It is 7:02 p.m. Thanks for your patience. Says we got a little bit of a delayed start here from some work we were doing upstairs. Um so uh I think director Benerroat our communications director let all of you know that uh uh we've been doing these meetings in a hybrid fashion since the start of co and folks are being able are able to watch remotely and call in uh with matters of concern to them. We've got several different public hearings tonight that they may call in on and they may call in with concerns of residents on uh one part of the agenda that involves community comment. And I just noticed we've got many scouts here tonight and probably working on merit badges and and scout leaders with them as well. So, welcome to all of you. I know. Would you all want to stand up real quick and and give us a shout out as to what troop you're from? Are you all from the same troop? >> All right. Where do you meet? >> Shepherd of the Hills. >> Okay. >> Are you gonna ask him any more questions? I'm ready. >> All right. Let them let them sound. Yeah. Let them say what troop they're from so the record can. >> One, two, three. >> All right. And where you meet? >> Shepherd of the Hills. >> All right. Thanks all of you for being here this evening >> for that one. >> Um. Oh, another scout. >> Oh, a different different troop. >> Okay. >> All right. Oh, >> I'm coming. Uh, I'm from Troop 389 out of Christ the King in Minneapolis. >> All right. Good. >> Yeah. Welcome. Thanks for being here. All right. Um, so yeah, as I mentioned, we're doing these meetings uh in a hybrid fashion. People can tune in remotely. We talked a little bit about the scouts being here. Uh, folks that are here will call on first for community comment or for the public hearings uh that we handle this evening. And um now we'll call the meeting to order and I'll ask our clerk Sharon Ellison to call the role for the council. >> Council member Agian >> here. >> Council member Jackson >> here. >> Council member Pierce >> here. >> Council member Risser >> here. >> Mayor Hlin >> here. Uh next is the pledge of 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. >> We've got a form of meeting agenda that's been published uh for the public and for the benefit of the council members. Is there anyone on the council or on staff that wishes to modify the agenda in any form or fashion? Is there a motion to approve the meeting agenda as published? >> So moved. I second. Member Jackson moves. Member Agnu seconds the adoption of the meeting agenda as published. Any further discussion? All those in favor of adopting the meeting agenda is published say I. >> I. >> I. Opposed. Carried. The meeting agenda is adopted. We have uh a guide for the meeting this evening. With that agenda and now we are at community comment. And so we're going to ask folks in the audience to come up first if they have a concern they wish to address to the council. And um they'll have three minutes. This first gentleman up is a familiar face for all of us and he knows he's good at remaining at three minutes. He's got his his talks well organized when he comes in his thoughts. Good evening, mayor, council members. My name is Ralph Sickert. I live at 4311 Cornelia Circle. My question for the council tonight is why are you not crowing cockadoodle doo about having res reduced next year's projected tax levy from 17% down to 11? Why is everyone around the dis not high-fiving and doing their little happy dance for a job well done? Why could it be because there is no reason to celebrate? Last December, following the final 2025 budget vote, the Suncurrent published my letter to the editor, and I quote, "Unfortunately, the harsh reality is that 15% levy increases may be needed to dig our way out of the fiscal sinkhole created over the last 10 years." This past week, when interviewed by a KSTP Channel 5 reporter, I'm quoted as saying, "It is likely that we will need 15% property tax increases for the foreseeable future." And as the interview ended, the KSTP reporter asked me, "What could be done about the looming double-digit levy increases?" And I replied, "Stay informed and vote." The slight of hand and lack of transparency of this year's budget process has only reinforced my view. Unfortunately, Manager Neil together with this council makes staying informed almost impossible for the average voter. Sorry, Mayor. Rather than focus on waste and inefficiencies, this past year, your focus has been on the optics in a dinina. It's better to look good than be good. 9%. You look marvelous. What's worse, even when the council asks manager Neil to do something, he refuses to share the simplest of schedules. So, council, let me help. 7 $1.7 million is pushed off to other taxing authorities. $2.9 million deferred to future periods, the details of which have not been shared, adding to the $70 million backlog of deferred maintenance. Now, do the math. Leadership like this confirms that 15% levies will become a reality. It is it it is not if but when only an electorate that chooses to stay just only an electorate that chooses to stay infor uninformed poo this message. But then maybe Mr. Neil was correct. It will take political change. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Secret. Anyone else in the audience that wishes to address council on a matter of concern to them? >> Yes, ma'am. >> Hello. >> Good evening. >> My name is Delo and I know that 522 Grand View Square. I've been here before to talk about the uh street light replacement project in Grand View Square that wasn't necessarily a replacement project. I want to thank very much the council members who did take my take me up on my request to come for a visit about 9:00 one evening and council members Agnu, Carolyn Jackson, and David Pierce did come over to view the situation. While there, uh, one of the council members remarked that there was some light in the area that we were talking about in front of the building where I live. And I remarked that it was because of this the lights on our building. In other words, the building's lights. So the answer is that the light from our building, the electricity that the re residents pay for was lighting the street. So that's a little wrong. But there's a bigger wrong that I really want to point out. Um, when council member Pierce and I were walking through the area, he remarked that the street light replacement was also an opportunity to cut costs. As I look back through the information that had been provided about this replacement project in Grand View Square, there is indeed a cost savings for the city. 46 lights had been there. 28 were going to be replaced. Great. 18 of them are going away. My question is why of those 18, seven were removed from in front of our building and three were removed from the park that faces our building. In other words, 55% of the lights were taken away. 100% of our lights, 55% of the project's lights, 100% of our lights. So, the area is still dark. It's going to continue to be dark. And my question is, ladies and gentlemen, what are you going to do about it? Thank you. >> All right. Thank you. >> We'll see if we can find out. >> David Frankle, 4510 Lake Fudra, Vina. Uh, I just found out today actually out biking that the uh Rosland Park pedestrian bridge is hit again. has a sizable dent in it. Does Mindot know about this? >> We do. >> Have they inspected the bridge? >> They do. >> Okay. What is the schedule for the bridge replacement? There's two different dates on the city's website. >> We'll get to that. >> The other issue is the other pedestrian bridge, the Grand View pedestrian bridge. When the bridge was approved at an H meeting in 2021, Bill Nandorf emphatically talked about the golf ball test. That test evidently came from the railroad Canadian Pacific that all the openings on that bridge cannot allow a golf ball to pass through it. Well, that bridge violates the golf ball test. I don't know if that test is true or not, but it sure be nice to get an update on what the reality is that. I've talked to another person who works for another railroad and they do use that golf ball test. That's an easy way for people to understand the size that is required for openings. Safety obviously is a huge issue for railroads. I'd like to make another comment that the press release the city put out I think on September 11th regarding uh the agreement with the US Department of Justice on that bridge mentioned the city consulted with a number of ADA consultants experts. I got a list with the data practices request from the city of Edina and one of those experts was a Minnesota council on disability. I emailed them. They did not, I repeat, did not say that bridge would be ADA compliant. So, I'm not sure there's some confusion here. Seems like the only people that claimed this bridge was ADA compliant were paid consultants. I talked to two experienced consultants, two experienced architects, talked to the Minneapolis ADA planner, the US Department of Justice, not to mention the Minnesota Disabilities Office, all agreed that bridge was not ADA compliant. How did this go through as being ADA compliant? I I don't understand it. I haven't found anybody that would say that bridge is ADA compliant. regards to the the fire department, the ECMO truck. Evidently, the agreement with the University of Minnesota has elapsed and heard the fire chief a couple weeks ago say they don't have the staff to use it anyway. So, why is that truck still sitting in fire station one, not being used contractually, they can't touch it? I've emailed the University of Minnesota Medical School and they don't know anything to do with it. They're the ones who own it. Also, I found out yesterday at the Minnesota Cup, there's a company, a startup called ECMO Data Analysis that's working with the city of Adina Fire Department to use data to determine where the calls are going and the the peak loads for the Adina Fire Department. The city evidently purchased it last spring. It's first I heard about it. I don't know why the city never put out a press release that the city was using the software, but the point is it'd be nice if the fire chief or the company they've bought it from or both did a public meeting to talk about the software and how it's being used and what they're going to use it for. There are plenty of real experts in Edina that understand data analytics. I'm sure be interested in seeing how this software package works. The last thing is Sidina currently has two fire stations. If you go into GPS, >> Mr. Franco, Mr. Franco, you're way you're way over time. >> Okay. We have two Edina fire station number twos. Anyone else? Yes, sir. Come on up. I think it's if you just have remarks to make, it's best to use the side podium and give us your name and address. >> Yeah. Uh my name is uh Jim Be. I'm a small business owner right uh across the bridge, the UPS store, 5021 Vernon Avenue South. And I was sent a letter from my landlord saying that there's a special assessment that's going to be due, I guess, uh, starting next year for $5,6939.18. Uh, I feel like as a small business owner, we've been hit with a double whammy. That bridge being knocked out for the past what, uh, seven, eight months, >> excuse me. I I think this is going to be the subject of a public hearing later. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. So, hang on. We're going to have to take this up later. So, usually did you if you listen to Miss Benro, she said that if >> it's on right after she made announcement. >> If if there's a matter that you want to talk to the council about that's that's on the agenda or scheduled for a future public hearing, you can't talk about it in community comment. So, you have to stick around for the public hearing. >> All right. >> That we're going to have later on on this very topic. know what time that will be. >> I don't I'm sorry, but we'll take we'll take your written materials if you've got a submission, Mr. B. Yeah. If you can't stick around, anyone else? Okay. And let's go to see if we have anybody online here while we're waiting for Director Milner to talk to Mr. Bich. >> I do not, sir. You can move forward with the agenda. Anyone else wish to address the council? Okay. Our practice is that we uh take the comments that were made at the prior meeting and uh we answer those online uh by Friday of that same week of the council meeting and then uh our city manager uh undertakes the u responsibility for also uh responding to those comments at the following city council meeting and he's going to do that this evening and then we may be able to address some of these issues that were raised this evening as well. I'm not quite sure but we can try. >> Uh thank you your honor. Uh, we had several questions at our January, excuse me, at our September 16th meeting. First question was, why does the Adina Fire Department not have adequate staffing to single-handedly fight a small house fire? Uh, our response was that national standards indicate that 16 firefighters are needed to safely fight a fire of a 2,000 square foot house. U, more are needed for for fires if it's a bigger house than that, of course, or even a multifamily building. Staffing decisions are locally based. uh we we we try to use uh standards as as much as we can in our policym although it's not a guaranteed response. Mutual aid companies count towards uh those national benchmarks. So that's where we are on that particular one. We're continuing to work through fire staffing both on the on the firefighting side and on the EMS side. >> Second hold on that. I think it might be beneficial for people in the audience to understand what mutual aid is. I mean, what what happens if there's a fire here or in Minneapolis? We got a young scout here from Minneapolis. >> Mutual aid is a is a practice of of cities or other local governments kind of sharing between uh over over government borders. So, we have mutual aid agreements with many of our surrounding fire departments. If there's a fire that's too big for our department to to fight on its own, we can always count on on people from Bloomington, St. Louis Park, Eden Prairie, Hopkins, etc. to come and help us and we in in turn help them as well. >> All right. Uh second question is what is the status of the advanced flasher for the Eden Avenue crosswalk and I think we're proud to say it's working. It's installed. Uh question number three was uh did US internet get a permit to work in Adidas Rightway? Now that T-Mobile has has acquired US internet, who's responsible for rightway restorations? utilities are required to get a permit to operate in the rightway the area kind of behind the curb and behind behind the sidewalk for for most homes there that's rightway city rightaway um and USI the US internet uh is putting in community broadband community and u so they get the ability to be in that space but they have to cooperate with city practices and and uh standards in order to do that and yes we we get after them when we need to uh so that they fix any any bad restorations or non-restorations that they do after they insert or after they put their uh their stuff underground. Uh third question was will the city consider a variance for the tree protection ordinance? There currently is not a a a an appeals process, but as we have talked with council, we think there's interest in in that. and when we bring back a a package of ordinance changes for you, we will uh make sure that we have some something in there regarding that issue. Uh finally, how is Edina's bike infrastructure paid for? Can it be built any faster? We have a utility franchise fee uh that that residents and utility uh folks who use utilities uh particularly only gas and and electricity pay a small search charge on top of their regular bill that goes into the city's pedestrian and cyclist safety fund. And we use those monies to improve uh bike lanes, uh street markings, all things related to sidewalks and trails in the community as well. Um, and could we increase the funding there? We could, but we always try to we try to balance uh th those charges with with our with our taxes and our other utility kind of payments as well. >> Okay. >> All right. Let's see if we can address some of these questions that were raised this evening because there may be some folks in the audience that are curious about what our response might be. So, uh, Mr. Zickert that was the first speaker uh talked about um our levy increase last year which I actually think was about 8% at the end of the time we got done working on