I have things to read. Um so under the open meeting law, when the city council has a closed meeting, the city's required to give a summary in the next open meeting about what happened in that closed meeting. This is done so that the public um can be generally aware of what happened while we were in closed meeting. So on uh August 26th, 2025, Dayton City Council had a closed 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 pro proposals. Persons present at the meeting were uh Mayor Dennis Fischer, council members Scott Swanik, Sarah Van Aston, David Fashion, Stephanie Henderson, city administrator Zach Dowed, assistant city administrator, city clerk Amy Benting, and city attorney Amy Schmidt. During the closed meeting, city council considered a labor agreement proposal from the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, Minnesota Council 5 Local 25 2454 asks me and a labor agreement proposal from the Minnesota Teamsters Public and Law Enforcement Employees Union, local number 320 representing essential supervisory employees or Teamsters. At the conclusion of their consideration of the terms of the labor agreement proposal from ASME, the city council directed the city administrator and assistant city administrator city clerk as to how to respond to the proposed terms during ongoing negotiations with ask me. At the conclusion of their consideration of the terms of the labor agreement proposal from the teamsters, the city council directed the city administrator and assistant city administrator, city clerk as to how to respond to the proposed terms during ongo negotiations with the teamsters. All right, so that's that one. Uh, so written summaries are included in the agenda tonight related to the closed meetings that we had on September 9th, but I will also state the summaries out loud for the record. And this is kind of long, but I'm going to have to get to them. Closed meeting summary. City administrators act out. On September 9th, 2025, the Dayton City Council held a closed meeting pursuant to Minnesota statute 13 DO5 subdivision 2B. Persons present at the closed meeting were Mayor Dennis Fischer, council member Scott Salonic, Sarah Van Aston, council member uh David Fashions, and uh council member Stephanie Henderson, assistant city administrator, city clerk Amy Benting, city attorney Amy Schmidt, and city administrator Zack Dow. During the closed meeting, city council gave preliminary consideration of allegations or charges that were made by council member Stephanie Henderson against city administrative actout. In an email to the city attorney and mayor Dennis Fischer dated August 5th, 2025, Council Member Henderson had presented questions about whether city funds were expended unlawfully or without proper authorization and whether the city administrator had exceeded his authority or breached a fiduc fiduciary city duty to the city. These questions were related to the city administrator's actions in which he allowed the fire chief to assign duties to two successive existing paid on call firefighters in a role that had not been established as a position approved by the city council and to pay the second paid on call firefighter in that role at a higher rate of pay than what was established by the city council for paid on call firefighters in the city of Dayton. As part of its deliberations of these allegations, it was necessary for the city council to address council member Henderson's questions about the job classification of the paid on call firefighters who had served in the role and the appropriateness of their continued participation in the firefighters relief association. The city council concluded that the duties and tasks performed by the paid on call firefighters who had served in the role did not change their employment classification as paid on call firefighters and as such the paid on call firefighters were not eligible for parah. Therefore, it was appropriate for them to continue their participation in the firefighters relief association. After consideration of the questions and allegations presented by council member Henderson, the city council concluded that the city administrator should have presented a position description and rate of pay to the city council for approval prior to any person serving in this role. The city council concluded as follows. The city administrator had relied on advice from the city's prior legal council when he approved the request from the fire chief to assign extra duties to an existing paid on call firefighter. City funds were not expended unlawfully and did not exceed amounts approved by the city budget. City administrator Dow had not exceeded his authority or breached any fid fiduciary duty and no disciplinary action against city administrator dowed or further consideration of the allegations or charges were warranted. Uh we move on to the next summary. Closed meeting summary fire chief Gary Hendrickson on September 9th, 2025, Dayton City Council held a closed meeting pursuant to Minnesota statutes 13D05 subdivision 2B. Persons present at the closed meeting were Mayor Dennis Fischer, council member Scott Selenic, Sarah Van Aton, David Fashion, Stephanie Henderson, assistant city administrator, city clerk Amy Benting, city admin, city attorney Amy Schmidt, fire chief Gary Hendendrickson, Amy Peruse, Teamsters Local 320, Kevin Beck, Teamsters general counsel, and Greg Burstead, union steward. During the closed meeting, the city council gave preliminary consideration of allegations or charges that were made by council member Stephanie Henderson against fire chief Gary Hendrickson in an email to the city attorney and mayor Dennis Fischer dated August 5th, 2025. Council member Henderson had presented questions about whether city funds were expended unlawfully or without proper authorization and um whether the fire chief had exceeded his authority or breached a fiduciary duty to the city. These questions were related to the fire chief's actions in which he assigned duties to two successive existing paid on call firefighters in a role that had not yet been established as a position approved by the city council and paid the second paid on call firefighter in that role at a higher rate of paid than what was established by the city council for paid on call firefighters in the city of Dayton. After consideration of the questions and allegations presented by council member Henderson, the city council concluded as follows. City funds were not expended unlawfully and did not exceed amounts approved in the city budget. Fire Chief Hendrickson had not exceeded his authority or breached any fiduciary duty and no disciplinary action against fire chief Hendrickson or further consideration of the allegations or charges were warranted. Those are the summaries. Um, so in addition to this information in the summaries, I I also wanted to add some some stuff. I I've never liked the fact that employees and names are put on the agenda for these things. I didn't like it when we were looking at termination of an employee. I didn't like that. Uh the problem is it sounds our attorney tells us that we are required to do that. Um, I think it it provides a a a perception that may not be warranted. Um, so and ever since these allegations were were made by council member Henderson, we had to resolve these things. So, the council needed to move forward as a governing body and address the issues as best we could and try to resolve whatever we could. It's hard to do that uh without violating open meeting law. Well, actually, it's it's impossible to do that unless you have a closed meeting. Um, under the open meeting law, we can't talk amongst ourselves or exchange emails or text messages and uh hence the uh that would be a violation of open meeting law also. So, in most situations, we're stuck with uh having to talk in public meetings about topics that may, you know, imply some things that we don't necessarily want to imply at that point. The uh allegations made by council member Henderson could have been serious, but there was a lot of private personnel data involved. So, we wanted to be able to talk about the details, but also respect the rights of the city administrator and the fire chief to keep their private personnel data private. And since allegations had been made, the situation met the criteria of the council to hold a closed meeting under the open meeting law. City administrator and the fire chief each had the option to open these. And uh I'm glad that we could respect their privacy even in that small way to keep them closed. Um so I've read the the legal summaries of what the council concluded based on the information that was at the closed meeting. And uh I want to make it clear the council concluded that neither Zach nor the chief did anything illegal. Mistakes were probably made along the way about needing to get city council approval before letting paid on call firefighters take on other duties or needing to have formal approval of the job. Uh any mistakes that might have been made were not done with malice or the intent to defraud or mislead the city council or the public and we are all human and we make mistakes. Those are learning what you would call learning experiences. Um, city money wasn't spent outside of budgeted amounts and PAR firefighter relief association rules weren't violated. Neither Zach nor the chief were given any form of discipline related to the allegations. As far as the city council is concerned, the allegations are done. We want to move forward, try to make the fire department and the city as a whole function better. Uh we will continue our discussions about the structure of the fire department for 2026. We're also going to work with city attorney to update city code employment rules and to update city personnel policy um so that we have clear guidance and this kind of thing doesn't happen again. Uh and that is it. Does anybody have any comments? Okay. So that said, we can move on. All right. Consent agenda. I need a motion in a second. Make a motion. >> Second. >> Okay. Discussion. >> I have a question about item K. >> Yep. >> Um so that's the tax um forfeited property. Just wondering um uh the EDA, right? We're turning it over to them as the the intention, right? And as far as we know, we don't know what the redevelopment will look like or we haven't had negotiations about any of that. Just that the EDA wants to do something redevelopment. Correct. >> Yeah. Um, do you want to take it, John, or does that? >> Yes. There there are there's no redevelopment plans for that property. >> Yeah. And there has been no negotiations done or any other information's been shared about that. get it. >> The idea from the EDA's perspective um is to get the tax for parcel back on the tax role um which is the same as the city's perspective as well is to get the tax for your parcel back on the tax role to be able to help with taxes overall within the city. So, >> and this is just the first step in them being able to do something. >> Correct. >> This does not um give the rights to the EDA at this point. This just um starts the process for us to reconvey the property to um Henip County and then they can give us a price back and whatever else it's going to cost us to do that process to get the property back into our name in that time. The council can decide if they'd like to give that property to the EDA to be able to control or if they'd like to hold that onto as the city council. >> Does the EDA have the power to reconvey to request? >> They do not when it's our it's our property, not the day EDAU. Mayor, if I could. Right now, the the parcel is owned by the city under a commissioner's deed or a special use deed, which limits the the uses for it to um what's listed in the deed when it was conveyed to the city. So, the first step, as y'all said, is to convey it back to the state and then um that will open up the opportunity for the city to acquire it under the tax forfeiture statute. There are a couple of different ways to do that. >> Okay. It just seems I guess maybe peculiar to me that we would go through that process or start that process if we don't have an intention for it. So like if the EDA has a you know like they want to do X Y or Z. Um and so I understand that we have to go through this process with Henipin County to then be able to you know we have to buy it for whatever that price is and then if the EDA wanted to redevelop it they would have to then decide what they're going to do with it. It just seems um >> premature. >> Yeah. I do not have a plan or I mean maybe they >> Yeah. >> Do I don't know. That's what I'm asking is if we take it with Penipin County, we pay for it and then we don't have anything to do with it. >> We we own it then, right? And aren't we paying? >> Well, it seems like what I've seen on No. >> Yeah. We wouldn't pay that. What what I've seen is is with these things, it always seems to be that first step to get it done with. Um, and had we done that with all of these properties from the get-go, I think financially we would have been much better off cuz they're sitting down nothing anyways. So, like that triangle, had we actually, you know, moved on that way early, we probably could have got it a lot cheaper than what we did. So, well, I I I guess I understand what you're saying, but the triangle was arguably going to be worth a lot more because of its location than I guess I don't have a problem with it, per se. I'm just wondering like the EDA obviously has said something about wanting to redevelop it at their meeting on the 9th, right? Or do something with it. >> It was a very short conversation. >> I'm sure they do. Yeah, >> there's a plan. That's all I want to know. Well, what about what about a plan but our