for e e call to order the regular meee of Dayton city council for September 10 stand for the pledge pledge allegiance 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 any Motion in a second we got excitement on TV tonight circus okay I got a motion by Dave and second by math any discussion okay all those in favor say I I I all this opposed say no motion carries 5 to zero on to consent I need a motion in a second I'll make the motion to approve it Dave and Scott second discussion I have go ahead just uh two questions on the um on Item B payment of claims uh there is an item for Conexus for 319 k for varying power lines on 117 correct um I remember us talking about that I don't remember how we were paying for that so that came out of the storm water fund and it's related to the rer and trails development East Side we did the same agreement on the West Side the first development for rap trails and we split the cost with the develop to put those underground that's what that was thank you y welcome uh and then on item C is U page 34 on our packet this is a around the approval of awarding contract on for the water main and extension of territorial and um I guess uh there were two items on that one just a second here sorry about that um so in the in the bids um the the low bidder um appeared to be quite a bit higher on traffic control and you know that I guess that's fine they put their money where they where they feel like they need it but um there were the other item that just caught my eye I just I just wanted to ask they were significantly lower on the on the cost of the fire hydrant they were at $14,000 versus 20 and 23 for the the other two bids I guess I just wanted to make sure that um you know that I thought fire hydrants were kind of a standard thing and that seem like quite a lot of difference in cost uh so I just want to I mean I I'm not concerned about where the other guys got their number I just want to make sure we're getting the fire hydrant that we expect uh at that and not one I might put in my lawn or something very specific equipment and materials that are Bid in I mean the exact thread type style u model number everything so yeah okay something that's that's our standard or Y it's a documented standard that's used in all of the plans for the city okay I was just curious because there was that that difference in the cost of just that one item um that's all I had anybody else I guess I wanted to extend on that too is uh one of our last trainings that we did we noticed that there's some different fire hydrants in our area that have different threads on them there's Maple Grove and there's Dayton thread and we've got them inter miixed in some different areas um that mean thread for the hoses to connect yeah we got adapter that we got to use on some and to be honest I have no idea why there's so many thread patterns out there but there's a lot of them out there and unfortunately in in uh I think it was Sunday green six is the one that I'm familiar with where they got some of six edition of Sundance greens they brought out the wrong threads M for them so you talking about like threads per inch or size size of what I'm talking about is actually there's there's Maple Grove has a certain type of thread pitch that they'll use on Y and then Dayton has a different type of threat pitch and we've got some that are intermixed in the city that was a good idea I I don't I don't know where happen I just know that we're coming across and we're like crap oh man yeah cuz go ahead yeah mayor members of the council um yeah to Jason's point last fall I believe we found it in uh sixth edition um then we ran across it at uh the cubes so we're going to check the other uh buildings just to make sure that they cuz we have to have the proper thread we we have both threads um either have National Standard um or we have a Minneapolis thread it's usually one of those two and if we the Minneapolis and the national you can tell that um it connects but it blows off pretty quickly once you start filling the 5-in lineup so we do need to try to be consistent of that or at least know from the fire department's perspective on where those might get put in I I understand it because obviously we're using Maple gr water at that end of the community um but we would like to see those all standardized so we don't run into that issue within the community this may seem like a silly question but can't we are there simply an adapter we can put on and leave in case so that they're all oh actually um we would we can um there is a thought process too of looking at maybe going away from that completely um I haven't talked to Jason about this yet but going to a stores connection which is a standard stores connection on a 5 in uh piece of hydrant line so therefore we wouldn't have to worry about the type of thread that we had and you'll see that in various communities around the country so it would be just uh and then it also minimizes other people trying to connect to that hydrant as well okay do you know how many are currently not to dat are we my question are we talking five or are we talking 50 trying to understand the magnitude of it fall apart honestly we don't know because Jason and I started a little bit of that last fall um we found a few um and just ran across these ones the other on iTunes and prated the cubes so I don't know that number it's definitely more than five um and it could be 50 Marty do you guys drain every hydrant when you draining the fall and can your guys check it as part of their checklist so we know which ones are which so uh the ones that we we have a standard thread that that we use for hydrant flushing and that fits on all the ones that we're flushing where we come uh don't know is where they on private systems like the cubes that they maintain all the their own hydrants and over um like King solutions they have there so we don't test those so we don't know which ones there are but all the ones that we uh do for the city of Dayton are all correct threads so the bottom line is you just have to have all the all the connections that you could possibly run into so okay just seems very odd I do think that that was something that you could put into our building code of some sort that would say the the same information is on every plan I I don't know why the wrong ones get out there I suspect what happens is there's not that many suppliers so pretty much they go to the same place and often they know what communities want and I'm completely speculating this but what I expect is some of the properties in the South actually have a Maple Grove address listed because of Thee the ZIP code down there and then when the supplier sees Maple Grove they may be supplying the Maple Grove threads just not on purpose but it can happen okay we have had those it did seem like we isolated to the I didn't know about the cubes one that's that one's newer to me but the U to one development we checked we checked a lot of them the hard part is you can get it threaded on there and if it's not under pressure it feels solid so it's hard to tell the difference but once you load it with pressure then those lat conditions that then turn into real Ser takes a lot more effort to crank every hydron open and close to check each one yeah guess we're usually standing when you try to pressure it up yeah think about that for yeah okay any other uh discussion about consent okay all those in favor say I I I all those opposed say no consent passed 5 to zero open Forum we have anybody here for open Forum if anybody online for open for do have one attendee if you would like to speak it open for him please use the raise your hand function I am not seeing a hand mayor okay staff consultant Council updates s yes good evening mayor members of council um just want a couple updates for you one update is that absentee voting for the general election starts next Friday September 20th here at City Hall at 8: a.m. um Central Park parking lot update for you hi project has been delayed another week possibly 2 it's a rough FL rough timeline is start of start to the near end of September um we have been in constant contact with the school district so they are aware of this and then uh last update City staff met with the mind today um to discuss how The Interchange is working out any future needs we have any concerns that we have overall as they're installing the same exact type of interchange at Rogers at 101 in Rogers um and so it was good to have a good followup conversation with mot as this is the first official check we've ever had from them and um we have the next scheduled meeting is in March of next year so if you have any concerns or questions about the interchange overall or questions about the process how it works so on and so forth please send those to me as soon as possible and we can have them on the next meeting agenda which is in again March so we can talk to them about Landscaping um that's in our bid so not on their bid but we did talk to them extensively about the lights and the coordination of Lights once we get all those up and running six of them in a row we want to make sure we coordinate so we'll have to get the county involved and US involved and M do involved where that going um so those are the lights that are going to be down by The Interchange one on the South Side added and one on the North side added TR lights traffic lights yeah sorry signals um so that we but we have we're going to have six in that Mile Stretch or so so we want to make sure they're coordinated otherwise they're going to be stopping go traffic 247 there that's all I got Mar May councel I've only got one update um The Well house 5 um is Project is going ahead they've done the excavation they're starting to put block work in so it's starting to come out the ground um so I think that's uh on schedule and going forward okay good evening mayor members of council um last night the Northwest Wen fire academy officially started so um we have four firefighters in that um we're starting off with EMT unfortunately since we last met um I stated we have two firefighters um that were fully trained with setion of one still needing EMT we started to put them through the process and uh they both decided they did not have the time to commit to the organization um we spent a little bit of money on one but um unfortunately that kind of is what happens today so we are back to um four um lastly um probably can't see her but this is Phoenix um Phoenix has had a rough day obviously seems a little as though um she's still working on getting trained she's a rescue dog so we really don't know her history um she is a little bit reluctant to uh interact with people at the moment but over the last week she's done really good interacting with staff and other people um and I did want to take one opportunity and I don't often comment on the community