on it but um we talked tonight about the preliminary levy being set uh a little at a little over 11% and you might want to explain for folks in the audience what the prel what that means what's a preliminary levy >> cities in Minnesota are required to establish a preliminary levy in September And the preliminary levy is an estimate of the tax revenues that we will need in this in the upcoming year. So in 2026, we adopt a number. We share that number with the county. All cities do. The county uses all of those numbers and it's coming from schools and watershed districts, all kinds of taxing bodies, uh to put together the truth and taxation notices. So notices get mailed to uh individual taxpayer homes. uh and that's when you can see what your share of that uh tax burden is and uh and then the council adopts a final levy in December. And again, that's what all Minnesota cities do. >> So, I can tell folks in the audience and those that are watching at home that we set the uh preliminary levy higher this year because we're dealing with an issue of of a number of firefighters that we're we're we're going to be um authorizing be hired. Uh we've got some different studies that have been done. We wanted to make sure we had enough flexibility uh to be able to do what we thought was important from a community standpoint. But but I can tell you that with with the preliminary work that we've been doing all year if we but for the firefighter issue uh the preliminary preliminary level would have been levy would have been around six and a half percent. Uh so as we deal with this uh firefighter issue in in in the time to come before we get to the uh final levy in December uh we'll be thinking carefully through with a lot of input what we're going to be doing from a final levy standpoint. Uh also uh manager Neil um at least this is me personally I felt like the inference from Mr. Zickert was that we weren't very financially or fiscally responsible and and I just want to remind folks that for the past all the years I've been on this city council and I'd say 20 plus years we've had a double AAA bond rating from the two rating a agencies Moody's and Standard and Pors and there probably three dozen cities in the United States our size that have double AAA bond ratings uh and we get countless numbers of awards it seems like at least one a year from some agency saying that we're fiscally uh excellent in the work that we do. Uh that we're and we're proud of the work our fiscal people do. Our our finance directors in the audience this evening. She's going to be presenting later. They do a terrific job of making sure that the citizens of Adina are well represented in terms of maintaining fiscal responsibility and uh it's an important thing for all of us. We all live here. We all live here. We all pay taxes here and so we're trying to make sure that we make the best decisions that we can for everybody in our community around all of these issues that we that we engage in. So, um, uh, Director Milner, anything more about this lighting issue? And I don't know if many some of my colleagues who have been over there have any thoughts on that lighting issue at Grand View Square. Well, we'll take a look with the project's complete as it was designed and bid out and we can take a look like I've mentioned at this podium before. We can add lights in the future if the council directs us to add more lights. But we'll look at the levels that are out there today and then we can address it. >> Anything we could do about wattage, >> increase the brightness? No. >> No, but we've had suggestions for the owners of the buildings. There's a lot of vegetation blocking their current lights that could help the situation. So, we've offered that suggestion. It's something I didn't get a chance to go over and see, but I want to go over and look at it, too. Member Pierce, thoughts there? >> Yeah. Um, so the the way I look at it, there's two issues. One is the park. And so I think that could be probably a separate issue. Um, the how dark the park is at night. But if you go over there, there's there's the square and there's one side of the square that has no street lights. And so there are two what I'll just call kind of post lights that are on u um on the sidewalk, but that's it on that whole street. And so when when I look at it, it does look like a I don't know if you want to say a configuration or a design um like a miss if you will. Um and so if you go over there, you go to the street that's in front of 5225, it's the north entrance, I think it was. >> Yeah. Um you'll see it. Okay. For sure. And it it is dark. Uh when we were there, there were people walking their dogs and everybody had a flashlight, which actually is good that you're at night walking a dog with a flashlight, but um it was uh quite dark on that one >> street. Yeah. >> Square. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Do any thoughts? I understand that in this specific situation, I think part of the concern is that there was a change, right? At one point there was more lighting and now there is less lighting. Um I but it also made me kind of question like when we look across the community like what is our kind of approach or our stance on the level or amount of lighting that we create um versus where we have kind of lighting that's driven by the the individual residents. Um I look in you know my street and think about like the the amount of lighting that is citybased versus just front porches. Um, so I I think it might be worth us even having a conversation to more broadly um to make sure that we're kind of in alignment from a policy perspective. Um, but I do understand here like the the bigger concern is they had one level of service, I'll say one level of lighting that is no longer being supplied and so we need to just think about, you know, are we okay with that or if not, how do we rectify the situation? reaction. >> Well, I'm going to merge my two colleagues comments. One is 5225 is much darker than the other buildings at Grand View, and that doesn't feel fair, but it's as dark as my house is. So, in that sense, it does feel fair. So, it's is, you know, what are we comparing? Um, and so, you know, it it just doesn't feel fair for that one building to be so much darker than the other ones at Grant View. Um, and that's kind of the experience. Um, you asked the question, mayor, about I'm going to rephrase it like I think you said wattage. Is that what you said? >> Yeah. Wattage. >> Yeah. So, I think when um Excel I shouldn't blame it on Excel. Someone said um what we're replacing the new lights have more lumens and they cover more. And so that may very well be that you need fewer posts than you would of the older posts, but there just are no post on this street on that one >> side. Yeah. So that's um that was kind of the way I internalized it. Your question about um wattage. So, could could we think about adding uh some more lighting adjacent to the building that doesn't have any lighting of the of the same type and just it seems like the wiring is probably there or wouldn't be that hard to add the wiring. >> We can add lights to this system. Um I'll go check out the lighting levels and report back to council >> and uh I'll be over there some night whether you're around or not. I I'll go check it out. Thank you. Thanks for coming. Um, >> thank you all. >> I know that um, Mr. Franco, who was here, sent some emails in earlier in the week, and I I don't know if you guys, if you, I say you guys, I mean Manager Neil and and Director Milner had any chance to look at some of those comments that he made by email that were same as what he made tonight about uh, the bridge. uh you know wondering well we said that we had relied on uh ADA experts to tell us that it was ADA compliant and he said at least the Minnesota Council of Disabilities says that it's not ADA compliant or didn't opine on it. I don't know if you've had a chance to follow up on any of those >> have a work session next meeting that we'll have a full discussion on this matter. >> Okay. >> It's probably it's not appropriate for us to talk about it before that I think. >> Okay. All right. And then the ECMO truck. Any uh >> We'll I'm working with the fire chief and we'll get back and answer that question. >> Okay. Anybody else have anything that they picked up from the conversation that we want to deal with tonight? >> All right. Let's move on then. Um we've got a consent agenda. We've got a number of items on the consent agenda. Those items are usually handled in a single motion. So there's in this case there's um 26 items 27 items that we can handle in a single motion. Is there any anyone on the council wishes to remove an item from the consent agenda? >> All right. Is there a motion to adopt the items on the consent agenda in a single motion? >> So moved. >> Second. >> Member Jackson moves. Member Agnu seconds the adoption of the items on the consent agenda in a single motion. Any further discussion? All those in favor of adoption of the motion as stated say I. I. >> I. Opposed. Carried. All of those items are uh adopted and approved. And then we will move on to uh the next portion of the agenda which involves our public hearings. And this is a night for the Boy Scouts that happens once a year. You're going to see a kind of a rapid series of public hearings on on on assessments. So, uh if we've had to go out and do weed mowing at somebody's property, uh there's there's a request by the people that did the work in the city for an assessment. uh if we um if we have to remove a a tree that's diseased or a neighbor wants us uh to remove a tree for them, instead of hiring a tree removal service, we do that and then they get charged back. So, this is all that kind of activity tonight. Some people don't pay their utility bill uh on time. And so, there's a collection of folks that get lumped together uh with respect to a public hearing on that as well. So, you're going to see that coming up right now. and Tom Swenson, our assistant director of our parks and natural resource resources department is going to take the first one which is the weed mowing and I think you're going to have the next one as well and maybe more after that. >> Excuse me. Uh Mr. Mayor, I just before before Mr. Swson starts, I just wanted to remind the council that we are seeking action on these individual u items tonight. Normally we don't do that, but we are getting uh close to the time frame in which we've got to have our things filed uh to the county. So that we try to give everybody as long as we possibly can to pay and then here we are tonight and uh we need some action on each one. That's all. >> So to folks in the audience that aren't familiar with our processes since um co for the most part we've been uh taking public testimony at a public hearing and then uh postponing a decision on that for uh a couple of weeks until our our subsequent meeting. But some of these items we can handle uh I think efficiently the same night that they're presented