budget? Yeah, >> sure. Well, you know, discussion is is really I guess just broader at this point. We nothing can be done with it. >> Um except for this single use that's described in the deed >> parking lot or yeah bus stop or something I don't know but not anything that the city would pursue. And so the really it's just the logical first step to get it moved into a position back to the council, right, to decide do we want to then reconvey it or however we say that to the EDA. That's another decision point. And then the EDA would then have the ability to um redevelop it, but then there's still zoning questions. Redevelop it into what? >> Right. So I think there's there's many steps along the way. This is just the first one. But I think the intent ultimately is that that's a residential area would it would be continue that building on that empty lot. >> Okay. Um I do have a question. Right now we So the city at in this moment the city owns it and we can do things like build a water tower on it. Correct. >> No. No. Okay. The only use that the city can do can make of it at this moment is what's listed on the on the use deed from the commissioner. >> And what is that? >> I don't have any. >> I believe it's a parking lot. >> That's it. >> Right. So, one of the I'm sorry to interrupt you, but I was going to say this this is a long process and as council member Fashion says, there are lots of decision points along the way. And so I it's you know like for example the city negotiated the the reconveyance and repurchase of the triangle parcel what three or four months ago and we still haven't been able to complete that because we're waiting for Henipin County to do the ne to take the next steps well the state and Henipin County. So it's a long process. There may still be time to develop a plan a specific plan. Um, and and I don't know that there's a specific plan for the triangle parcel and we're in the middle of that process, too. So, it's not I don't know if premature is the word. It's just kind of you got to start momentum somewhere, I guess. >> I guess I was just asking because we're doing the water study in there and it's like, well, if we have this plot and we could and because I know in the other one it was just it has to be a public use like so I that's why I was wondering if a water tower would have counted. we're doing this whole water study. I would say let's hold just until we know >> really tall waterfront. >> I don't know. >> I mean to your point Sarah in the council packet it does say that the city has the ability to use the property for a public use without charge like i.e. water tower. >> So we'd have to I'm sorry to interrupt you. You would have to still have to reconvey it to the state and get a new commissioner's deed for that special use if it were to be used as a for for a different public use. >> The cost would be $0. we just call it a repurpose of that problem. >> And again was just from what I read I thought the same thing. So I was like you know if the EDA doesn't have a definite plan like I thought the same thing as you like maybe we there's another use for it. >> Um >> but it sounds like no matter do that but we'd still have to start to >> we'd have to do the process. So >> we're giving ourselves the most flexibility. We're going down the path of least regret and then we've got the options. >> Okay that's fine with me. Sorry to >> this is not approving the purchase of it back yet. So decide not >> we we don't know what we'll repurchase it for. Okay. >> Nothing >> makes sense to you. >> And so if they came back to us and said, "Yeah, you can have it back for a million dollars." We're like, "You know what? We'll take it for free and put a water tower there after all." Like that is still on the table at that point. Okay. Okay. Then I'm fine with it. >> Great. >> Thank you. >> I'm fine with all of that except the water tower card. >> Well, yes. >> At the bottom of a hill, >> not a great location. It just it was the example in the thing and that's just in my head. >> Yes. Okay. >> Any uh any other discussion items? >> Um I guess we're on still in consent. >> Yep. Yep. >> Um I had a couple one um in item A with the minutes on uh page 12. It uh there's a section that says council commented on this is related to the the Mississippi River Regional Trail. And I think the way I know AI just does this, right? But the way that it's written, I think could end up being misleading. It says council commented on and then there's a bunch of bullet points and one of them is properties in future allowed to be purchased. >> We certainly talked about that, but the way that's written >> could suggest to somebody in 10 years that >> we were in favor of that somehow. Uh, also on the third bullet point, it says tax purposes for easement or right away and affecting property owners. I know we talked about we talked about the tax impact of that, but I you you don't get that out of the the way that's written. So, I think that could be could be said better. >> Try to try to amend those things and adjust them. to me the the for the uh purchase properties we said we would consider them on a case by case basis. >> Yeah. >> Wasn't right something about properties can be discussed to be purchased >> case by case based on the trail or something to that effect. >> Um >> yeah the way this is worded I agree with you Dave it sounds like we would be okay with anything. That's how it sounds. >> Yeah. And you know, as time passes, people look back at the minutes, it's hard, you can lose that intent, I think. >> Um, on page 32, item H, there's a a payapp request, request two and final for Territorial Road uh water main extension. And I'm wondering why the the final amount is different than the contract amount even though we are um it accounted for change orders. So I I don't know where the tilt is there. >> Yeah. So on that one it was a little bit unique. We had some extra work on there associated with a a hydrant that was built into a hillside if you will. We had to take more of the material out of the hillside to accommodate the hydrant location. We had work provisions in the contract for the seating, the blanketing, the restoration, all of the other work associated with it, but not for the removal of material offsite. So, a change order was required to introduce that new type of work into the contract and covered under that change order. But for the other work in there, it was already part of the contract. We just exceeded the estimated quantities for those items. >> So, we were able to accomplish compensation through the existing contract. Okay. Um, yeah, I think that's all I had on the consent. >> Anybody else? >> All right. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> I. All those opposed say no. Four to zero. Consent is approved. Open forum. Anybody here for open forum. Come on forward. limited to three minutes for non-aggenda items. State your name and address. No council action will be taken. Items will be referred back to staff. >> Yep. Uh Brian Harvey, address 17730 Dayton River Road. Uh just looking to uh have my property looked at for the uh case by case basis on Three Rivers Parks, potentially acquiring them or making an offer when we would like to sell. What was your address? 17730. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Okay. All right. Um, >> did you have a timeline? Are you like >> No, it not really. We're just kind of planning for the future kind of. You know, we'd like to be out within a year or so. So, it's just kind of getting what our options are. So, >> Okay. Is there a reason you wouldn't consider just selling it through the normal channels? >> We are considering that too. We just want to have all the options on the table. I know they've acquired the properties next to us and the property next to that. So, you know, it kind of makes sense like if there was to be a larger structure there, you know, it's just us and them one other house between that and a parcel of stateowned property. So, you know, just seeing what the options are and kind of giving thought to everything. So, >> thank you. >> All right. Thank you. >> Yep. >> And then Brian, can you fill out that form and then u make sure you put your contact information on there? >> All right. Thank you. >> Anybody else for open forum? You want to step back? Add to us in a second. You're good. Thank you. >> Good evening, mayor and council members. My name is Dan Pearson and my wife Debbie. We live at 13880 Dayton River Road right next to Col Park. We recently learned about the trail that would come through our property and wanted to explain why this creates serious concern for us. Um we have about 43 ft behind our house that goes to a drop off. We're basically on a bluff. Out of that 43 ft, our septic takes up most of that. So it would make it impossible for the trail to run behind our house. So that leaves only in the front of our property. Taking into consideration that the county already has 45 ft easement uh to the edge of the road, not to the middle of the road. This would put the trail in front of our house. And for us, that's not workable. We moved from our last home because they put a trail through the front. It was a quiet road, 30 m hour. Uh next door, someone pulling out hit someone on a bike. My wife nearly hit somebody on pulling out of the driveway. Uh Dayton River Road is very difficult. Uh it's much different. It's a busy road. Uh it keeps getting busier as the new homes are being built. Um our property is right between Well, there's a sharp curve between our property and Clo Park. Our mailbox got hit nine times the first year year we were there. Um, I'm sure you're all aware of how busy Dayton River Road can be. We We already get honked at trying to turn in our own driveway. Pulling out of our driveway is even more challenging. We got to look to the left, to the right three, four times, and then we got to floor it and hope that somebody's not right behind us. You start adding bikes, pedestrian ebikes that go 28 miles an hour. If they're altered, they can go up to 50 miles an hour. That adds another layer of probable accidents. We bought this retire as a retirement home. I'm 71. We'd rather move now than wait four years or so for the project to begin and then have to move in my mid70s. So, we'd like to ask you for your approval to allow three rivers to buy us out. Um, this would allow us to relocate to a safer, more desirable place. Thank you for your time and consideration. Thank you. >> Dan, you want to fill one of those out? Dan, can you fill one of those out for us? Um, fill one of those horse right there. Yeah, that'd be cool. >> You can just drop it off with the chief in the >> Thank you so much. >> Anybody else here for open forum? >> Lee Hollquist, 11471 Fernbrook Lane. And uh, I don't have a lot to complain about, but I get some concerns about this Rush Creek intersection. And I I don't know if it's part of the traffic study or what, but the the right turn lanes north and south are blocked off now. And so it's there's no right turn lanes, I guess, if you're coming out, at least as I see it. And this morning, it took me 20 minutes to get from my house down to 81. Uh you come up from the from Rush Creek there and traffic is just blocked backed up. It's just poorly done, poorly laid out. Uh people trying to get into the roundabout from the from the north and from the west were backed up almost a quarter mile. It just it's not a good design for whoever did that. Um >> which which roundabout? >> That roundabout at Territorial. >> It's in Maple Grove. >> Oh yeah. >> Okay. For the new road that that you guys didn't do and and I defend you for that, but um it it's just gotten worse. Um, I know there's being a tra a traffic study being done and I don't know if that's why the right turn lanes are shut down, but it's just getting nuttier. Traffic is backed way up to the stop signs and and I appreciate the stop signs, but it's it's just something's not working there. Uh, like I say, it 20 minutes to get down to Fur. I live uh 2 miles north of 81 and it took 20 minutes this morning. That's just not reasonable that even it was 7:20 in the morning. But anyway, and then the other thing, um, I understand that, uh, Elm Creek Park Reserve is going to cut out that lot on the, uh, be the southeast corner of Fernbrook, uh, sometime next month. They're just going to eliminate that parking lot. And my wife talked to Threed Rivers Park District yesterday. They're going to eliminate a trail access from there. So, basically, that that nice new crosswalk is going to just end when you get to the green spot. There's no trail there. There's no access there, or there will be no access there. And I don't know when she talked when Linda talked to Three Rivers yesterday, they said the city didn't respond to anything when they asked for input what they wanted if if there was any reason to keep that trail access open or not. We use that trail access every week, at least once or twice a week. We're in there almost every day. Um it looks like it's going to eliminate a whole lot of stuff for uh utility value for us. And I know the people that bought those houses in Sundance Greens and all that were told that Elm Creek Park Reserve is one of the selling points there. only now you have to drive there. They they told Linda we'd have to walk that if you wanted to get there from Fernbrook you'd have to walk there on the on the street there's not going to be a walking path in there anymore uh that's accessible and I I don't know if you guys know anything about it. They said you didn't respond to it and they made a big point of saying that. So >> that's the path that goes to the parking lot, the little parking lot. >> Yeah, that little parking lot