uh page on Facebook at all but I want to make sure that everyone's aware that the dollars that we spent or that I anticipate spending on Phoenix over the next say roughly 8 to 10 years is going to come from our Public Safety dollars those Public Safety dollars were designed for some of those were designed and supposed to be designated for mental health of firefighters so um I just want to make sure that that is out there um in the public as a result of that post so thank you Paul nothing John nothing nothing here Amy good evening mayor and members of the council um although this isn't usually my area um I just thought I would bring to your attention that the city's litigation Council let Zach and me know yesterday that um housing first Minnesota has filed for the review of the Minnesota Supreme Court or Minnesota Court's decision um in the lawsuit they've sent a petition for a what's called a RIT of cersi irari to the United States Supreme Court um Monty Monty Mills from Green espel whose litigation Council obviously knows more about it um but you know what he communicated to Zach and me is that you know it's somewhat unlikely that they that the Supreme Court would take the case but it is ALS it it's out there and um you know he according to the numbers that that Monty Mills provided um the Supreme Court gets about 7,500 requests every year for review of cases from across the country um but only grants review of you know between 100 and 150 in the past four or five years it's actually been lower than that so um it's it's out there uh the petition that they filed um he gave a summary of kind of what they're claiming um what they want the court to review it's very hyper technical but I just want you to know it's out there um I think if if you wanted to see the petition and I think it'd be no problem for us to forward that on to you other than that I have nothing and that was the Supreme Court you said yeah okay to go to the Supreme Court of the United States do they have a deadline upon which they decide whether or not to review that or not usually and I'm not an expert on this but usually the way that it works is they will um review it and at least four of the of the justices have to agree that there's an issue worth reviewing um and so they will um I believe that all the decision all the cases that they're going to review in the term that will be starting in October next month for you know 2024 into 2025 I believe all those cases are set so I think um and I can verify this with Monty and follow up with you if you'd like um I think that the case would probably they would decide if they decide to take it it would be in the fall of next year that it would be brought before the but will we know before then if they will or won't take it's my question you will and when when approximately I don't think there's a deadline but um I can follow up with Monty and get more information about that just to be more precise thank other than that I got nothing Scott I don't think I have anything Travis good a few things um so it looks like the sign by Pine B Meadows is gone uh did we do that or did one of the residents do that it could have been I think it was probably us guys took it out you talking yeah the large one that's on D Road yep the big one okay yeah okay um and then did they get the did the other signs get letters do you know yes I know that I'll sorry you're talking about the realer signs not the park signs so correct no I believe the Builder did take that out or they were told to so um we had sent out letters I'm going to say in like in December and April of December of last year then again in April um I know there's a few that are new newly up are they 4 by eights or are they also B oh no they're big so oh no they're big okay so we are kind of actively chasing those okay um some some already it maybe this is something for Parks but um a couple residents um over on Pine Ridge are asking if they could use soccer goals over there and they said they would pay for them I don't know okay what that means for for us for the park or for um there's a lot of Green Space there which which Park was that um the one on Pine Ridge okay um the one that has the putting green and yep have you have you got any contact details that you can share with me I do actually also said they pay for it but I can't imagine it's going to be that big a deal but um yeah I do um and we typically don't put bathrooms on Neo Parks right and is that simply because it's just asking for maintenance nightmares um it's um traditionally we've only done it where there there's activities so that where you get large groups of people so over here at McNeil and stuff like that um so we haven't really done it in neighborhood parks I think and was people are close to home so you know true that would be you know the way to use it but we are starting to hear a little bit more about people want in bathrooms in neighborhood parks I know trabis sent something to me today about that as well um so it may be something that we want consider going forward Parks Commission talked about it two meetings ago yeah well and I think you were going to look into it to figure out the cost so we could figure out if that was worth while to put up Porta and all the bathrooms it's not necessarily the cost but what follows yeah how many times you get TI or yeah there all those things but yeah generally they you know they're they're not a maintenance issue we have a Serv that comes around and takes care of them that's usually just contract that's not something that you're going to do anyways right that's biffs or whoever comes out and does that yeah so yeah we just have a have the cost to cover for that yeah and then I have one more um Paul I I think we we covered this about not quite even a year ago but resident is asking if there are enough speed limit signs on Pine View you get forwarded that email by State Statute yes it it's covered and you think it's adequate to make to make people understand that there that is 40 there and that's that I believe it is adequate because the people that are probably requesting it um see them every day um and there's one at the beginning of just off of Sou good okay yeah I guess that's all I got on the same note of the signs uh I was talking to citizens in Zachary Lane North in uh Hayden Hills area and they there's like no speed limit signs on that chunk of road I know you got to go through a 30 to get there but people turn in that neighborhood and I saw it happen a couple times bolt off so I don't know again if we have a standard on that we've met the standard or not but I'm curious what that looks like I would have to look at it but technically the cities do not have to post residential roadways um we can enforce them that's automatic by State Statute that residential roadways are 30 m hour um so they do not have to be posted and we can enforce it um but I would have to if you want to shoot me an email I can definitely take a look at it and see what I think um yeah just two things qu I think we probably all got the email from Elders today about this TI survey and I just want to make sure that um that we're going to respond to that I'm kind of looking at you Zach um yes we will respond to that that's correct it doesn't sound like it would be any fun for you well it's already not very fun so it's just more more um as we continue to go down government oversight they always have more and more requirements for us just like they do for everybody else same applies to the city so there's always more and more requirements that are needed typically more detail that they're looking for we provide them all the detail anyways but they want it more easily spelled out basically so it's already fun enough so might have make it more fun well it sounded like they're they attempting anyway to ask for a good deal more than what the statute requires correct so it seems to me like we we should respond we will respond accordingly based on how much is being asked I got the email but I have not had a chance to review exact questions here okay and then my other question this one is I guess a little bit selfish but have we heard anything from the county about Dayton River Road uh the start date um is still the 16th as far as I know um that's the revised revised revised start date but as far as I understand it they are still progressing on that time schedule and it will be a twoe project yeah it's coming up as there so they're running out of time to delay it again yeah yeah I think that it's now or never how long do they usually warn a person with those signs at the beginning of the project normally I think Jason is it 10 days that they like to out yeah I forget if it's yeah 10 business days or 10 calendar days I think it's 10 business days yeah they did have a sign out there and I noticed that it's moved so late I'm not sure about that will not be a hard closure though so they may not do Advance warning those are required when you're doing an actual hard closure place because it'll just be on Lane so they'll just be construction ahead signs is basically they're prepping for they'll probably have flaggers during parts of the project okay and they're going to start on yet for that I I haven't heard I haven't been attending the meeting so I don't know if they've got I don't think they've discussed that level of detail yeah hopefully this week at the meeting this week they will have some more detail north or south and they get to First all right thank you that's all I do I three things already talk about one um the second one was I got an email from someone at CDA just letting me know and I figured I'd share that CDA is getting pressure from the city of Champlain to have Dayton start to carry more Park load need for cdaa it's as much as they'd share uh I reach back out to the person and told them to contact Zack and let me know how we can help I fig let everyone else know that I got the email um and then street lights got some questions on street lights Marty particularly on South Diamond between the Champlin border and Dayton Elementary I got some complaints from residents that those lights are like on one day off the next not on so if you could just have someone keep an eye on them over the week something's going on or what I I don't know what the answer is but if you could you know I don't know if we ask the patrol officers to drive down there once a night and just see if they're on and then let Marty know that think that' be helpful but um and then the other question I got asked by a couple residents that were hoping for more street lights on their road is we put a lot of street lights on Pine View more than we needed have we talked about taking some of those out and using other locations yes we did okay and I'm going to guess that's way more expensive than just getting new ones or what's the behind that I I