as long as we give people the opportunity to be heard. Uh and so we're going to proceed now. The first matter is a weed mowing special assessment proposed proposed weed mowing special assessment. >> Thank you mayor, members of council. Uh in general the weed mowing uh when weeds exceed 12 inches in height uh in someone's yard and uh the the yard is not mowed then action must be taken. Noxious weed as defined by the state commissioner of egg shall be eradicated. When weeds exceed 12 inches in height the weed inspector attempts to reach the property owner and eventually sends a certified letter. the owner has 10 days to comply. Uh if that doesn't happen, park maintenance staff will cut the weeds and assess the property, the cost of labor and equipment. Nine different properties in 2025 were cut by maintenance staff. And here's the list of the property IDs with the various amounts. A couple of them were pretty large because they really hadn't been mowed all year. So they required a lot of extra labor to get them back into shape and we received no no comments on the weeds. >> Okay. So unless there's any questions. Any questions for Mr. Swinson on these particular items. All right. I'm going to open it up for public testimony right now. Uh is there anyone in the audience that wishes to uh address this matter regard regarding the proposed uh weed mowing special assessment that Mr. Swinson has discussed in his presentation. >> Lori Gro 5513 Park Place. I took a look at what was on the agenda here. And as far as weed mowing goes, a lot of these properties are owned perhaps by rental or corporations. The city's charging $75 an hour to send out a crew plus the equipment and the time to mow a property. $75 an hour. It's not enough. It doesn't cover the cost for the taxpayers to pay for this and it's far cheaper for the property owner not to hire somebody to cut it and to let the city do it. Plus, you take into account the time before the city cuts according to the memo here. First, they're contacted at their place, their residence or their property. Then they get a phone call. Then they get a certified letter. Then we send out a crew. $75 an hour. Does anybody get their lawn cut and know what it costs? City's losing money on this. You need to double the fees and then people will be cutting their own lawns. city's got some financial problems and you've got to be more respectful to the taxpayers. You know, it's costing us money because people don't want to cut their grass. You've got to make some changes. Thank you. >> Thank you, Miss Gro. Appreciate the thoughts. All right. Any other folks in the audience wish to testify? Do we have anybody online that wishes to testify? You do not. >> Um, okay. One last chance. Anybody else want to testify? Right. Is there a motion to close the public hearing in this matter? >> So moved. I second. >> Member Jackson moves. Member Agnum seconds the motion to close the public hearing in this matter. Uh, any further discussion? All those in favor of closing the public hearing say I. >> I. I. >> Oppos? carried. Uh we've got a motion uh that uh Mr. Swson has prepared for us embodied in resolution 2025-95 which designates the properties for weed mowing special assessment in improvement number WD25. Is there a motion to adopt the resolution 2025 >> 2095? >> Second. >> All right. Uh, member Jackson again moves member Agnu again seconds the adoption of the motion to make those weed mowing special assessments to the group of folks that are identified in resolution 2025-95. Uh, also embodied in improvement number WD-25. Uh, any further discussion? All those in favor of the passage of the resolution 2025-95 say I. >> I. >> I. Opposed carried. And then in terms of uh the issue Miss Gros raised, uh, manager Neil, you might want to talk about how we have to go about the process from a state law standpoint about making sure that our um our our charges align with the value of the work. >> I I can assure you that we're as frustrated about some of aspects of this process as as Miss Groce is, but we do need there is a standard of of of process that has to happen here. There's due process along the way for the property owner involved. We observe all of those. It's a plotting process that has uh stops and goes to it, but we comply with it and that enables us to to pass all the legal uh muster to to receive to get payment for this ultimately. >> And Mr. Kendall, if we were to take a look at um whether or not we could raise these fees, what would be the process? This is our city attorney sitting here uh for the scouts. >> Mayor. Yeah, I think it would just be if I mean if there's if it's on the fee schedule, it would just be a discussion for the next approval of the next fee schedule. >> All right. Okay. Very good. All right. Uh Director Swinson has the next matter as well, and that is some proposed special assessments for tree removal at certain properties. Director Swenson, go ahead. >> Yep. So, this one's tree removals. Uh if the tree inspector finds and uh if tree inspector finds and controls uh the spread of disease trees, uh they al the city forester also uh detects safety trees and notifies the homeowner by 31 days to comply with disease trees or public safety trees. Homeowners have the option to remove and dispose of these trees on their own or hire their own contractor. six properties uh in 2025 or four did not five did not do this and the city contracts out the removal and trimming of the trees. Nine tree nine trees in total at six