will be gone away >> and the path to it will be gone. they said. So, >> yeah, but like when when did they did I don't recall >> starting uh either it's October 6th or October 20th. They got two steps that they're doing. >> I'm just saying I don't recall ever hearing before this a chance to respond. >> I don't I don't know. I'm not on either side here except that we use the park we use the park reserve like I say almost daily. I know we've had conversations with Three Rivers about the elimination of the the small parking lot once the >> Yeah, we call it the trail access. >> Yeah, I'm trying to remember the trail discussion. >> It's we had a conversation with them at one of the quarterly meetings that we had with them and we asked them specifically about the trail there and the trail access was going to stay and they assured me that the trail access was going to stay there. They were going to eliminate the parking lot um because they're expanding the parking lot elsewhere. >> They they told us yesterday that that the crosswalk would be the end of it. There was wasn't going to be any from that. >> That wasn't my understanding of the conversation. Who did you speak to? >> I don't remember talked to because my wife called it. >> Okay. If you can get me to name, we can I'll try to do that follow up with that. >> Okay. Other than that, like I say, traffic is getting to be a ginormous pain in the butt here. And and uh I don't whoever did that is just poorly laid out. So I saw that after it was 5 weeks old, they already re resurfacing part of that road and it just I don't know. Anyway, that's all I got. Other than that, life is good, guys. I appreciate the work you do. >> Thank you. >> And I'll fill out a little horn. >> Thank you. Come on up. I'll I'll provide an update to the council after all the open. >> Um, by the way, before I forget, that open utility box that actually Keith was complaining about last time, it's still open. So, I don't know if that's something we have to contact him about or it's right on the east side of that intersection. >> Is that at 113? >> Huh? >> 113. >> No, it's at um Elm Creek Road. It's >> It's next to the trail that Lee was just talking about. It's Yeah, >> it's on the county right away. >> That's a county item >> on the southeast corner of that intersection. >> Yeah, it's And like I said, I don't we can do anything about it, but I have a feeling somebody open it and totally forgot about it. But yeah, you can walk into that thing and you're going to snap your leg off. >> Okay, >> Jason, do you want to follow up with the county? Be great. >> Yeah, we'll try to find who? >> Perfect. Thank you. >> Okay. I want to I didn't know anything about this issue that Lee just brought up, but frankly, it kind of irritates me that they're taking away that that park access parking there because anyone that lives in that that housing development that we just built thousands of homes in that doesn't want to tracks all the way through the trails in the development, you know, drives out there and uses that parking lot to park in to get onto the trail. I mean, that's why the parking lot was built there in the first place. That's why the trail was built close to the road, so that could have a parking lot so people would have access to the bike and the walking trail. So, it just I don't understand why why Three Rivers or Henipin County or whoever is pulling the strings there wouldn't want to remove that parking lot. And I know they just spent tons of money down at the nature center, one completely repaving the road in and out of there. that looked like a perfectly good road to me. Repaved the parking lot that looked just fine to me. They added another parking lot in their overflow area that was just grass parking that I don't I've never seen anybody park in it before unless they had an event down there. But they just spent literally hundreds of thousands of dollars in pavement down there. And I was kind of curious why they hadn't repaved that one because it seems like they repaved all the ones going into Champlain. But I don't that's not why I came here. Keith Grover 113th in Fernbrook. Um what I wanted to bring up tonight is is uh the holding pond that's at DCM. The new holding pond that's right at 113th in Fernbrook. Um all the water from that whole development now is is now channeled into that holding pond. It's if it's full, it's probably 25 ft deep, but it's not full yet. But the south side of that pond that faces 113th towards Deans Country Manor, the south side of that pond is a straight cut wall that has a 6 to8 foot drop off straight down. And the other sides of the pond are all graded with a, you know, with a maybe a 40 degree, 45 degree slope. And is clearly the way they plan on leaving it for the winter because they've blown seed and straw over everything except the south side that has that drop. And that drop is probably 15 or 20 ft off the asphalt of 113th. Yeah, it didn't even look like that far, but yeah, >> it gets very close. I've got a picture out if you if you want to see it, but it's it's too close to the road. It's just a few feet inside of the silk fence they have up, you know, that we make them put up so that the debris doesn't run off the property. This whole thing is scary. I mean, Zach and I talked about this and um he didn't think that there was an ordinance that they were violating within the city. I guess my question is if developers can do something like that and make such an unsafe condition in the city, if there isn't an ordinance that covers that, maybe we would should think about doing that that they should be required to commit to keeping their job site safe. Not only for the workers that are working there, obviously, but for the children in the area. We've got a whole development there that's full of kids and they're always running up and down that road, riding their bikes up and down that road. They don't all know that that 8ft drop is there. I wouldn't want to fall off from that. I wouldn't want to fall off that as an as an adult. I'd hate to see some little kid go off that. >> I was surprised they were able to get it cuz there must be a lot of clay right there. >> Oh yeah. Well, yeah. 18 inches down. It's solid clay. Yeah. But anyway, um it's kind of a personal issue for me. Not because of the developer or anything, but because I got hurt in a project like that when I was like 8 years old. And at the time it was at the Dayton Trailer Court. They had two streets there, Auburn and Burns, and they were adding on everything north of there. You know, Crestwood, Deerwood, all the way. They added on probably 200 more lots. While they were doing that, there was a playground that used to be in the center of Burns on the north side. Swings, um, teeter totters, monkey bars, uh, maple, all the kinds of things that when I was little, the kids used to love to play on. They got mad that people were driving out where they were digging their trenches with cars. I don't know why they were doing I was a kid, right? So, in their infinite wisdom, they decided they're going to run a wire across there to keep cars from going out there. Well, the wire that they ran across there was a barb wire. And they ran it across and they ran out of posts in the middle. What do you think they tied that barb wire off to? They tied it off to the monkey bars in the playground. Those of us that are kids running around being used to playing in that playground day and night, we forgot they put the wire up. I ran into that wire and I caught it right across my chin and across my neck. I ended up at North Memorial Hospital that night in in the emergency room because they thought I my mother thought I ripped half my head off. But when you talk about keeping a work area like that safe for kids, it kind of hits home for me. you know, you see dumb things like that happening. What's going on in that development right now with that polling pond to me is just plain stupid. It's it's creating an accident just waiting for some little kid to wander over from Dean's Country Manor, which they do quite often. Kid, mom and dad are done eating. Kids go out in the parking lot and they kind of wander out there. Maybe they don't live in the country all the time. They wander out there and they step over this little silt fence that's like 18 in high and they take another five steps and they're down 8t into a hole. I just think there should be something that we should be able to do about that. I'm not sure what that would be, but I just wanted to bring it to your guys' attention because you're the ones that can actually do something about it. So that's all I have tonight. >> All right. Thanks. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> Anybody else bro? Anybody online? >> Uh, so if you're here for open forum and you're able to hear us, if you can use the raise your hand function, I >> believe we're having some audio issues, but um >> I'm not seeing any hands. >> Okay. >> Yeah. I I want to follow up one thing with the council for the parking lot thing so that everyone's aware. Sure. So the improvements that um Keith had mentioned for the improvements at the Eastman Nature Center are the reasons why that other parking lot is going away is because they want to ensure that people have a bathroom and other available facilities for them. So they expanded the parking lot at the Eastman Nature Center to be able to accommodate more cars than that current little tiny parking lot was um able to do and then it would obviously put them closer to the bathroom and other handicap type facilities. So, the reason for that is they did all the work on that Eastman Nature Center to expand it so that they could remove that other parking lot off of there um and then not have the two parking lots that were close enough together. They just wanted to have one large parking lot for everybody to use. Um so, that's why that's being utilized. Um I'm not aware of them removing the trail access. So, we will verify that that is not removed because it shouldn't be. I do know that longterm they may be looking to remove that trail access point. Um that would be once their legacy project of a underground tunnel at the bottom of the dip past the Rush Creek Parkway and going south towards um 81. They're supposed to put an underpass basically underneath there and that'll be a trail that'll connect up into Sundance Greens development inside the development um basically dead center that development Sundance Wood Sundance Greens area. So I believe likely the answer of them cutting the trail off is going to be once that legacy project happens. They don't want people then crossing at an unsafe crossing if they can cross at an underpass. So >> how far away is the underpass from the current? >> From my understanding it's two to three years out. >> Oh physically how far away? >> Two to three years out. >> No physically. >> Oh physically far away. Sorry. Um, it's supposed to raise the entire So, they're going to redo the bridge at the bottom of that hill and they're supposed to raise the bridge and the pavement up at the same point. So, it's supposed to be basically at that bridge. Um, which is I don't know how many feet south of Rush Creek Parkway and Elm Creek Parkway on Fernbrook. >> It's about 2,000 ft. There you go. 2,000 ft. >> Yep. And it's supposed to then connect up into the development. So, it'll actually connect up um almost dead center into Sundance Wood Sundance Greens. That's that's my guess related to removing up the trail, but we can confirm >> the underpass will technically be in Maple Grove. >> Yes, the underpass will be in Maple Grove. It is a legacy project for Elm Creek Park or the >> So, does Dayton have any access points left in the park? Then >> there would be road. >> Yeah, Elm Creek Road would have their access points like Eastman Nature Center and such, but no, there would be no access points from >> um a neighborhood currently into the Elm Creek Park Reserve in Dayton at that point. >> There's two. >> Well, there's the back on the north side. There's ones. There's ones on Jonquil here. Two John on the north side there. Sorry about that. >> But that doesn't Yeah. help these guys. just >> up here. >> What's my address again? >> Just just for the record, that tunnel that they're talking about putting under 121. That's the tunnel that Tom Dean wanted to pay to put in, >> and the park wouldn't give them access on their side of the road to put it in. So now the county all of a sudden has all this money to put that in when we could have had that paid for by the developer. He wanted to do it. It was part of his project to do it. And we should be asking Henipin County why are they spending our tax dollars when they told us the developer that was building all the homes out there wanted to do it and they wouldn't let him do it. That's insane. >> Kevin's Kevin's number Kevin. >> It won't be it won't be handed county pardon. >> I've got his number. Thanks. It won't be Haden County paying for the project through particip pay for that project, but they'll do it in tandem with the bridge project that Hannip County is doing at that time. But >> still tax dollars. >> It's still tax dollars. You are correct. >> Okay. [Applause] Um on to staff consultant and council updates. Seth. >> Yes. Good evening, mayor, members of council. I've had um heard from a few of you related to the Maple Grove water discussion. um various responses and sounds like it's not going to work as a work session on the night of the 14th any longer no matter what. We would like to have everybody involved and um we have another council member who's not going to be here at the 14th meeting. Is there sometime the week of October 20th through the 24th that works for you