wasn't here so I don't know I I just forget to ask the question so there was a a lot of T and fr about this and it was it was expensive to take some of them out um and then there was the maintenance aspect of it as well we would be excluded from the maintenance contract and so it kind of got very convoluted as I recall and it turned out to be a much more expensive proposition than you know just leaving it as it was do we have a standard when it comes to parks and Paths of when we use lights when we don't what that looks like so that it's consistent across the city and not just one street happens to get every light in the city and other streets get no lights um we do generally with engineer we have um a general rule of thumb where you know if there's a trail there um we try to light it at at Junctions where across the road where there's a bend in the road if it's over a certain length um there's certain things like that and and distances between them so it's just some common sense rules of thumb that we use um and generally those of surprise with what we're doing is that just for new projects or for existing roads and C so like example next year we're looking at redoing South Diamond at what point in time do we talk about what the proper spaces maybe long sou diamond for lights if we want them or I'm not saying we do want them but this is a question I was asked so I want to make sure I can respond and I'm not sure how that works retroactively I would imagine that you know we've got the the street lights at the intersections on South D currently I don't see the need for additional Street lighting down there but there may well be I mean I think maybe that something that we could review with the plants Jason sure yeah there's no lighting requirements as far as how many you need or anything else it's a matter of safety so we do try to illuminate with the large Cobra style at all of the um at all of the major intersections and if there's any bends where there might not be light at certain parts of the evening um we would light those as well and then there's other styles like Dayton Parkway where it would go like a corridor lighting system where it's as much maybe decorative as functional um just the combination of having a the more decorative style light um and more frequent um spacing throughout the corridor okay thank you all right on to item h g g huh g g start with G first oh G first look not too much slides for you mayor and Council um this is um a proposal that we worked on with a uh for a little while the park commissioner have been looking to uh get some um resident input into keeping Parks clean um we did try something last year with uh on earth a for a cleanup um we didn't have any response for that at all um this effort was uh promoted by a couple of inquiries from uh couple of residents who were keen on adopting a park and if the city actually had a program in place for it um which we didn't at that time um Danielle uh reached out to other communities around us to see what they did for their um do Park programs she reached up to I think Brooklyn Park Maple Grove Rogers oo and Blaine um and they all have you know different um uh versions of this document some of them have a 2-year adoption program some it's only a shorter program than that maybe once a year clean up but you know so we kind of split the difference and went for a one-year program with a monthly um input from the the residents the idea is to try and uh get uh residents in the new neighborhoods to go and have a community event and get a group of people whether it's done through the HOA or or some other uh system or um some of the existing Parks we could do with girls girl uh Girl Guides or girl scouts whatever it is in this country so um and to get other volunteer groups like that to get involved um so um we I showed this to the park commission and they uh were happy with it um approved it you to come to council for your approval I like it I think it's yeah I I would almost think that as an additional possibility some of our Parks have got a lot of invasive type stuff prickly as and it'd be nice to somehow organize something to clean that up too I mean this is this is good it's a good stting point and we have tried the the you know the invasive species stuff you just have to make sure they know what they're looking at they're not snipping their fingers off I remember one time we had one organized and the volunteers were all lined up and Doug Baines went out to clo Overlook Park and none of the volunteers turned up and Doug got started and got heat stroke and ended up in the hospital unfortunately so it can't be a good thing yeah well yeah yeah I think it's a appreciate it sounds like a great program my only comment on it is that I think we um if people are going to volunteer their time to go do this I don't think we should charge them the night bucks for the sign okay we can we can take that out if that's what we want to do yeah was that was that just to kind of mitigate everybody applying even though they'd had no intention of and you know they don't have to have the sign so I mean that's just a night nice and it's kind of ownership type of deal you know it's like the signs that you have picking up the the ditch on the road it was just that kind of an incentive um if they wanted to take ownership of it and and have their name on it then yeah yeah I think it's good recognition but I think that we ought to cover that yeah I think part of it was to the mayor's point was that we don't want just have somebody say I'm going to do it sign up cuz they can they can and then all a sudden now they get their name on then your name's on the mess yeah true so the the Parks Commission has been working on this for a little bit now this been something they've pushed through and so I'm happy with it I'm okay either way with or without the fee I see the the benefits of it either way so it doesn't really make a difference to me see where people would just do it to do it and I don't see the city having a problem covering the $90 so I'm impartial on that piece of it you guys care about the sign I mean cost if you want to go havies on it I mean I I get the point of having some commitment so that you kind of I get Dennis's point about it so I mean if that's something that we just want to share the cost with but I mean if you want to work it out any other way I don't really not inclined one way or the other I just see how it would keep the minutia out okay riff RP is whatever Ri Ra um I just got a text from an activist group they want to talk to Marty if you motion it I'll vote Yes how's that if it's motioned that way it won't change my voting I'll make a motion to approve the adopted Park program as written uh waving the $90 fee for um the group sign I'll second okay any discussion all those in favor say I I okay all right all those opposed say no motion carries 5 Z now we're on to uh IEM H what's that it's under new business not really na item though good evening Mr Mayor members of the council I'm here to uh introduce an item to you that be an eventual uh ordinance Amendment related to adult use cannabis within the city of Dayton um the discussion tonight is specifically related to the zoning side of things rather than the city code and Retail registration side okay just a brief overview the in 2023 Minnesota Legislature legalized adult use cannabis Statewide um the state created 16 license classifications that are listed on the next slide for cannabis related businesses that they would be required to obtain from the state before conducting operations um the state did uh retain local or give zoning author to the local governments providing them the opportunity to uh regulate these businesses in their communities specific to time place and manner um and I will just note that uh by State Statute uh it's required that all licenses be allowed within a local jurisdiction in some capacity the cities cannot outright prohibit any of these specific uses so here's the list of uh licenses and uh the chapter is is 342 if you're interested in looking up this information from the statute side of things um the process uh basically goes the uh applicant will fill out an application for the state um the state then uh will deem the application complete and reach out to the local jurisdiction for zoning um to verify compliance uh with whatever zoning standards is adopted eventually in Dayton uh the city will have 30 days to verify that compliance for the state and uh after that point they would then kind of work with each other to make sure that they are compliant not only on the state side but the local side as well um and just where the city currently is in the process is that in 20 just in August of 2024 the city council did pass a moratorium prohibiting uh cannabis businesses in town until January 1st 2025 uh for discussions like this and uh ordinances like this to be adopted uh so they can be in place before businesses start conducting operations um the plan is uh following the discussion uh this item would then uh from the zoning side of things hold a conduct a public hearing at the Planning Commission level and ultimately bring to the city council for final consideration and decision uh some of the main discussion points that uh wanted to staff was looking to get direction on tonight is uh just overall land use related to the licenses um and where these things would be uh permitted within the city uh if you uh read the uh draft ordinance that was in there there was a note that uh required all of the uses related to cannabis licenses be conducted completely indoors um and one of the questions related to that that we'd be looking for direction on is if that is the case uh does the city council feel there needs to be any further restrictions on these businesses um rather than just looking at them as a manufacturing use uh standard uh or a retail use similar to liquor and tobacco um another one that we wanted to touch on was that uh the cities are allowed to uh create buffers for from specific things uh as listed here uh one of the things in the draft ordinance uh was a mimic from the liquor license requirement to be 100 ft from uh School locations I think it's 100 actually yeah um so that was the one buffer that was mimicked uh a question for the city council would be did the city council field that uh there should be any additional buffers required within the limitations provided by Statute um and then the other one uh generally for home occupations uh for lower potency hemp manufacturing uh I think as uh written in the draft uh this would be these cannabis licensed businesses would not be allowed in agriculture and residential districts um and really limit these to just commercial and Industrial uh districts in town um and if there are any other considerations or questions at this point that you want to ask um