properties. The city forester secures quotes from private contractors. The cost per tree varies great greatly as you can imagine based on the size of the tree and where it's located on the property. And city staff does not do this work. It's all through a contractor. Uh recently we updated the payment schedule because some of these trees are fairly expensive to remove and this is the list of uh property IDs and trees that uh we're asking to assess the value back on. >> Okay. Very good. Questions from council members for Director Swinson? >> All right. Let's uh this is another public hearing matter. Let's open this up now for potential public testimony. Is there anyone in the audience that wishes to testify regarding resolution 2025-96 which would provide for special assessments against six properties for tree removal. Hearing nothing. Seeing no one coming forward. Uh is there anyone? >> I don't have anyone online sir but because there is a slight delay in the broadcast I would recommend we wait a minute before moving on. My clock shows it 7:43. I will come back to you when I have a caller or 744, whichever is first. >> Thank you. [Applause] Assistant Director Swenson has withtood the awkward one minute of standing time and I still don't have a caller. So I think it's safe for you to move forward. >> All right. Very good. Um, so we had nobody testifying live, nobody testifying online. Is there a motion to close the public hearing in this matter? >> So moved. >> Second. >> Member Agnu moves. Member Pierce seconds the closing of this uh matter from a public testimony standpoint. Any further discussion? All those in favor of closing the public hearing on proposed resolution 2025-96 for tree removal special assessment say I. >> I. >> I. Opposed. Carried. The public hearing is closed. Is there now a motion to approve resolution 2025-96 for tree removal special assessments embodied in improvement number TR-25? >> So moved. >> Second. >> Member moves. Member Pierce seconds the adoption of the resolution as stated. Any further discussion? All those in favor of adoption of the motion as stated say I. >> I. >> I. Opposed. Carried. The motion to approve resolution 2025-96 for tree removal special assessments improvements number TR-25 is approved and adopted. Uh, next public hearing matter involves the certification of delinquent utilities and our finance director that I mentioned earlier, PTA is here to uh talk about the folks that uh have been delinquent in the payment of their utilities and uh discuss certifying those delinquent utility bills to the county for collection. >> Good evening, mayor and council member. Um, that is correct. So tonight, um I have in the packet a listing of delinquent utilities. These are all utility accounts um with any of our utility services for water, sewer, and storm drainage and recycling with balances over $50 and delinquent for 30 days or longer. They have been notified in writing of the pending certification and the date of today's hearing, tonight's hearing. In addition to the delinquent amount, a $35 administrative fee will also be added to these delinquent accounts after tonight. Um, customers does have until November 21st to pay their overdue balances, which includes the $35 admin fee until November 21st. And then after the November 21st date, staff will then send the delinquent list of any remaining accounts as well as the resolution that we ask you to approve tonight uh to the county for certification on December 1st, which will then go on their tax role for next year, payable in 2026 to the property owners. Um, so with this being said, after December 1st, um, if any residents or any customers wishes to make, uh, their delinquent utility payments, they'll have to make it with the county. Um, certified amounts will also have an interest rate of 6.5% that will be added once sent to the county. And all of these assessments are all a one-year assessment. Um here are some stats uh for uh in terms of the utility his certification history over the last couple of years. um letters go out the first couple of days in September to the initial poll of delinquent accounts and then um we always see a decline of amount and accounts by tonight's hearing date and I anticipate that by the certification date of November to the county this amount will be in trend with previous years as well. So tonight we have um 642 accounts and in the amount of 664,998. And as tonight is the public hearing, I will stand for any public testimony and I request that after that council adopt resolution 2025-100 certifying this year's delinquent utility bills to the county auditors for collection with the 2026 property taxes. Any questions for Director Tao? All right. Uh, this is a public hearing matter again. Uh, I'm going to now open it up for public testimony. Is there anyone in the audience that wishes to testify regarding this matter in this proposed special assessment? Because Miss Groce again. >> Yep. >> Lori Gros, 5513 Park Place. This year there were 11 pages of property owners that chose not to pay their utility bills. There was just a work session today and the consultant is discussing what the increases will be for water and sewer next year on rates. Looking at five and a quarter% on the water, nine and a quarter% on the sewer. We have 11 pages of people that have chosen not to pay their utility bills. The city needs the cash flow to operate. So when it said in the packet that after it's certified, there will be a 6 and a half% interest that's charged. Is that going forward? So, in other words, are we floating alone to all of these people at no interest? Uh, two properties in particular stood out. 7401 York Avenue. It's the Yorkdale Town Homes Limited Partners. It's a lowincome rental. Their outstanding utility bill is $43,485.72. The property taxes 57,35. The water bills almost as much as the property taxes. The other one is at 3400 Park Lawn Avenue. And these um owners are from the Henipin County Property Tax website. Common Bound Communities, Common Bond Communities, lowincome rental properties. The money that they owe the city for their utilities, $43,598.78. Their property taxes $31,88654. 