guys to meet? >> I would anticipate this to be about a two and a half hour discussion. That's my presumption. I don't know if it will be that long or not, but my guess is there'll be more questions. >> One of the things that I've been So, I occasionally talk to the a couple of the council members over there. They're deciding questions on their capacity before they decide the softener question, the soften water question, which seems totally backwards because I don't know that if if they go softener, we're probably out. don't know that for a fact, but well that's going to affect their capacity numbers by, you know, a good amount. >> It just seems backwards. I don't understand what they're >> Yeah, this conversation obviously is not going to affect our current agreement with Maple Grove, but it will shape what it looks like in the future. And I want to ensure that we're giving correct information to Maple Grove. So, I don't presume it to be one answer or the other answer. I presume it to be multiple answers depending on what Maple Grove does. >> If they do X, >> if they do X, this is what we're going to do. and we'll provide all the information that we have from Maple Grove so you guys have educated information. I've done that. Try to do that already. Um, but the main thing for me at this point is just getting a meeting scheduled so that we can have a conversation as >> What dates did you say the 20th? >> Um, I just picked October 20th through the 24th. So, >> I teach a night class on Monday and Wednesday nights. So, I'm not available any Monday or Wednesday night. Those are just straight out for me. But, I could do >> that Tuesday. >> I could do it. It's technically my wedding anniversary, but it's okay. So, we don't do anything anyway. Wait. Yeah. At least you remember yours. >> Neither me or my wife don't. >> It It's not It's not a deal breaker by any stretch. So So I could do the 21st or the 23rd. >> Yeah, I'm the same. >> 23rd or 24th for me. >> I can do the 24th also, but that's Friday night. >> I mean, yeah, I also don't have a life, so I could do that, too. So >> just tell me when to be here. I'm going to speak on behalf of city staff and go. We don't want to be here on a Friday night. I love you guys very much, but I do not want to be here on a Friday night. >> No sacrifice. What's >> I I know I will say that we'll try to tentatively plan for the 23rd if possible. >> If it does not work, we will make it the 24th if that works for everybody up here as a secondary date. >> Can be the normal time of a work session. >> We can make it whatever time you guys would like it to be. If you want to make it a 5:30 start, that's great. If you want to make it a wide open 3:00 start, that's fine, too. whatever you guys want. >> It's totally up to you all. So, >> if I have a date at least, then I can narrow down times and I can send out just a hey, this is tell me what time works and um you can make an evening work or a day work, whatever. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> October 20. >> Thursday. >> Thank you. >> You done? >> Yep. Thank you very much. Sorry. He's >> I don't have anything. What did they tell you about texting and driving? >> I was looking at October 23rd. See what I had on, of course. >> Um, good evening, Mayor Council. Just a couple of updates. Uh, wellhead treatment plant. The masons have finally finished their work and are off site. Um, they're continuing the pipe work on the inside. Um next two weeks looks like the water hookup for the raw water will be uh completed and there's a culvert realignment to do under the driver which they will uh work out in the next two weeks. Uh parks I own gardens um where the hydro hydro seating on there will be complete tomorrow. Uh Sundance Greens the hydro seating will be completed there by the end of this week. Um area 21 sport courts and parking lot uh being paved tomorrow, trails on Thursday, um irrigation being installed currently and the trees I'm anticipating getting installed in 2 weeks. Uh last time we had a presentation on the DNR boat landing uh the concept there, there was a couple of questions about the location of the handicap parking. Um the reason for the location is it's closest to the launch. It minimizes travel distance for disabled users of the facility. Uh the location was selected by the DNR during concept development so that the connection from ADA parking to the ramp was a better longerlasting service than regular asphalt. So, and there's a bunch of other ADA compliance things that go in there. >> Oh, is that cement? >> Uh yeah. >> Oh, >> yeah. And then uh the other question was about how much space is used for straightening and backing up the boat. Uh the total length of space of pulling up and then backing down the launch is about 150 ft. Uh as the design shows uh the boat trailer size utilized for sizing the site and evaluating uh the necessary turning movements was a vehicle and trailer length of 50 ft by 10 ft wide. Um, this is also the maximum size that would fit within the parking stalls as proposed on the site and it is slightly above and beyond the Minnesota DNR's uh typical standard for their launch uh facilities. So, it's a little bigger than they normally use. Um just a fun fact um on water um I did a little bit of uh research on what we did um in March this year we pumped 8 u964,000 gallons um in July we pumped 30,7 uh 30,790,000 gallons a difference of 21,826,000 uh >> and it all went on the grass just on the grass. So, I just thought I'd share that with you guys. >> Jason, we got to fix that. >> Let the clo Let the clover and the dandelions grow. They don't need as much water. >> Chief, good evening, mayor, members of council. Um, Sunday, October 5th is the fire department's open house from 11 to 2. And then I I'm just curious, Zach or Amy, for planning purposes for emergency management. The next council meeting after the 28th is Veterans Day, will that get moved? >> November 11th. >> Yes, it'll be moved because we could not conduct official city business on a um federal holiday. >> Okay. >> So, we will need to move that date. So, council, you want to do that now? We can move that now, too. I don't know if you want to do that now or not, but >> what day was that? >> November 11th is the first meeting in November. So, we can either move it the day before. >> I can't do Mondays and Wednesdays. So, it would have to be the week before the 4th. >> I don't know if we want to do it the week before cuz that only >> Yeah. Then we got to mess with and stuff. >> We could do Thursday. >> I can do whatever. >> I could do Thursday the 13th. I don't know. Do we want to wait though? Cuz Scott's not here. Do we want to wait till Scott's here to decide that one? >> Yeah, maybe we should do that. Or we can do that, too. That's fine. >> Well, and you want to just email us and we can email you our availability. >> Good question, Chief. Thank you, >> Chief. >> Evening, mayor, members of the council. Um, we survived all the events this weekend. No issues. Um it was great to see everybody had a good time. Um parade was good. Um second thing is is we've got a good offer from Henipin County. We've been trying to get involved in their spe special operations unit for quite a while. Um and recently they have reached out to um chaplain us um in the city of Corkran um to join their have an officer join their special operations unit other known as SWAT. Um so we have one officer interested in taking this on. It's an on call position. Um they'd only be called out when needed. Um and the first year is basically training for this officer to be involved in. So, just wanted to give you a heads up on that. >> John, >> uh, thank you. I'd like to thank the council for attending the, uh, open house for states manufacturing last week. We might have a picture on the slides. Um, so th this is what a half million square feet looks like. Um so these are the larger containers that this is the reason why states uh is leasing a a large building is so they can build buildings within buildings. So thank you. >> Just to add to that I I asked a question about those those uh switch gear houses and they said that order was for 82 of those. >> Wow. >> They're probably not cheap. No, >> Jason. >> Uh, a couple updates along Fernbrook and Rush Creek Parkway just because there's been discussion even tonight, but there's been some calls from the residents. Um, one regarding the stop signs or the intersection of Rush Creek Road. We are of the understanding that the intention is to permanently close those turn lanes. Um, we have requested additional discussion on that with the county. We haven't yet scheduled anything. U, but we would like to talk to them more about that. But that is that is the plan as is consistent with what they did in uh the city of Champlain on the Hayden Lake Road. Um the other one, if folks have noticed a camera or cameras out on the roadway there, there's been some questions why are those out there? >> Um Henipin County crews are actually collecting traffic data for our use in the study. So they have put cameras out there just to record data and then once it's all collected, those will be removed. What turn lanes are they? >> The right right turn. >> The right turn lanes. Yeah. >> I think it's because people don't understand four-way stops in general, and if you've got too many lanes happening, people are just dumb. They're dumb. That's >> um >> I might use a different description, but um it is exactly I think what you mean by that. with with that many cars approaching in that many lanes, it's difficult for drivers to determine who goes next in order of operation. So reducing the number of lanes reduces driver confusion, at least in theory, and makes it easier for it to function. >> That sounds way nicer than what I said. Yes, >> that was a lot of money put into that. >> Okay, >> no report from me. >> Um, I've got a couple of things. two are just uh checking in on um we have I know planning commission it came up a couple different times and I feel like it's come up at city council to revisit our landscaping requirements particularly in regards to shrubs. Um I think it's a ridiculously high number and doesn't make any sense. I'm just wondering if that if there's any progress on that or where that is in the process. >> Yeah. So um a part of the planning commission, Mr. Mayor, members of the council, part of the planning commission agenda in October is going to be a discussion on a couple of items that have been um kind of a front at uh meetings. Um it is going to also be a little bit of a clarifier to the landscaping standards. Um that is kind of an eitheror option if you can't meet the tree standards. So it's not necessarily that's what is required for all developments. It's more of a if you can't meet the standards that are required for trees, then you have to supplement the site with shrubs. So that summary will be a part of that and we can certainly either provide that as a update um to the council at the following meeting or sent out in an email just to summarize what the conversation will be had at the October meeting. >> Awesome. Thank you. Um next one was we had um Stephanie brought it up initially about getting um the fire and well basically all Dayton vehicles marked clearly so that people know just wondering where that is in that process. >> Yep. It's in line currently. So, we're just waiting on the >> Okay. >> slot to come up and be filled. So, >> Okay. But it's happening. >> It is happening. Yeah. >> Okay. Do we have a price on that? >> I'm going to go uh chief >> wondering how much >> you know what the price was? >> Um I do not. They're working on a markup or a visual and they have not provided a quote yet. >> Okay. Thank you. Um, and then lastly, I had a chance to meet with John and Hayden um, to talk about ensuring our city maintains a variety of housing options to meet people at various stages of their housing journey from first-time home buyers to people who are wanting to like, you know, empty nesters who might want to downsize a little bit, maybe have less maintenance, but don't necessarily want to be in an association where they give up all their like rights to what their yard looks like and things like that. Um, it was a really good conversation. I think we got a lot of ideas. Um, and we all kind of have we gave ourselves homework so that we're by no means done. Um, but I just wanted to let you know that we had that conversation and um, I'm excited to to think about how we can do that. One of the things that came up and Dave, I think this was something you brought up at a meeting was how do we preserve our current homes to make sure that they stay marketable and sellable and usable um and not necessarily purchased and then torn down and like a brand new house is built up, right? Again, right? Like so um yeah, we're exploring a lot of different options and it was a really good conversation. So those are my updates. >> Um I wanted to thank staff for all the help with Heritage Day. It went well. Um, it was fun. A lot of people showed up and uh we appreciate it. Thank you. >> Uh, nothing from me today. >> Nothing from me. >> Okay, we are on to item L. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um, we had been contacted by a couple of farmers that had concerns about franchise fees that were being charged to um for their uh natural gas grain dryers when the dryers weren't in use. Um, it's easier to kind of explain the story. So, um, we have three large what I'm going to refer to as three larger uh, farming operations in Dayton. two that use natural gas drain dryers and and a third that uses a an electric um irrigation system. U the gas drain drain drain dryers um are uh customers of Centerpoint Energy um in order for them to turn their dryers on dryers not grain dryers um in the fall they notify uh Centerpoint Energy three days ahead of time. Center Point comes out, turns on the meter, um the dryer is used, and then they lock the meter for the rest of the season. Um and then franchise fees would be charged on the months where the grain dryers are are in use. Um there was some hassle with that and so uh Centerpoint had applied to the public utilities commission to allow the grain dryers to just be um on I shouldn't say on, but have gas running to the the meters 12 months out of the year. Um the unintended con consequence was that with that is that the franchise fee would then be charged 12 months of the year even when the dryers are not in use. Um so the fix to this is a request to the city council to exempt agricultural drain drain dryers from paying the franchise fees. So, this would be a reduction of thought I had it on here about $3,000 a year in lost uh franchise fee revenue. Um, you should note that this is affects the two farm operations that are uh Centerpoint Energy customers. It does not affect any other GA uh utility company. So, we still have another farmer that's using electricity from Kexus for an irrigation system. Um, my understanding from KEXUS is that they charge a franchise fee during the six-month growing season. Um, which you could still use the irrigation system for throughout the growing season. So, it is not a apples to apples comparison between two different utility types. >> So, that loss you're talking about though, that >> I want to make one clarifying thing for the mayor and the council. It is not a loss of $3,000. That's what I >> is a loss of $600 currently because we do not currently collect $152 per month for each grain dryer that's in the city. >> It would be 9. We didn't make a change. >> Yeah. We currently only collect $600 a year roughly from the current system that we've had in the past. So, um Okay. We when we say exempt them, we're not exempting $3,000. We're exempting $600 total. >> And that's total across two or three. That is two different two different operations that use it for two months out of the year. So if you have $12 a month >> times by two is 300 $300 a month and they use it for two months. So >> it's $600 for the year. >> That's what we're asking for. >> I'm fine with that. >> Any questions for staff? >> The only thing we need to make sure we do is close the public hearings. This is a continuation of the public hearing from the last council meeting. Um, so you need to make sure you open it again or ask to open it. I don't know how that works, but it's already open. It's still open. >> Okay. So anybody that Okay. >> Um, and given that it's still a public meeting, I would assume we have to ask for any input. >> Yep. >> Any concerns, any questions? >> I will close the meeting and >> the open >> the open meeting public hearing. Yes. >> Okay. Any any other comments? I need a motion and a second. >> I'll make a motion. >> Make a comment. >> I I will, but it can happen after the motion. >> I'll make a motion. I'll second. >> Okay. >> Okay. Good. >> Um, so in reading how this process works, it sounds like there's some delays because this has to be passed around to other >> entities and they have 90 days or something like that um to respond. Um, and so it pushes the implementation date out a ways. >> Probably till Yeah. till next year. >> Next year. >> Next year. But in the meantime, >> they would be charging this franchise fee even past the grain drying season, which is kind of the next two months or so. >> And so I guess my question is this this is revenue that comes back to the city. Uh, is it possible or reasonable even that we would in this interim, I mean, our intent is to not charge this anymore, correct? That that that money could then be uh refunded >> until we get this ordinance finally blessed by everybody that needs to look at it and and in play. >> Can we justify that? >> If the council if the council feel that that's the real the right thing to do, then yeah, we can. I think that's >> once the season once the grain drying season is done. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> So, yeah. So, we they would charged for the two months that normally they would get charged for and then anything above and beyond that we would >> whatever time after >> passes until we get this thing finally. >> Does he say next year? You talking about next January or I'm going to say January. January. >> I guess it doesn't matter. Yeah. It seems like we should just Yeah. refund that after those two months. >> That makes sense. >> I'm okay with that. Okay. >> Do we need understand what we need then? >> Yep. >> Okay. >> You'll just see it on the payment of claims like any other >> payment of claims. >> Payment. Okay. >> Any other uh comments say? >> Okay. We got a motion to second. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> I. All those opposed say no. Carries four to zero. >> Thank you. >> On to item M. >> Thanks guys. Made that very easy. All right, Mr. Mayor, members of the council, this is a public hearing uh to consider resolution 63-2025 uh approving a drainage and utility easement vacation on outlot A, Dayton Fields, fourth edition. Um this is a little bit backwards in the way that this will get uh addressed. Um but it is in connection to the next item that you'll see on the agenda. Um essentially as a formality because this property was previously platted um the uh vacation of the easements that were previously established need to be removed as uh they will be essentially reestablished with the new plat. So um that is the request. Obviously the uh vacation of the drainage and utilities currently excuse me um is contingent on approval of the final plan. So it's not like we would say vacate them and then when the next item comes up they can be like haha just kidding and peace out like it wouldn't >> correct this resolution would be recorded at the hen at Henipin County prior to the final plat being recorded. So essentially it would go as a as a package. >> Okay. >> Any questions for staff? >> No. Okay. I will open up the public hearing. Anybody want to speak to this? I will. If there's nobody online that wants to deal with this, okay, I will close the public hearing. >> Okay. Um, >> I'll make a motion. >> I'll second. >> Any more discussion? All those in favor say I. I. >> I. All those opposed say no. Carries four to zero. And we are on to item N. >> All right. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of the council. Uh, as I mentioned before, uh, tonight you're asked to consider the, uh, approval of, um, couple of resolutions tonight. Uh, one for preliminary and final plat approval of Dayton Fields fifth edition, as well as a resolution for a conditional use permit for outdoor storage as an accessory use, and uh, site plan approval uh, for development application by Rogers Ops LLC. So, this actually is a continuation of a project that you had seen on a concept level in June of 2025. Um, the property is uh along um adjacent to 121st Avenue North and West French Lake Road. Um the overall site is uh 8 1/2 acres and is currently that outlot that you just uh motioned to vacate the easements on. Um property is guided for an industrial use and currently zoned uh I1 and is also in the current uh staging area for uh the uh um sewer service. Uh the site, if you any um a couple of you might remember, the site was previously approved for a similar use in 2023 uh that never uh proceeded with construction. So, as I mentioned, the applicant is Rogers Ops LLC, but the uh business and the applicants and business owners are here for uh for this uh application tonight, and they can uh speak to it a little bit more. But uh Telkom Construction is a utility contractor that does rightway work uh all around the metro area and beyond. Uh they are proposing a 26,000t building uh split between 8,000 ft of office space and 18,000 ft of warehouse and shop area. Um both are permitted uses within the I1 district. Um the single access that they are proposing is directly uh aligned with uh the invent property uh right across the street. Um employee and customer parking is uh located in the front of the building. And uh as I get into the site plan and show that and it was also in the packet um there is a section of private parking for the employees. Uh the applicants have stated that uh the use of the parking area that is not open to the public is for employees that go on longer term uh work uh jobs uh that may be uh that may last up to a week. Um and uh as I mentioned before associated with this is roughly 36 12,000 ft of outdoor storage space um 10,000 square ft which is proposed to be asphalt surfacing uh which is a slight reduction. Actually, I'm sorry. That is an increase in the asphalt area that was previously shown in the concept. Um, and then, uh, the remaining area is proposed to be class 2 aggregate. Um, all of which is proposed to be fully uh, screened by a fence and landscaping area on the outside of the fence. Um, as you may recall, I believe it might have been July or August, uh, the city council adopted an ordinance amendment that allowed for, um, surfacing materials in outdoor storage areas uh, other than asphalt and concrete. uh which is uh was kind of in connection to this uh concept at that time. So here's the overall uh site plan. You could see that it is uh very similar to uh what you saw at the concept stage. Uh the applicants are proposing a fence line all the way around uh up to this parking lot that would essentially uh provide a gated barrier uh between the public parking and the private parking for employees. Um and then here is the area um shown as the uh proposed class 2 aggregate. Just to touch on the architecture, the architecture overall is consistent with the I1 district requirements. It's a combination of concrete panels and metal finishing um including the accent materials that uh both are vertical and horizontal and complimentary uh colors that will uh be shown here a little bit more detail. The signage is conceptual and they'll obviously have to pull a permit for that stuff. But just to orient everybody, this is the site um looking south and you can see here is the invent building and the proposed access on the property. So, just to run down some of the uh requirements for the I1 district, uh the building setbacks, all front, side, and rear are all met uh related to uh the building as well as the parking uh with substantial separation from property lines on the street side of West French Lake Road uh as well as the rear yard. And here are the parking setbacks that are proposed. And here's just a rundown of the site layout for uh requirements in the I1 district. Uh all of these uh are u met including the outdoor storage coverage which uh based on the current language in the I1 district requirements is about half of what they would be allowed otherwise. Um a major limitation to this is there's roughly two uh plus or minus acres of wetland on the property uh that would otherwise not allow for that to be used. So, just to get into a little bit of the detail, uh the site plan uh shows 77 parking spaces. Um and for the uh city council's understanding, the requirements for office space is one space per 200 square ft. Um and the uh shop area warehouse is one space per 2,000 square ft. Um based on this calculation, they are well over the uh requirement for parking. And uh I I would attribute that mainly to the use of uh that private parking area for um employees as well as company vehicles. Um not all of this area is open to the public, but it is still counted in that calculation. Um the landscape numbers for the trees are compliant as well as uh they are including shrub uh counts and a lot of that has to do with requirements related to an accent around the building. Uh that includes a decorative uh finish uh the usually a 5 foot wide strip that is required and that uh consists of whether it's rock decorative rock and then uh shrubs that kind of soften that building wall when you're next to it. Um and then as well as they are proposing to uh include shrubs and trees along the outside of the proposed fence line to soften the look of that to the surrounding properties as well. Um there was a recommendation in the staff report that uh there was proposed to be a quantity of 20 worth of mountain ash trees. Uh that has since uh been a a request and a condition of approval in the site plan approval to remove those and uh swap those out with another tree species. Um the concern is really uh continuing to introduce more ash trees within the uh community and the emerald ashbor that uh could potentially affect these. Um I know that in talks with uh Marty and and the uh city arborist that uh while there may be more um protections with these newer trees um newer trees uh they still are susceptible to emerald ashbor and could affect other trees within the community. Um so that would be a requirement. Uh there was also after conversations with Marty and the city arborist that uh to remove or replace the overstory trees um that are within the vicinity of I think I can go back to this within the vicinity of this there is a uh sewer line storm sewer >> san >> sanitary sewer line that uh runs through this easement currently. Um, and essentially what uh the conversation um I guess uh brought forward was that the overstory trees um could uh make the pipe more susceptible to rip damage uh versus evergreen trees or uh ornamental trees. So that would be another condition of approval to that as well. Um let's see. And then just to note on the wetland buffer in the concept plan, the wetland buffer was a little bit short on uh the square footage