I will do my best to answer them this is all uh new to me and uh learning as we go uh and if I can't answer them I'll definitely take note of it and uh hope to get an answer back to you um and then just that note below at the bottom shows what the types of uh things will be adopted by the city code rather than the zoning ordinance such as uh temporary cannabis events the registration process hours of operation and then uh use in public places which if I'm not mistaken might have we' been taken care of earlier this year um we had a great discussion at the Planning Commission level uh the couple of the things that I wanted to note was that given the uh newness of the retail uh establishments in town they recommended that uh we that retail locations would first obtain a cup wherever these retail locations would be eventually allowed um so staff could have time to do a thorough review of any of the plans that are provided and uh catch things that maybe we W aren't thinking about uh prior to seeing a our first application in that matter um another thing was uh limiting cultivation out of the GMU 5 given that that is kind of the uh I guess the gateway to the city type of zoning district and uh they would rather see those limit limited to the industrial the i1 and the I2 um if there was ever any I2 to be implemented back into the city um the other the only other thing that I wanted to note from them uh it was a great discussion was that uh they did have some conversation that they could see that the 500 foot buffer from parks for these cannabis businesses could be something they could see implemented into the zoning orgs um so with that i' happy to answer any questions or take down any notes that you may have uh thoughts on this this is all new this is just an introductory discussion item only not looking for any action um likely could be something that we could bring back for discussion again um prior to the public hearing being held probably in November so um I was at the Planning Commission meeting I didn't I didn't quite get the so so all the activities have to be done in inside correct why does it matter where the the manufacturing or the packaging or the non retail stuff happens is there is there a realistic reason for that within the zoning districts or the yeah um I mean if it's a to building somewhere and you don't it's not like they're doing it on on the front lawn that's why I'm I'm wondering yeah and that's the that's the exact question that I had posed related to if we were going to limit these to indoor is there any reason that the council feels we'd need to uh look at these beyond what the actual use is being uh a manufacturing style uh business or something like that uh they they are currently not you know they could be outdoor or indoor if we want to look at just specifically indoor that'd be a restriction that we put on the process and things like outdoor storage of materials and uh things like that would be something that wouldn't be allowed on these sites so those would be the types of things that uh would be limited in that regard um but generally yeah that is the question that uh was posed Scott you were going to say something yeah I personally I would think that uh if you're going to if you're going to say it should be 500 ft from a park it certainly should be 500 ft from a school and in here it's 100 yeah so that's current city code for for um liquor alcohol that's correct so that's what we currently have in city code so we mimic that in this code y um doesn't mean that you know they can be contradictory but that's just what we have currently in the C I'm saying that I would put 500 sure and the other thing I thought I seen in year but I don't find it now is should an establishment be up and a school decides to build next to it establishment has to De decease decease deist I actually believe that there is a section in the state statute that says that if a a school comes in after a cannabis license is um allowed on a property that property is grandfathered in to continue operation that's where I would go with it so you read that the same way I did I misread it if you reread that again it's kind of a double negative in there okay okay but so because if it was my business yes yeah somebody's going to not walk away right I don't NE you're buying me I had said this previously but I think we should just treat this as far as sales go just like liquor that's my personal belief I I I don't see why I would treat this any different than liquor um I get if you're talking about some sort of smoke shop or some sort of you know that then you got to almost treat it almost like alcohol and tobacco or something but um if we're just talking about you know sales or yeah I'm a well when I saw the 100 ft I was you know feeling like that's why I have it you know at that point but the thing is these are going to get you know it's kind of like worrying about you know selling cigarettes next to school you still you still going to show an ID and yeah they check it so I don't know I'm a little bit more I'm not sure I think it should be um consistent with the alcohol sales um and maybe 100 ft isn't enough for that but we can talk about that more but I I agree it should be consistent um because it could be the same businesses that are doing both um I had confused I listened to the Planning Commission meeting and lots of good discussion there but I did get confused um why we are addressing a number of four or maybe more zoning areas that we don't have currently and why we need to have them in our ordinance if we don't have them if they don't exist here well they don't exist but they are they do exist in the zoning ordinance by definition so I basically took the list of zoning districts that are within the zoning ordinance currently you might not see them on a zoning map or anything like that but being that they're defined uh within the zoning uh ordinance there could potentially be an opportunity for someone to request a resoning to those districts so it made sense on staff's end to include those regardless of if they exist or not um because there still is the opportunity to have that so we Define them in a in our ordinance someplace else correct for for zoning that they could exist yes okay that's where I got lost is why why worry about it if we don't have them but if we've defined them I guess that makes sense um I had a couple other comments but I got to get to another page sobody else can go here so I'm just looking at the questions that I pr after reading it so the land use I think if it's inside I'm not overly worried um I know that the gm5 district is the gateway to Dayton I think when cubes was built the gateway to Datt and idea kind of out the window in my opinion so it doesn't really bother me one way or the other whether it's in gm5 just cuz I'm being realistic to where we are today I know that wasn't the end goal for that area but I just also I don't see that as really coming to fruition it was originally thought out after the cubes building was allowed I think that in my opinion that made that go out the window on the buffers I agree that it should match the alcohol one and knowing that the alcohol one's only 100 ft from a school that's not that's not very far so maybe maybe as David said we need to adjust it in general I could see 500 feet being fine across all of the things that I see here it doesn't all those options doesn't bother me for either alcohol or tobacco right that doesn't bother me I think anyone if we were to change it anyone currently would be grandfather and so on and so forth I do want to make one comment the GMU 5 is only on the cell side of 94 right only just so the cubes wouldn't technically be in GMU 5 GMU 5 is only on the south side of um 94 I just want to make sure it's clarified so we know where that's what we're talking about when we refer to that yeah sure I I don't disagree with that but I don't think that changes my opinion sure no you might not make clity though I appreciate that yep um and then the home occupation I agree that we should not allow this within homes if I'm reading that right um cannabis license business would not be allowed in Agricultural and residential districts I think that I'm okay with that piece and I don't have any other considerations or questions after reading it so and I will second what David said I watched the Planning Commission meeting twice on this item and I appreciate the discussion that was had amongst the commission members and I will note just to clarify regarding the agriculture District uh it was recommended within the draft ordinance that we provided that that uh cultivation be limited to indoor only um I did send this off to the city attorney's office and after their review they thought that that might be a preemptive um note and that uh they might uh strike down right we might have to allow it in some capacity or at least uh in the capacity that the state would allow it um I plan to have a longer discussion with the attorney's offic as I still have questions uh too that need to be answered you know I wonder what the intent was there because whoever growing this it's a clearly a cash crop I was say it's a huge to too I mean You' think they would secure it Som and and that was that was kind of noted in the discussion was that uh really the just the economic forecast was what I think what was said uh is not very uh good for outdoor cultivation in Minnesota so it might not really be an issue well maybe you you might be um able to answer this what is the local potency stuff is that are we talking about the equivalent of like 32 beer is that what what that really effectively means if you eat a whole bag of this stuff are you going to get off on it or what what what's that mean talk to me no some of the low potency you can get off of one gummy you can get um intoxicated off of it or high off of it oh so a lot of of people will take one gummy and think it's not doing anything and take another one and that's where really hours later there y I think the low potency stuff really is connected to uh the hemp derived items that were previously approved in 2018 by the farm bill at the federal level um so I think that that's just kind of incorporating what was already legal um into the state statute for this item so that would be those kinds of it I was just asking me because it's sprinkled throughout here and I don't really know what that means but I'm kind of surprised we didn't have any of these requirements back in the 70s soide two other comments go ahead not to cut anybody off but um on page 74 in of our packet anyway talks about fees and um you know that it that it has to be uh related or half of or up to um the fees for the license itself from the state and so that's something we're going to have to look at CU I know we put some made up numbers in our fee schedule and um and they're not going to match what this says so that's something we're going to have to look at to make sure that they're in alignment um and my other comment was around um the number of these uh you know we I think we need to talk about are we going to have we have to have one I think that's pretty pretty much a given I looked at you know they have some language about it if the county has has a certain number um per its population henpen County would need 208 establishments for us to not have to have one so I think that's not I think we were going to have to have one uh at least but you know what is our number then and and we should probably Define that you know are we not worried about it I'm not worried about it have no the reason I'm not worried about it is because they will they will control each other um I mean we had two liquor stores and one was run out of gas I I I just think that um that the mark no kind of control that I'm not too worried about us yeah and and that well that's in a way that's the easier answer because what I worry about if we say it's one or three or five then we have to have some process for how we're going to choose the uh winning bidder so to speak and uh I know they gave a couple of suggestions in the the guide from the from the state I didn't love any of them so I'd rather say we deal with them as they come and not have a cap on it is there any interest on Municipal dispensary no not me none for me that just yeah and I think the draft ordinance does note that uh it would otherwise allow the city to if they chose to do so not that it's something that you wouldn't want to would want to do right now but eventually down the road if something ever changed or uh what have you that opportunity is still there by the ordinance population cap is there a population cap on that like there is for the the municipal lior store I would have to take a look at that I don't I don't think I saw anything in there was trying to do it so there what 400 people or something I mean there's not a lot of people in oio I don't know if there's a cap established yet that's we're we're kind of like half talking about it right now but if if all of a sudden we change our minds that don't want to get to the point where it's like oh we had to make decision last year cuz now we're over this we missed the window like the municipal liquor store thing 10,000 we couldn't do it anymore and so um I can certainly take a look at that but I don't believe that there is a cap on there yet I didn't see anything in anything I didn't either but I good question yeah not yet at least I'm sure there will be one eventually just right now it's all new so any other discussion yet this is strictly discussion there's no action needed this will come back to you at a future meeting so we just want to get as many thoughts down on the paper as possible no I've got nothing else on that very fresh you guys got anything I'm good I think I've got good notes that touched on all of these so I appreciate the feedback all right thanks let's go on to item I yes uh mayor and memb of council you got this information in your packet um myself and Amy Schmid are here to answer any questions you may have but we're looking for a motion in a second [Music] I'll make a motion I'll second it discussion we got a question and then comment but no real discussion need the question is when I read the way this is written I just want to make sure I know what we're approving under the the Norwood Lane it says that City will wave permit fees um and F and under the laale lane that's not listed so are we not waving the the fines on laale Lane because it's not listed in the document as it was proposed um mayor members of the council that's actually I think an oversight in the summary when I wrote it I if I remember the conversation correctly um where we met with the owners of the property um that it was the intention to recommend that that the um that the fines be waved on that property as well do we need to alter them well you got to alter the proposed resolution okay I get I get what you're asking we could add it in there as a note right I mean you can just if you make the um you can amend the motion to just add the vote on it as as you know with that change as amended yeah so the only discussion point I have is so let me start by saying everything was done up to Legal code nothing was done um incorrectly or as unadvised by our lawyer so I understand that 100% um I struggle with us coming to an agreement um for not everyone's there and then when it is in front of the council we are asked not to um dive into it too much yeah like to me it feels like I I need to approve this or the ramifications are worse for the city if we don't hands are tied right and so I I recognize that all of this done is is done in the best nature I think the um shroud behind which this sits if I was a citizen would be concerning to me and that does not sit again I don't think you me anything wrong so I want to be very clear with what I'm saying I'm not saying anyone anything wrong what I am saying is the lack of transparency on this um I have a hard time with that so that I'm I'm not looking for a response that's just my statement of of where it's at um and with that I'll be done and you can feel free to amend your motion if you'd so like Mr Mayor I'm sorry to interrupt I I just even though you're not asking for response I would just clarify that in most situ ations where the where code enforcement is occurring um it happens administratively it happen you know staff is usually has the authority to you know to address issues with owners um this particular case because it involved three properties and multiple LGE violations at each it was just it was just a very complicated uh set of issues to resolve um and it had been going on for quite some time and so I think this the this it wasn't intended to be a lack of transparency it was just this was it's also very typical for you know when there's a complex dispute for you know a subset of the council like if you were in litigation and you went to mediation you would have you know a subset of the council that's not a quorum participate with staff in reaching some sort of resolution or not in a mediated and then we'd have a closed session where we'd talk about it in depth and we'd be able to ask more questions the difference yeah and I I don't think anything was done that was improper here so I just want to continuously say that because it's not the statement I'm trying to make at all um but and I've been talking to I meet with Zach weekly so I've known this has been going on and the background all these details and I've met with the property owner oneon-one and I've gotten his feedback on these as well so I mean I've sat through both sides and i' I I feel like I have a good understanding of what's been going on with these properties on my side okay but I'm saying it's unfortunate that with the fact that we're we're essentially waving $7,000 in fines that the public has no um real insight as to why that's happening and so that's that's where I get a little that's where it's a little hard for me and and so with that again would you like to elaborate on why we would do that um I could the the it was part of the negotiation that we were engaged in I mean it was just part of the conversation um that it was we don't have to let I'm just saying I'm just trying to get like I I I'm not trying to make this discussion it was asked to make it short but I wanted to be able to say my piece that's all I want that's fair I just the it's it was just part of a universal resolution to all of the issues H do you want to amend your motion I don't know who motioned but somebody did I think so we we we've done this recently with a minor issue uh somebody had grass problems h there was a negotiation and the problem was resolved going to court is expensive and again I understand that and that's why I'm going to vote Yes on this I'm going to go along with this that's not the point I'm trying to make I think the what I'm trying to make is maybe be missed but go ahead I don't know who motioned it someone has to amend their motion whoever motioned it mayor the mayor motion it yep I'll amend it yep as such okay any more discussion all right all those in favor say I I I all those opposed say no motion carries 5 to zero on to item J good evening mayor members council tonight we're looking to approve the preliminary Levy and general fund budget again this is preliminary Levy this does not mean that is the final Levy we can always go down but this is the ceiling find some background information for you just so we know where we're at as of today um right now we are looking at a 16.63% increase in the general fund Le or the overall Levy for the community um about just under half of that is for the general fund other portion is 380,000 for Capital Equipment 15 for Park Capital Equipment and 300 for pavement management uh $380,000 Capital Equipment breakdown there is $180,000 worth of the future fire ladder truck in that number so just so everyone's aware of the breakdown of where dollars are going towards um again we don't have to worry about the total breakdown but I do want to make sure that's noted that essentially a contingency in that um Levy number um the overall community so 16.63% increase in the levy 16.8% change in the property um valuations or increases based on um new construction roughly 14.2% of that is new construction and then 2% is roughly um change in values for existing businesses or existing homes um the tax rate is um anticipated to decrease with this 16.63% increase in the levy which means that um individuals will pay less tax for the city next year if their house value stay the same I know it's very difficult to assume and adjust but that is the general answer um and that will be right now it's at 35.643953 couple a slide or two um these two graphs just kind of give a generic kind of um easier than maybe numbers to look at how the tax levy compares to the tax capacity so the black line on the top graph is the tax capacity as that takes off the further difference between the bar on the bottom which is the levy and that um tax capacity means that's what our tax rate is so as you can see if the differentiate differentiation gets larger so does the tax rate the tax rate actually gets smaller percentage so we were quite heavy in the tax rate four five years ago I think it was above 50% 55% somewhere in there yep it was pretty high today we said at 35.643953 the big reason to that too was a debt fill off as well that year so we were able to capture those debt dollars and re reallocate them over to General funds so that is a a bit deceiving but it's not quite you know totally you know it's it's a little harder to explain maybe than than easily accessible but final tax rates for 2024 is good to know where we're at with other communities um I don't know what any preliminary numbers are from any other community yet but I can tell you where ours is at um I have 35. 