requirements and meeting that 25 foot average. The applicants have uh resolved that and have uh met the code standard for that. Now, there was a healthy uh conversation at the uh planning commission meeting regarding the fence line that was proposed on the front or that is proposed on the uh the front property line to screen that u parking area, that private parking area. Um through the discussion the applicant had stated that a lot of that uh reason for the opaque fence and not to be fully visible through that um is for the uh security of um people's personal properties uh while they're not on site. Uh and uh throughout the discussion there was some conversation related to whether they would be allowed to do so um or if it should be uh fully visible to have full sight view as you're driving down 121st Avenue. Um ultimately the planning commission did vote four to one uh in approvement in approval of this uh development proposal uh understanding that that uh that that the uh opaque fence for screening does serve a purpose in that specific area. Um and then uh just the conditional use permit uh they also recommended approval and uh added a couple of conditions that weren't originally in the resolution. uh one being limiting uh storage in the front area of the building to those vehicles at a height not to exceed uh 10 feet. And then uh anything in the rear yard, not necessarily vehicles because there are going to be vehicles on this site that are taller than 10 ft. Those would be stored in the rear yard or in the side yard adjacent to the building. Um the materials however that may be stacked or stored in that area would be limited to a height of 12 feet. And this is the proposed uh location of where the fence line is going to go. Um originally they had uh proposed it to go all the way out to this almost all the way out to this property line kind of following the easement on this property. Um and the planning commission did request that uh it be recessed to um just the edge of the parking lot. So, um just in proximity to the sanitary sewer line, it is roughly 7 and 12 to 8 ft away from that. Um and then, uh 2 feet away from the curb that is on there to allow for an overhang on parking if necessary. So, with that, I'm happy to answer any questions. >> I got nothing. Anybody else have any? >> I don't have any questions. >> All right. I need a motion in a second. I'll make a motion to approve. >> I'll second. >> Any more discussion? All those in favor say I. >> I. I. >> All those opposed say no. >> Motion carries 40. >> Does that include the changes to the use permit stuff or no? >> The condition the uh um conditions of approval were updated after the planning commission meeting and incorporated into the packet. >> Okay. Just want to make sure I >> All right. On to item, payment plans. >> Yeah. May council, I stand for any questions on payment of claims >> or defer to anybody else. >> Anybody have any questions on payment of claims? >> Thank you. >> Thanks, guys. >> I was going to let Sarah go first. >> I don't have anything. >> Okay. And Scott's not here, so >> that'll leave me. >> That's you. I'm not doing my job, apparently. No, it's it it's fine. It um one comment I'd like to make on it is that uh the report we get, you know, it kind of uh bundles all of the the credit card payments, you know, under the heading of whichever bank that is that issues the card and >> gives pretty limited information. I mean, it's meant to be a summary. I understand that. But we get more information out of the, you know, out of the regular payments than >> on the credit card kinds of things. So, it's it I don't know if there's a way to make that less vague. Vendor information or any additional description would be helpful. >> Let me work with you, Dave, to figure out what you're looking for to see what we can what we can help out with or not. >> Yeah, um >> we can connect offline. I'll show you what I >> struggle with on it and see if there's anything that can be done. I know it's a canned report. So, >> it is a report out of the system. So, I mean, we can generate a new report, but sometimes only the only information that we have in the system is that information. And so there's only so much we can do with it at at some point, but yeah, we'll touch base. >> Okay. Um, then there were there were just two that I kind of picked up on this this time around. Uh, and you know me, when I don't understand it, I ask questions. So, there was uh there was one on page 113 uh for a fire department recognition event for $1,500. And so, I wasn't sure what that was about. Mhm. >> Uh, I know I got that question asked, but I thought others might want to know as well. >> Chief Henderson, do you want to answer that one? You want me to? >> Yes. Mayor, members. >> Yeah, >> sure. >> Okay. Sorry. Um, mayors and members of the council. Um, we had planned a recognition event for September 19th. Um, it didn't work in a lot of schedules. Um, so I did work with the vendor and we're able to move that to May 15th of uh, 2026. So, we didn't lose out on those dollars. >> But, >> yeah, the $1,500 is the deposit that we had to pay to book the event on that date. So, that's why the dollars had to be >> the venue needed to deposit to book the event. >> How much is the total? That's just the deposit. >> That is the deposit. I don't know how much the total is. >> It's uh dependent upon the number. I think we're like we were last year around four or $5,000. >> That sounds right. >> Thank you. I one more question. How much did we pay for the Top Golf event, the um this because you guys had your recognition for the staff here? >> Yep. All all employees including fire department came to that >> roughly. >> Oh boy. Good question. 20 29 20 29. Yeah, something like that. >> How much do we pay for Top Golf? >> Great question. I can get that to you. I don't have that answer off the top of my head. So I I didn't pay for the event, so I can get it for you. But >> just there's the same amount of fire fire. Well, not what the spouse says. I'm just It just feels like a lot personally. >> Sure. I can get that off. >> That would be really great. >> I don't I don't know that on the top of my head. >> Thank you. >> Mhm. >> Okay. Um, my other question um was on page 118 uh was4 or $579 to the Metropolitan Polish and Protect >> Yep. >> uh LLC or something like that. And so I thought that sounded like a pretty expensive wax job, which it's not, but I ask you to give that answer mayor members of council. Um it's uh polish and protect. It's our soap. What's a concentrate though? So, it's five gallons and so roughly about I think it's 3 ounces per gallon or something like that. And before we used to just buy a straight um gallon at like $50 or $60 and that was out being reduced from a concentration if that makes sense. So, it provides more coverage for less dollars but upfront it's $579. >> And this is used for cleaning the trucks. >> That is correct. Yep. Thank you. >> That's all I had. >> I have one. >> Um, sorry to beat you up tonight, Gary, but um, we've got two charges for cell phone bills totaling over $900. Does that seem like a like a lot? Cuz one is 609. It's on page 113. And then one is 314 for cell phones. Um, and it looks like it's just one month. So, it's 8:17 to 9. >> So, purchasing new >> I can I can address that. Sure. >> Mayors and members of the council, the we switch from um T-Mobile to AT&T or FirstNet, so we have more secure. >> Okay. >> Um, and so the that's two months of AT&T and then one month of uh T-Mobile. So, it's a transition and then we still have one phone that we need to transition over um that will probably show up still from T-Mobile >> eventually. Actually, it's going to be dropped off cuz we're not using it. >> Is that for one? That's for just three phones. >> Oh, no. So, that's to clarify. It's It's not just for phones. >> Okay. I was like, that's no way that's there's no way that's phon. I'm like, wait a minute. We have um it's all for our iPads. So all the iPads that are in the trunks. So those are roughly 20 bucks a month. >> I was going to question the first do change. I'm like whoa. >> Yeah. No, that makes total sense. And like I said, it comes across the cell phone bill. So I was like, uh, hold on. >> Thank you, Gary. >> Anything else? All right. Need a motion and a second. >> I'll make a motion to approve. I'll second. >> Any more discussion? All those in favor say I. >> I. >> I. >> All those opposed say no. Carries four to zero. On the P. >> You got it. >> Um so this is two different resolutions. This is really just a formality getting a policy in place so that the public can request data and um how they access it and or um how we organize that information. >> Yeah, I'm going to say that this resolution is long overdue for the city. We don't have a technical policy for any of this stuff. So, we realized that we didn't have that policy and said we need a policy ASAP. >> I thought we did about 5 years ago. Was it something else or must something different? Yep. that I could find >> because Yeah. How do you not have a policy on this? Cuz >> Correct. because even people ask public data requests for >> We have a data retention policy. Maybe you're >> I might Yeah. Who knows? I could. But you'd think somebody would have at some point wanted some data. >> Well, so we we've gotten data and we've pro provided that to them, but it hasn't been following this policy. So it's who gets the information, when is it given to them, how fast is it done, who's responsible. >> It's actually documented of who's doing what versus just So, we have it and be done with it. >> Have to be able to produce um who has requested what information. And currently, without asking every single employee, we don't have that ability, right? Because they can just reach out directly. And there's nothing >> in policy that says that has to even be in writing. >> All right. >> All right. Um I had a question. So if someone requests a physical copy like or to make a copy, they pay for the copy and then they also pay for the employee time to it was mentioned that there is a charge for employee time. Um but if it's inspection only then they don't have to pay for the employee time. >> Correct. Correct. >> And if they're that's if they're a member of the public requesting data. If they're requesting data about themselves, if they're the subject of the data, then they don't pay the cost >> no matter what. Just the printing copy. >> Just the printing copy. >> Just the 25 cents per black and white page up to 100 pages. >> But if someone like the Star Tribune came in and wanted to pull a ton of data and just review it, even though it took you hours and hours to put all together, we couldn't charge them a single dime if they just wanted to look at it. >> Correct. Okay. >> Just wanted to clarify that. Um, oh, and then I do have I think this was I think this is something we do have to fix on page 141 when it's the data request form for data subjects. Um, in that box that's boxed out that says contact information, it says data subject name, parent guardian name if applicable, and then the address phone number. It says you do not have to provide any of the above contact information, but don't they need to give us the data subject name? And if it's the parent and guardian name, isn't that required if applicable? Is that an optional thing for something when you're requesting data on a subject? >> Yeah. So, if you don't provide what you're requesting, it's technically not a request. >> Yeah. Okay. I mean, I just because typically if something's boxed out and says you have to provide the above content information, I was like, well, don't but don't don't they have to? Like how can we how can we tell you the data on the person if you don't tell us the person that you want the data on? I was confused by that. But okay. So they just won't fill it out and then we won't do anything because we don't don't know who that person is and then that's not our problem. Okay, that's fine then. >> Yeah, I think in the policy itself it has blurb about um they have to provide reasonable contact information and respond within forget how many days. 5 days I think I put in there um for any questions that we might have and if they don't respond then that is equivalent to no request. >> Yeah. Well, because and and I I guess my question was was this just an a copy paste oversight because the original contact information box is from the general um data request where they don't have to give us anything at all. like you said they might not get what they want but like but it looked like that language was just copy and pasted into the >> I see what you're saying. >> Yeah, I'll double check. >> Yeah. So, we would we'll just re we'll have to say that you'll have to provide the data subject name if >> yes like that part that that specific line isn't optional because otherwise we can't do anything. Y >> um and I assumed it was just a copy error thing and that >> I would I would pres presume you were correct. >> That was >> good catch. >> I try to do my job. I didn't I didn't uh find find tooth comb in the other one. Um let's see here. That was it for me. >> Okay. I need a motion and a second. >> I have a couple of >> It's okay. >> Comments. I'll make a motion to approve, I guess, for so we can >> Oh, yeah. Sorry, I jumped. >> I always jumped that stuff. Second. >> All right. Go ahead. Um, on page 131, we have a comment about uh that we will notify in writing. Get back to it so I can just read it. Sorry, it's going to take me just a second. I should have printed it out. Um because you're probably going to answer this very easily. I'm almost there. >> Thank you for the confidence. >> We need the Jeopardy music. All right. Um, on page 131 it says, "If we do not have the data, we will notify you in writing as soon as reasonably possible." I'm guessing, you know, outside of probably lawsuits, most of these requests come via email. And are we responding by when we say we're responding in writing, do we mean email or do we al mean just postal mail? >> Can can be both. >> Can be >> either. Yeah. >> Either there. Okay. most likely email, but >> that's fine. Um, my second one I answered for myself, so I don't have to bother with that. Uh, on page 144, there is a typo at the top. >> The Dayton >> the Dayton thing. Yeah. >> Yeah. Thank you. That was pointed out and I didn't get to fix it yet, but >> I will fix that. >> On page 147, we talk about um who are I think this the accountable people >> in in this thing. I'm I'm wondering if it would be better to just name positions and not names because people do turn over. >> I'm sorry. I'll just jump right in and say the statute requires that an individual be named not just a position. So if you know Amy tried to do that because they didn't want to have to update this resolution, >> right? So if Amy Benting leaves her position and somebody else becomes the responsible authority, then you need to do another resolution. The statute requires an individual be identified. >> Sure. Sounds dumb, but I get it. Um, >> it's data practice field. >> Probably so they you can't pass the buck around. Or if there's a place that has more than one person in a particular role that they can't be like, "Oh, I thought so and so did it." And they're like, "Well, no, I thought so and so did it." So, I'm guessing that's why the law is that way. >> Sure. But it also means that we have to revisit this every time there's a change in staff. >> Well, then no one can leave. That's >> you don't hear. >> That's one approach. I'm just I don't know what will trigger this to come back to us because we've got lots of statutes that you know should have been looked at some time ago. We find them and say that you know realize that they address things that are no longer true or applicable. And so >> do we have when someone leaves a position is there a set of okay now this person has left we have to do like you know we have to get this back from them we have to do this could we put it in something like that like if someone in one of these position leaves that that there is a reminder that this policy has to get updated. >> Yep. >> We can do that. Um we yes yeah so we do have an exit checklist essentially that we utilize for when people are leaving >> of what we need to do and what we don't need to do to make sure that they leave employment or whatever. >> Um and we'll just have to note that any resolutions of that person's name under updated. >> Okay. >> Um with policies >> with this one obviously it's only two of us so it's not applicable that most people's >> Oh you mean the other part with the individual design? >> So there's seven on >> Yeah. I just well it is what it is but I I know firsthand I still get um I've been retired for six years from the hospital. I still get calls from Excel asking me for access to the hospital's power plant. >> Did you give it to them? >> Sure. >> Do what you need to do. >> Um so I know those things get lost and I just thought we might have a way around it but we don't. >> I'm adding it to the exit >> exit exit list. an idea. Yep. >> That's all I had. >> Anybody else? >> Stephanie, did you >> I have a like a They say there are no dumb questions, but this may be the first. Um by like default, let's say that like one of these individuals isn't here anymore. That would then fall on >> the responsible authority. >> Okay. >> Just him. >> Just making sure. I mean, I figured that, but >> so Amy's responsible to get the information. I'm I'm responsible for Amy making sure that she got the information. >> Perfect. I just >> Which makes like if someone was on leave or something like that, like so they haven't triggered the we need a new thing, but someone's on medical leave or maternity leave like you're not going to be back for a while. >> That's not going to happen. >> Or no longer, >> you know, Marty might have something surprising coming. I don't know. Okay. >> Marty, >> I don't think it's unapproved. >> No, I'm again just making sure. Again, ask the dumb question. Um, but the default is that if someone's not on that position, that would automatically then go to you. Correct. >> Okay. So, even if we didn't pass a resolution and if someone left us right away, there would be a backup. >> Closing the loop. >> Correct. Okay. Any other comments or questions? >> No. All those in favor say I. >> I. I. >> I. >> All those opposed say no. >> All right. So that passes. And anybody have a problem with the two-minute recess? >> No, not at all. >> I thought I was the only one. clarifying question. So, >> on the record or off the record? >> It can be on the record. >> Oh, wait. Back. Oh, are we back? >> Yeah, we'll be back. >> Um, >> sorry. >> I historically Well, okay. A couple years ago, the first um Carlson LB Carlson was our accountant for a couple years. They haven't been since 2022 or 2023. I think 2022. Um so should I recuse myself from this conversation since they were one of the people? >> Oh, LB Carlson as in were they were they then acquired by >> LB Carlson? No. So of you got four people who put an application in. Yep. >> LB Carlson is one of them. >> Oh, >> they were my account. >> You do not need to recuse yourself. No. >> Okay. >> Because they aren't now and they haven't been for years. So, but Okay. >> This is the first time anything like that. >> You do not need to recuse yourself. >> I was trying to figure out the LB Carlson thank you. Makes sense. >> Yep. >> Okay. Q. >> Yep. Stand for any questions. P me council about awarding the RFP to CLA. Um they came in, you know, most of the um RFPs came in very similar. Um it really came down to, you know, type of service and and dollar amount really. Um it was it really came down to two two firms and CLA was the clear winner in the dollar amount area of things. So they were significantly cheaper and right on par with what we could actually afford in the budget this year. >> Okay. Motion second. >> I'll make a motion. >> I'll second. >> Any discussion? I had one other question related to well I guess it relates to all of them. So they all um separately price something called a single audit. >> Correct. >> What is that? >> So a single audit is when a local government expends more than $750,000 of federal dollars in a single fiscal year. There has to be a separate audit done on that project or where those fiscal or those where those federal expenditure dollars happened. So, it's a totally separate audit that has to have happen as an addendum to the current audit and it's essentially another audit that happens um to say that we federally used our federal expended money properly and with all of the requirements related to those federal dollars. So, >> so we certainly would need to be doing that now with the water treatment plant >> that is well for this project. Yeah. So, the we've had a single audit since I've been here. We had it with the interchange project. Um, and it's only related to when we expend the dollars, not when we receive them. So, it has nothing to do with the revenues of them. It has to do when we're expending them. Um, and so now this year, you know, um, we would be expending those um, federal dollars related to the wellment plant. Even though we were awarded them many years ago, those didn't count. We didn't expend them until this year. So, we will have a single audit this year. That is correct. >> So, it's a year that the money's actually spent. >> Correct. >> Okay. And that could be ongoing with other grants that we hope to get or have. >> You got it. The water trail. >> You got it. >> Something like that. Okay. Thank you. >> You you are correct. Yeah. So, it's a total doesn't matter if it's by project or not. It's a total amount of federal expenditure dollars. So next year we will likely have a single audit again and I calculated in that into our costs of how much we're going to have for an audit this year cost price because next year we'll likely have the same thing again because we'll have some wellhead treatment plant dollars and some water trail and that'll put us over 750 almost guaranteed. So 750 is about a drop in the bucket for the federal government. I don't know why they care about $750,000 but they do. >> Thank you. >> Comments. Um I guess I'll just make one comment because I had asked Zach about it before the meeting, but um my question to him was is who is the staff selection committee because the um item says that they selected um CLA as the auditor for the next 5 years. So just clarification that was >> um yep that is myself, the accountant Dena and then assistant city administrator Amy Venting. >> Thank you. I just had never heard the called that or anything called that. That's why I had a question, but just for the benefit of everyone later on. >> Thank you, sir. >> You're very welcome. >> All right. All those in favor say I. I. >> I. All those opposed say no. >> That carries four to zero. On the item R. Shoot. >> You have to click on the PowerPoint. >> You have to click on the You'll have to click on the PowerPoint with the mouse. >> Yeah, just on the PowerPoint itself. There you go. >> There you go. >> Oh, just one. Gotcha. Okay. >> Uh, good evening, Mayor Council. Um, we're looking at the project involving the street signal that's going in on Dayton Parkway and Holly Lane. U council's seen this project several times, so I'll go through the background quickly. Um, stop me if you want a reminder of anything and then I'll concentrate on the new information. So, if council remembers, this project originally had two uh, signal systems proposed. one on either side of I94 on Dayton Parkway as shown. And again, just those intersections in relations to the uh recent, the new and the future development expected in the area. So, a background, this project was initiated back in June of 2024. It was paused uh to determine the funding to be utilized for it. Originally proposed to be a special assessments, it then moved to municipal state aid. The preparation of the plans were authorized in May of 2025. The project was again paused to verify the scope whether both intersections to be included or not. Um it was decided to remove the signal west of 94 and then uh based on the plan approved the plan approval and authorization will be only the signal at Holly Lane and Territorial. So again, just graphically, uh the one on the east side of I94 is the only one to be included with this project. So there are some updates um on this one. This project uh kind of slid late, if you will, in the process. So there's been some late changes in it. Um um part of it being the bid opening. I I'll get into that a little bit as well. Uh there was an alternate one of the big changes um there was an alternate item added for this and that was to include a temporary traffic control system as an alternate bid. This would allow the contractor to install temporary fixtures to at least have some sort of control in the intersection if it doesn't operate well. I'll say after the opening of Quick Trip because we're not sure if it's needed at this time. We did include language in the contract such that if this alternate is awarded, we are not obligated to construct it. In other words, we can award it and the item can sit there and if we see that there's issues with the operations, we can instruct them to install the light and then we would pay it as as bid. If we feel that the operation is acceptable or the timeline is short enough that we don't want to spend the money on it, we don't have to install it and then we just don't pay the contractor for it. So, there's some flexibility in there. So, that that will be important. Um, >> and is that equipment that they would have sitting around? >> We don't have the timeline. We expect it will be readily available. >> Okay. >> Um, but that's a good question and I don't have an answer to that yet. We'll have to get that from the the contractor. And part of the reason for not having that yet is the bid opening was moved all the way to this morning. So, we didn't even know who'd be awarding to. Wasn't confirmed until almost noon today. So, um we're still trying to iron out some schedule assumptions. Um and then also to note, and this came in even after the council packet, it was that late. Um, I guess to back up, we had requested county input on the design. And the reason for that is I think we're we're all aware of at least discussions of transitioning this jurisdiction over to the county at some point in the future. We wanted to make sure they were on board and we weren't building anything that they would require us to redo um if the roadway, including the signal, were turn was turned over in the future. So, they did provide some comments and suggestions. Um to be honest they were very reasonable. Um most of them were quite minor. There was some pedestrian improvements that introduced some new work to the project but for the most part they were limited that you know don't use 14 gauge wire. We use 16 and small smaller items in there. But again it did take some time and that's hence the delay for the posting of the documents for biders. And then we did have to move the bid opening out. And then we got ready to post Friday morning for a bid opening yesterday and there was it issues and we couldn't post until about 7:00 p.m. on Friday. We didn't want to leave the bid opening on Monday morning if it was getting out that late. So we moved it to this morning and we did get the information in. The good news is we can