64 and here needs to be 35 5.53 I must have moved the wrong number over but and then um we're just under we just be just under Rogers uh under Champlain under Handover but more than Maple Grove more than Independence more than Plymouth so I just took some communities that are around us in hean County other counties are not quite as transparent with their tax rates I don't know why but like a NOA county is like impossible to get their tax rates off their website I don't know why they're so difficult but um I did send an email to the finance director of County to see you can help me out with those I don't know why but just seems more difficult than it should be here's the impact in taxes for people's homes like I mentioned there is a decrease so if your average value which is 525,000 that did not change from 2024 2024 to 20125 um it would go down $6 for the year or 50 cents a month um what I would chock it up to is it's about even is what even is what you'll see depends on what the count does with valuations to I want to make sure everyone notes that that we have nothing to do with the Val valuations of homes if homes go up in value that has nothing to do with us that's probably related to sales or review of the overall home values in your area um and then just some general notes just for everybody to know a 1% reduction for the levy so go to 16.63% reduction in Levy dollar is $78,000 for the city and then a 1% reduction in Levy dollars results in 8 33% reduction in your tax rate so kept that 1% reduction every time and here's what it means on the different values uh for people or for the city what I'm looking for today is to be able to approve the resolution 46 2024 and 47 2024 which is the preliminary tax levy and the Eda preliminary tax levy the Eda number is at zero still that was based on Council Direction they will they may still look to approve a budget next year based on operations but that will just come out of previously reserved dollars and not out of new dollars so there is a tax rate decrease and I will stand for any questions again I want to note this is the ceiling we can always go down from here we can't go up these are the numbers that will go on people's property tax preliminary bills that come out in November um along with the TNT meetings but does this build in a buffer for the upcoming contract negotiations as well because that's a bit of an unknown for us right now right yeah we do have some a few unknowns obviously there's always some things that change throughout the year there could be health insurance changes we have those now and all those are a able to be baked into this it's not quite as easy and simple for us as as other communities may be but we did see over an 11% increase in health insurance for next year which is incredible I don't know where those numbers are going to stop but we've seen some serious increases um and then yeah there's a depending on which budget you're looking at and what your numbers are for your budget um the $180,000 for the future ladder truck to pay for that all of that money is essentially the what do you want to call contingency or buffer dollars depending on what your number is per council member is what I'm saying by you um you have up towards 180 or 80 or 40 or whatever you want to say for some negotiation but that's the negotiation or the I wouldn't say that's the negotiation number because it's not the negotiation number but that's the overall contingency we have for the city when does this have to be filed filed I mean can we also look at making any changes at the next meeting is it at the end of September yes end of September is when we typically pass the preliminary txt Livy so I highly suggest not wait until the second meeting we can um a little tighter we can if that's something that comes to it but again this is the ceiling I will say that City staff is of the understanding that this will come down from where it's at right now we just don't know what it's going to be for final numbers so we don't want to handcuff ourselves to have to pay or redo something else to pay for something that we have to have um when it comes to unit negotiation conference and we can always I'm sure everybody knows this but we can always totally rearrange the furniture but we just have to correct cap so that's why I tried to not go into too many details of like what includes in each one of those numbers um and I'll go back to the screen that I'm talking about here yeah that's this screen here for everyone at home or watching later on the dollars per Levy are not set in stone it's just the total number that we have to worry about The $1.3 Million number and I'm using that as a rounding number but um we can move on those dollars anywhere you want so say you take okay pay management EXT year 50 Grand we don't need that we're going to move it to the general fund and pay for something else you can most certainly do that and it's not going to break the bank or do anything to us we can move the money around we just can't tax any more for 2025 so it's on motion that we put the preliminary tax levy at 35.539938 yeah what you're what you're recommending in your what the city staff recommends y yep for now me a second I'll second okay mat da discussion I mean we've we've kind of hammered on this quite a bit so and by the way this is a good job because you're getting five totally different inputs that is the most difficult y item for staff to deal with is that every single one of the compomers has a different object or discussion that they want to have for the L next year and we do our best to get as close as we can to everybody so yeah I guess I appreciate that though yeah I guess I don't mean to bring the elephant up in the room but I would like to see that there is some capacity built in for what the fire department requests as far as those two firefighters and I don't know if that capture is captured under that 35 Point five or six that we've got but um I think we' be yeah go ahead I I'll will give you some information just C member you brought it up so what is included in this number the 35.539938 for part for part-time yeah I think that's just totally missing the mark though so that's me I just I want to PR the information of what it was I did provide all of those numbers on a weekly update believe I went back and looked it was August 16th so if you want to go back and look at the breakdown of those numbers that's the number that weti was $30 an hour so and I think the mayor said it well we're setting the size of the room but the furniture can move around in it so it's not set in stone as to where any of the ne funding is going to go so we have time to talk about that in further for yeah I 100% get that I just if you're not going to announce it then you know if you're not going to say like hey there there's capacity built in there yeah we can rearrange a room but like that's one thing that should not leave the room so as long as you brought it up and we're going down that rabbit hole we almost got out of here almost it's so hard go ahead Scott uh there was a post yesterday great post I have no issues with it the only the only issue I have with it is a third person jumped into it and I don't think we can go down that rabbit hole anymore I commented first on the post so don't look at me I wasn't a third person to comment technically you it was his post and I commented on it so you were the third one to comment I don't see it so anyway anyway not they apply now get my comment on that deal is to me that's a little misleading when we say the cost is only 8,000 more the cost of the city is $8,000 more that was in Zach's email he sent all of us I understand that but the dollars are coming from the households instead of state A so it's a little deceptive to say it's only going to cost if you look at the program you are correct it cost ,000 in state aid to help cover that but we won't get that we still get we still get it we just get to keep it as the City versus giving it the Fire Relief I called the auditor's office today about this and we don't get it it comes from the from the residents are actually paying for that it's part of their insurance cost and that given back but the residents are paying for it right now either way correct the way the way the way this program is set up is we're going to get rid of the retirement fund no well we're going to get rid of the Fire Relief F going be gone doing them to a different retirement fund correct well if we get rid of that fund then we don't get the state aid money we still get some of that money to go to perah I I will clarify to make sure and we have confirmed with don't know who you conted I want to make um and I to Mike we have confirmed with the state that we get the entire state aid dollars because we are still putting it towards a retirement account so the the insurance money comes from the homeowners and it's paid on your tax on home home insurance bill so whenever you get that take a look at it it's called 2% money so 2% of your insurance goes to the State Fire basically Marshall's office and they disperse the money to communities based on call volume population a number of firefighters that each Community has um we still get that money so right now what happens is every community that has a fire paid on call fire department gets the money and then pays it out to them to the paid on cold firefighters and then it's paid out through their pension fund um so they get an X number of amount per year that's how much they get for the retirement we did call the state to verify this as possible and it is possible so Chief Hendrickson and I did work with the state together to verify that does it have to be a pension fund or can it be any retirement fund and per there comments were as long as it's scheduled time so that everyone has the equal amount that they can get which is the duty crew model that would supplement that fulltime and there it's goes to a retirement account and not into their pocket as in cash as in wages we can use that money all of it to pay for those things one the biggest advantage of going to the full-time versus the paid on call system is that currently Chief Hendrickson and assistant chief ostrup we have to pay their Pera as in their retirement out of our taxpayer dollars if we utilize the the state aid money we can utilize that state a money to pay for their retirement as well on top of the pay on cult system so it's actually a supplement to the city and not actually a a degradation at some point there's a cap um so it will cap so basically what it's Capp there in it we would only get and for example we use the numbers that we had there um I think it was like $997,000 we get in parac cost that's what