consider award at tonight's meeting and move forward with the project. Um, if you take a look at a calendar, any additional delay would have been a three-week delay to the project as being a fifth Tuesday in uh this month. So, um, I should have warned you before I brought this up. A lot of numbers on the next few slides. Um, I'm just going to show the highlights and and what's in here um or what what might be of interest. So just regarding the columns on here, the previous estimate, that's exactly what was shared when we approved plans. So council has seen that before. The current estimate I've just separated out with and without the alternate, but they're the same otherwise. And that information actually that matches what was in the packet. So, not in new information here, but just wanted to point out, you know, based on the suggestions and revisions based on Henipin County review. Um, you know, our estimated construction did go up. We added some costs for the temporary signal as shown. Um, the engineering and the other indirect costs. Um, these might seem a little bit confusing. Previously, we had 102,000 for engineering. That was to get us through bidding, not necessarily into construction. So there was not construction costs identified in that. And I'll also note it might seem a little bit high, but that was also to design both signals. Um so your next one's uh ready to go if that's helpful. Um so we did basically just shift some of the costs from the other indirect that 21,000 was account was intended intended to account for additional construction services with engineering. We were hopeful that the county would be able to complete some of the field services to save some costs. Um that did not work out as we had hoped. So the uh construction services is going to be a little bit more expensive than intended. We'll be completing the work um with uh less than anticipated assistance from the county. Um and then the other the the other work added to the project uh with the pedestrian improvements I mentioned they they do require some additional testing. So there's some additional costs there as well. So u and then just the revenue I think this is familiar to to council. The quick trip is obligated for about 442,000 with the balance expected to come from municipal state aid and that has been preserved and identified through a advancement of future aotments through the state aid program. So here was the morning. Um these are the bids that came in. We did get four bids on the project. Um the top row that's bolded is the low bid and I'll just drop right to the bottom row which was our estimate and as council can see uh significantly higher than our estimates. Um I honestly wish I had a better explanation or a more um pointed reason for this. Um a large portion almost 80% of that is based on the signal system itself. And I don't have a great reason on why they're so much higher other than the cost of signals is skyrocketing. Um the bids were consistent which is encouraging that there was not you know mistakes or you know inconsistency in the the bidding documents. So we're we're comfortable with the amounts. Um we even checked with the county earlier this year. Um they said uh they warned us um if you're looking at these our prices have been coming in high. we've been budgeting $600,000 per intersection for a total project cost. So, we thought we were right in line with our estimate and then we came to this. So, um not sure what to say. Um hopefully the next slide does help with this. Uh so again, that's just the current estimate carried forward and then the post bid. The only numbers that are different on this is the base bid construction and the alternate are added or updated with the actual bid amounts. As you can see, that puts the total projected cost um above that identified in the CIP. I will note that the alternate was not included in the original CIP. Um and then again, and this hopefully is what at least helps a little bit is the uh balance that slides through, if you will, to the municipal state aid. Um still well below that available. So, the funding is there. We're not um scrging and looking for funding for it. it's identified and available for it. And then minor, but I'll point it out. Um, there was a few work items in there that state aid said were not eligible for state aid funds. So, we had to slide those over to local funds. So, the city will be responsible for salvaging four street signs and one overhead light. And then this is just the same slide um without the alternate. So if we choose not to install the temporary signal, there would not be a payment with that and the estimated project cost comes down to the 778,000 which is at least much more comparable with the CIP budget identified previously. >> When uh when is the quick trip open? >> October 2nd. >> Okay. >> Is their first 5:00 a.m. October 2nd will be their first. So, if there's an issue, do we expect it to show up fairly quickly or? >> Um, so we do we do have a few options. Um, none of them are immediate. Um, but once they open and we witness operation and and as the opening continues, I assume it'll ramp up probably quickly with use. Um, I mean, we would instruct and we'll talk more with the contractor this week. uh will instruct either the signals to go in. Um another potential option would be to install a four-way stop. That would be much cheaper and much simpler um if you will. Um there's some potential risk with that just with backup backups in either direction. So I'm a little bit hesitant to move forward with it. I think we'd want to take a closer look at it, but we could definitely at least evaluate that. Um the other part and as indicated on this schedule, the work we do expect to start essentially right away. So in October, the initial work will include installing the bases and getting the site ready uh for the signal system. Um the equip equipment installation can start as soon as it's procured. However, um at least at our initial estimates, and again, we haven't been able to connect with the the winning or the low bid contractor yet, but it is estimated that that will be a four-month period. If that ends up being shorter, um all the better. So, >> that's the equipment lead time, that four months. >> Yes, that that's what we were told to expect when we checked with vendors. Um I suppose it's probably been two months now before we went in for for plan approval. It seems like everything's pretty straightforward other than whether or not we're going to eat that 80k >> 114. >> Yeah, it came in at >> Yeah. Sorry, I didn't point that out, but there Yeah, the actual bid was 114,000 on the signal. >> So, it would be more yet. So, >> Oh, the 80 was an estimate. Okay. >> The 80 was our estimate. That came in notably higher as well. >> Better than some of them. 200 some thousand was a lot. >> There was a big range on the temporary. I don't I don't know why that is. Um I'm hoping that means the cheaper ones means they're on hand, but we'll >> um we'll confirm that. So our recommendation tonight is to award the contract to Collins Electric, which is the the low bid. Um we are suggesting to award the alternate. Again, um just a reminder that does not obligate that the payment is made or the work is completed. that can be. >> So this says no and that we can actually say no. >> Yes. Um we specifically included it for that reason. We didn't want to commit to it and then have everything working fine and then be obligated to spend whatever money that is. So instead we would again we we'd monitor um the intersection upon the opening of Quick Trip. That's probably going to be about when contracts are going through. So that's about the earliest we could tell them to install it anyway. Um, >> and that will be the city's call whether to pull the trigger on that temporary >> situation. >> Yeah, that'll be at the city's sole discretion. >> So, and I'm assuming monitoring we we just put in count counters or something or how do we know? >> Uh, I mean, we could take physical accounts, but I think it's probably just a perceived operation level of of just experience. Um, I'm sure Quick Trip will have feedback if it's not going well. King Solutions, Sm. ing. Um, we can certainly keep eyes on it. Um, you know, probably have >> the PD can >> seems like >> about it routinely, especially during peak hours. >> Mayor C. The idea would be to have the police kind of monitor and tell us what's going on so we have an idea of what's happening down there. >> Yeah, there's there's no exact trigger, if you will, for how many movements, but if it if it's getting to the point where nobody's making movements out there, we're going to have to move on something, I I suspect. But >> how quickly can they get the alternate up the temporary signal? >> We don't have a great handle on that yet. So, um, as soon as we connect with Collins, assuming that's the the direction council chooses, is we'll start having those conversations and and ask what timelines would be from, you know, basically how how quickly from instruction to operational template temporary system. Um, what's what's that timeline look like? So, >> and you're thinking that this the stack up might be problematic for a four >> for those? >> I'm I'm nervous about a three months or something. >> You're just dealing with so many semis like you just need one or two in the whole thing. >> Well, there there's the benefit of having two lanes which is helpful. Allows more stacking in there. Um it's also a diverging diamond intersection signal. Um, I'll be honest, I'm not 100% up to speed on how the timing or the operations of those work if if there can be adjustments to accommodate. I know with the the one at 81, for example, that one can certainly be adjusted, but I think they're they're a little more complicated when you get into those on andoff ramps in a situation like a a DI. So, >> okay. I mean, even though it's MSA, it's still money we can't put somewhere else. It it it's not free money. You're right. It's it's it's available and it's identified for this project, which is good. But you're right. Anything we don't spend on it can be spent elsewhere on a city approved project? >> I know this changes from year to year, but approximately how much MSA dollars are we acrewing each year? >> Um, we just had a we we got a big jump. We did a bunch of redesations. We got a big jump. I don't know if Zach, if you remember on this one. And I want to say it went up to about 700,000 total. >> I think it was 696,000 or something like that this year. >> I think 25% is that construction or is that >> that's just construction, not the total. >> So that that goes to projects. The the amount is bigger, but 25% of it goes into a maintenance fund um for the city and then the construction dollars go to eligible projects. and we're in the um 2026 budget. Were we anticipating using any of this money that we um now have to divert >> to this project? >> Yeah, great question, Culture Fashion. So, there are no projects currently allocated in 2026 that would be able to be MSA eligible. So, um we would not be anticipating using any MSA dollars at this point in 2026 or in 2027 currently. So hopefully that helps answer your question for a couple of years out at least. >> Other questions? >> Oh yeah. I mean the ones currently we did 2025 new projects. No new projects. That's correct. >> Yeah. Well, that's good to know. Um I think you answered this. So, the the cost for the salvage lighting unit, that's moving a light pole, taking it down, and putting it back up somewhere else or >> um the reason we can't use dollars is we don't want to put it back up. So, they won't they'll pay it if we salvage it and use it on the project, but if we salvage it and bring it to Marty's shop, then they they don't want to pay for it. So, okay. >> Um and if we list it as remove, it'll get destroyed. So, if we if we call it salvage, we will be able to reuse it if we call it salvage, but they won't pay for it to salvage. So, in other words, we'll pay $2,000 to be able to reuse a light and four signs, or we could probably change that to $1,500 and have them just demolish them. >> Okay. And then um correct me if I'm wrong, but I had heard at one point that Simstone was willing to donate some concrete to this project. Is that incorporated into this cost at all? >> It it's not directly into this. Um my understanding is that has happened and it's a credit to the city. Correct. >> Um but not necessarily applied to here. Um Collins would be or their sub would be the contractor and the customer on this project. So not sure how that pass through works if if even an option but there was a contribution made um >> for the benefit of this project is my understanding. >> Yeah. So essentially you're using other dollars. So the the city of Dayton's account got credited for $10,000. And so instead of us using dollars for a project or whatever that we would normally be utilizing those concrete dollars for, we'll then >> put those dollars for towards the project and then the $10,000 credit would happen on our account if that makes sense. But that is correct. That happened. >> There's an offset there. >> There is an offset there. That is correct. >> Yeah. >> Uh I don't think I had anything else. >> Anybody else? >> Motion. Second. >> I'll make a motion. >> I'll second. >> Any other discussion? All those in favor say and this is with the right. So >> with the alternate because we don't have to do the alternate, >> right? It's kind of free at this point. >> It It is. It's It's a insurance. >> Okay. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> I. >> All those opposed say no. The motion carries four to zero. And if there are no objections, we will be adjourned. Thank you.