the rough number is guess um and that that's our budget number that's based on how many hours whatever so that might go up or down but we would only be able to get as much retirement as we're paying out from the state so say we're eligible for 1110 $110,000 worth of um retirement dollars from the state from fire state aid we'd only be able to collect 97 of that 110 it's not a loss to us it's just yeah we can't collect more than we paid out in retirement that's the cap and when we looked at the budget the last time we had here's the adders and here's the here's what happens if you do this we obviously didn't know that then we did not yep so when we did 2024's budget we said we'll take the relief money in and we won't we'll just pay it out to them in an hourly wage which the chief and I worked on extensively and said why can't we do that that's the same thing I agree they can then take that money and put it into retirement or do whatever they want with it but the state said we are not going to give you your Fire Relief Aid unless you pay it directly to them as Retirement and then it wasn't equal because it's not scheduled time so everyone has not the same playing field when they're looking at that kind of system whereas in the Fire Relief system everyone has the same exact chance of getting the money at the beginning of the year as long as they meet their requirement whether that's 20 hours a month or 25% a cations whatever the stipulation is everyone has the same chance of getting it at the beginning of the year which is why it works with that retirement so this year in 24 we're doing the same thing we've done historically which is get the money in paid off to the relief and they get to you know they still out there $7 and that new model would balance that you clarify yeah May mayor and members of council I can simplify it this way the Brooklyn Park relief Association dissolved a few years ago when I was there um when they resol when they dissolved um and they went to full-time Staffing the dollars that are it's no different than the police department the the 2% dollars if you will um then automatically the city collects and it goes to paying the pensions or part of that 17.8% that's put into police and fire repair so that's a good example EA is another example of that they dissolved their relief Association um they just have full-time fire there now as well and the city is the recipient of those dollars um as long as they're utilized to offset um the 17.8% for police fire PA retirement corre the same thing I said is that you still get it so it's not gone it's not going to cost taxpayers anything actually cost taxpayers less cuz we get we get to utilize the state's money for the retirement of both Chief Hendrickson and assistant chief OST which we can't do now because it just goes right to the relief and chief Hendrickson and assistant chief UST are not part of this the relief at all they're right 0% participants in that so it is actually a benefit to us a little bit but does that help Scott Clarity wise well that's exactly Mike said we don't get it yeah correct so we will confirm with Mike and I can also talk to our contact is Rose um and I can confirm with both of them to make sure that I'm not misunderstanding something and chief Hendrickson isn't misunderstanding something but as far as we are aware nothing changes with what we get as long as it's for retirement purposes which we're going to use it for retirement purpos and other cities are doing this correct so and that's part of the stuff we can yeah those things we can discuss from now and clarify and Y clarify and stuff I'm sure we'll have more work sessions or discussions on them at we at um Council meetings because we're going to have to decide where those monies exactly to Side Up by December CU after December that's hard knows we can't change yep these um these allocators those are stuck in stone in December and the chief's do is always open I mean I've gone and talked to him try to better understand this multiple times to make sure I had a good grasp of it so doesn't hurt to talk to him as well what is that pavement put us at I think I've asked that before but is are we up to so it' be just over 1.5 million okay in total dollars per year in Revenue cuz part of it comes from tax levy part of it comes from those franchise fees franchise fees and then which is roughly 600 Grand a year give or take oh it's gone up to 600 so go with every house that goes in so every house industrial industrial one or size whatever the size of the gas and the MSA will kick in probably another four or 500 the next year so we should be on yeah so cuz so next year in 26 budget we will have the what's it called again like in the MSA dollars yeah State a dollar the um Pine View project will be paid off and we will get that money which is roughly about 400 Grand and then we can utilize those dollars for stated roads so it'll be in good shape hopefully so I have a couple of comments I want to make um not quite sure how to phrase this but I want to because we I generally don't weigh in on on Facebook posts but Travis I do have to say that you made some comments in there that that hurt me personally um you know it characterizes a vote against moving ahead with this as as being somehow not compassionate and I think you all know I spent my entire career over 40 years working in a hospital so I think I've shown demonstrated Beyond any reasonable doubt that um my head and my heart are in the right place and in terms of how I see Public Safety and how I see us spending our money I I think it comes off as as we're not supporting the fire department and I just want to point out a couple of facts um in my time on the council we've increased the fire department budget 351 per. that's not small change that that is that's a real number that's real progress um I think we were behind on where we needed to be I think we probably still are M uh we've also committed 3.68 million of dollars toward new fire trucks just this year yeah that's something like 46% or the equivalent to 46% of our whole city budget just those two items uh so I think the lack of equipment or the lack of commitment is is here with this Council I think that we disagree on timing and and some of the details of it I had a good meeting with Chief Hendrickson a couple of weeks ago I think we talked for quite a while and I I uh explained my position on why I'm not supporting that that change for this year uh we have have made a lot of changes over the last couple of years and some of the things that we are expecting as as deliverables was a 5-year plan for the fire department uh we don't have that yet and I'm not pointing fingers at at um Chief Hendrickson or anybody else nobody expected him to solve all of our problems in in a year or two right this is a journey we're on so I'm not I'm not pointing fingers there but there's there were also things uh like a policy and procedure manual that that we knew we didn't have in the in the way that we should for the fire department and we still don't uh Emergency Management we don't have a Citywide Emergency Management plan and that was a priority uh for me anyway when we were adding a chief and then an assistant chief position that we work on that I know there's progress on it but it's not uh I also think that um well I think that the commitment is is there I don't think that that this is the time to move forward with that plan U I think that that the the uh payon call or the duty crew model probably is the right way for us to go but I think we've still got a lot of things that we need to do to get ready for that and that's why I'm not voting for it this year I I appreciate your sentiment as much as I disagree with it but know I hear you and you know like I said it's it's more or less everything I hear you bring up is are the blockades to the operational efficiencies um this is really written on the backs of um residents who are telling you um we can't commit anymore and we need help in that department they don't need the policies and procedures manual they're operating right now like that's not something that should block them from getting to work like balance those these things are legal liabilities for the city they're not things that we can say we don't need because it's not because we just need more guys or we need to use them in a different way yeah I appreciate that but like I just wanted to make those comments imag that this is my response to you agree all right I'm offended that you think that my that I don't care about anything but the dollars I never pointed to anything to to you right you guys well I would disagree with that you're saying that anybody that votes against us which will include me and future councils and whatever else I mean I just it's it's not directly pointed at anybody I'm just hearing what my people are saying well I have a lot of opinions about that but I'm going to leave it at that for now I think we've made a strong commitment to the fire department I think it's an ongoing commitment I think that we've got some catch-up work to do to set the stage for this model to be successful and I don't think it's in 2025 I also would like to point out that I don't think that we've had some discussion around the the conversion from the Fire Relief Fund to the para fund we've missed that deadline for 2025 that the cut off for an application to for them to consider a change was July 15th so I I'll let you keep going then I can provide some information you I write it back then doesn't change my mind about anything but I don't think we could we can make that conversion if we even if we wanted to move ahead with it in 2025 I think that's a 2026 issue at that point I could be wrong at that but I'm looking at the form and it very plainly says in bold text July 15th of the calendar year to be considered for the following year um so we should probably have the discussion if we're going to have it early next year not till budget season because otherwise we're Miss every year we can't every year I'm not saying for next year I'm saying if it I'm going to make the Assumption it's not going to pass this year so let's if we assume that go if we wanted to implement it in 26 let's say it I'm not saying we want that either but if we did we'd have to make a decision well before we make normal budget decisions which is the end of the year we'd have to have that conversation in the first 3 to four months of next calendar year even though that's way before we nor talk about budget stuff so that way that could get done to be implemented that's all I was saying tot totally agree cognizing your call that's all I'm saying before July 15th Yeah well yeah I want to provide a little information from what the comment that is correct so you are 100% correct on moving from perah it has to be July 15th of the fiscal year year so what that form is for is if the Fire Relief So currently our Fire Relief um manages their own Investments so they have to invest dollars into different investment funds so that they can have their retirement for you know all the firefighters in the in the um relief if you want perah to manage those Investments instead of the individual Fire Relief that's the deadline we're talking about is July 15th that does not mean per like what like what we mentioned so what's a little confusing and I would agree with you 100% that is confusing is per can be managed um so you can have your investments from the Fire Relief managed by per as in they have trained professionals that do it and kind of can guarantee interest rates um what it ends up doing is sticking the Fire Relief and this is why the fire leaf has not done it is because it um caps the amount per year that you can earn As A Firefighter in pension dollars so I think right now it's like 3250 so it caps that and says it's has to be 3250 for 5 years and so that's why this fire leaf and Dayton has not done it because they don't want to be locked in at 3250 every year for 5 years um CU they might see that they want to call from 3250 to 3750 for their relief um what we are talking about in on the our side of Pera is an actual physical pension relief or I shouldn't say pension relief um a direct benefit relief that happens that's forever so it's a totally different fund it doesn't go into a manage fund like from Pera it goes just like I pay my Pera in every single check 7 half% of my pay goes right to Pera and then the city matches 6 and half% of my pay for chief Hendrickson and chief engga they get matched 17.8% and then they put in 12 11 point something there you go and they put that amount in from their check and then the city matches 17.8 but it's a individual account not a group account then at that point so that means every individual person can decide what kind of Investments they want to use or they can have per do the defined benefit for 2055 or something just like you would at your normal employer for your 401k so there is that I would agree it's confusing um but I do want to provide a little information of we don't have to decide if we're going to go to Pera by an individual account by July 15th we just have to decide by July 15th if we want to do it as a whole fire relief organization wants to do a group investment does that make sense sure it's it's confusing as mud I get it no I get that it's a separate deal it's a totally separate we would want to do that though wouldn't we at some point um so our fire leaf has I think I suggested it when I first came here in 21 I said I would highly suggest you guys go to par for your fire leaf and I remember coming in and talking to the fire leaf and saying I highly recommend it because it's guaranteed income basically they guarantee a dividend whereas somebody has to manage all those Investments the treasure typically of the firea has to manage those Investments everybody and if they screw up an investment they've lost 150,000 bucks and now the fire leaf saw mad at them that they lost that money so and they have not elected to do that they said no we'd rather take our own risk and do it ourselves and not have p u manage our dollars um if you went with the new Fire retire the retirement that we're talking about with Chief Henderson and I with the $30 an hour and the not having the PA involv or not having fire leaf involved at all then every individual person would manage their own Investments individually not as a group and that would not be dedicated to that's just run by the public employees retirement Association overall as a giant organization not as a group it's equivalent to a 401k correct yep yep you move from having a group investment to having a 401k essentially is what it turns into or 57b whatever you want to call Mayor members of council just real quick I won't blor the issue but um the relief Association will also take roughly about 6 months to dissolve so let's assume it was appr for January um there would be no movement um necessarily to put anything in place until probably mid July just because there's certain things that they have to go through they have to post in the local paper make sure all debts and all those other things so it is another six Monon process after that so just for informational purposes how is that that today is that pension fund funded I mean what what percentage we boy last time we looked at that it was yeah I thought it was above 100% it it is above 100% I don't the specific numbers mayor okay um but the other thing too to the benefit of kind of what Zach and I and and the organization are looking at is it relieves the city's liability liability um as well so if it did get down I think 80% or 90% 90% is considered underfunded and then the city is required to kick to kick in for them all and that's when I say kick in I mean we have a Fire Relief 88 that comes to us and we pass through but we also had in the past a $20,000 amount per year as the council may remember catch just to catch up to make sure we're at least the reason I mentioned that is because it is beyond 100% now so I mean typically we wouldn't have put in the 20 correct but I mean we can still use it to finagle the furniture correct yep it is that 20,000 I believe is in this current 25.53% budget it can be removed if that's the council decision is hey we don't want to fund any more than 100 I think it's 103 but I don't remember that for a fact that was the last time I talked about treasure but the last Fire Relief meeting I was that was at they always happened to be on City Council meetings the nights and that one wasn't they were talking about pulling the funds out and putting them in cash my understanding um as we're looking at moving to this type of system is they did move all their assets to cash right now so they're not necessarily gaining anything but they're not losing dollars either at the moment just to protect you know from a payout perspective and the relief I have zero uh control Zach has zero control over that group it's all the Fire Relief board in them and the firefighters themselves which is what I made note of I went to the Fire Relief and said I would do this if I was me and the relief said we don't want to do that okay sounds good then up to me no different that I have no vote here I don't have a vote there either so you got more to say dude no I'm done I'm good you good good um okay I think yeah like I said we have we've hammered this over the months so agree okay we got ation I understand so huh it will be discussed more at Future meetings I yes we got a motion in a second and there's no more discussion all those in favor say I I okay all this opposed say no no no no Dave were you and I yes okay that's interesting motion failed like to be an amended motion so we can have a tax levy for this year or do we want to come back on the 24th so then we're required to pass on the 24th can we yeah yeah is your conc the language isn't in there so but we're not going to language in at this this me whether it's this me or the next me it's not going to be presented with it though I mean I'd like to see it in there so but it's so it's a it's a preliminary piece and it can fit in five five it can fit in less than five 3553 okay I don't know if that changes your opinion at all but it it will fit in the if we could get the votes for that particular piece it will fit in the 3553 cuz I know it'll fit in the 3535 I presented so it'll fit in the 3553 if that piece gets the votes in their Council I'm just looking out for my guys I it's not it's not about me at this point it's it's the 30 29 others that are underneath me so I want to remind the C we have to have a levy pass I don't care if it's at this one if we don't do it now it's going to be at the same number I'll make a motion to set the levy at 35.539938 just did you a specific name me givee minut did I make the motion I motion I'll motion you want point one you guys can't nope they can't but he can up on the you can yeah um give me a second I'll have it it doesn't matter me my last email bring the book every week and not this we can make this really we learn a lot tonight for all of our uh boy all of our thousands of viewers out there I'm sorry for this delay but if we motion at 3554 do we need the this name or can we just move on with the meeting it's still the resolution numbers and it's it's no I I think we have to keep find on the quick guide of Robert rolls give me a minute I will get to it resent boom is that or is it a motion to reconsider no it's it's reconsider that's a motion to reconsider because the resin would yeah correct language I should use is I make a motion and you know what I think everybody knows what we mean we're basically going to flush the last V and redo this motion and you can do that CU you were on The Winning Side so so I'll make a motion to reconsider I'll second okay do we have to reset the motion or the exact same motion it's the exact motion okay so you're not going to change the numbers no 3553 is the motion as long as legally I am the city is correctly legal standpoint yes yeah the initial motion failed we The Winning Side reconsidered the motion that was previously met that's correct correct so okay uh Matt you second it yeah okay any discussion well all those in favor say I I I all those oppos say no no no so we're passed three to two thank you three oh were you still on not I'm still okay yeah okay uh there are no other no objection what about the what about the Facebook issb um you can give a short blur sure mayor before you adjourn I just wanted to there's been some discussion back and forth um as you've been disc discussing the the budget um item where it's apparent that there was some conversation on uh Facebook where whoever chimed in third whatever whoever whatever the order is I haven't seen the posts myself but I just wanted to kind of reiterate that um according to the open meeting law if if the members of the council are engaged in social media discussing city council business or matters that will come before the council or have been uh or will be under consideration by the council it's really important to remember that even if you're not together it still could be considered a meeting under the open meeting law um so I mean I understand the need to communicate with the public and talk about the the issues that the council is considering but I just as a reminder want you to be mindful of how you do that on social media if you have more questions about serialized meetings is what it would be considered under the open meeting law um if you have questions about how to best manage social media um activity with your in your role as a council member let me know I'm happy to answer your questions okay now there are no objections will be adjourned morning e e