12 Their property taxes are $12,000 less than their utility bills. So, what does the city do to try to collect these bills? Or do they just let people float along? There's a lot of people in there that have 1,500, 2500. There's one $5,000. Why aren't they paying their bills? We need that revenue. So, what's the city process? Do you just wait until the end and then certify it and then you get the 6 and 12% fee? Seems to me I don't usually look at my water bill too much because it automatically comes out of my checking account. Uh, it used to be if you didn't pay on time, there was Is there a 10% fee that goes on to that? Yeah, might be a 10% fee, but we we can't be footing these bills. How do you make the people pay their bills? Thank you. >> Thank you for that. Uh, anyone else wish to testify? Okay, check. No, nobody waiting online to testify. Uh, did Miss Grocher's comments cause anyone in the council to have a direct a question for Director Tal? Okay. Uh, this was a public hearing matter. Is there a motion to close the public hearing? >> So moved. Second. >> Member Agnu moves. Member Jackson seconds the closure of the public hearing regarding the potential certification of delinquent utilities bills to the county for collection. Uh any further uh conversation on that and closing the public hearing? All right. All those in favor of closing the public hearing say I. >> I. >> I. Opposed. Carried. Uh and then the motion that the director tow has requested is that we approve resolution 2025-100 for certification of delinquent utilities bills to the county for collection. Uh is there a motion to that effect? >> So moved. >> Second. >> Member moves. Member Pierce seconds the adoption of resolution 2025-100 which would certify the uh delinquent uh utility uh holders to the county for collection of their utility bills. Uh any further discussion? All those in favor of adoption of the resolution as stated say I. >> I. >> I. Opposed carried. Resolution 2025-100 certifying the delinquent utilities bills to the county for collection is approved. And uh Commission Director Tao, before we start with Miss Wilson, why don't you come back up for just a moment and talk a little bit about what kind of success the county has with uh assisting us in the collection once they go under the special assessment roles? >> Yeah, that's a good question. Um, once it goes over to the county, they then put it on the property tax owner's property tax to be paid in 2026 or the next year. And like I stated, it's a one-year assessment. So that is charged on top of the 6 and a half percentage fee. At any time if the property owner doesn't pay this Deleno utility, it will be part of the um payment due to the county at the time of the sale of the property. >> Okay. And then with respect to that 6 and a half% penalty, I think the inference from Miss Groce was could you or the implied question was could you could you charge 6 and 12% from the time it goes delinquent as opposed to the date it gets certified? >> Um we charge the 6 and 12% when it goes to the county. >> So when it gets certified >> that is when you're legally allowed to do that. We know >> statuto >> statutory that's when you can start charging interest. >> Mr. Kendall >> mayor I I think you can charge late fees prior to that and those late fees can be included in the amount certified and then once it's certified the interest kicks in and that becomes part of the prop property tax. >> All right, makes sense. And I assume we charge late fees. >> We do. So until the payment is fully paid, we assess, we don't assess, sorry, wrong word. We do charge a delay fee onto the customer's account until it's fully paid out. >> Okay. Um, you might think about coming back to the council, too, and let us know. I think you have in the past. Let us know how how effective the county has been. >> Yeah, I can certainly do that. >> Okay. All right. Very good. >> I can answer that. >> Oh, Jamie, >> thank you. >> Oh, yeah. >> Yeah. Jamie. >> Yeah. Jamie Ericson. I'm the special assessment uh person here for the city. Uh yeah, it's well it's 100%. You >> want to hold your microphone closure? >> It goes on their property taxes and so um even if prop we don't have very many foreclosures in the city of Edina. Um but you know if a property were in forbearance or foreclosure um we I believe the uh taxes are collected through the mortgage company. So >> I I think you were right. Yeah, it's ultimately 100% effective if if not close to that. >> I'm pulling some background from my title experience. So, um that's where I'm getting my reference point there as far as that piece goes. >> Um but yes, it is 100% effective as far as it going county. >> Yeah, I would take it's not even upon sale. It's upon taxes due >> um on you know October 15th and May 15th. So, >> good. Thanks. >> Well, that's helpful. Thanks for that. Okay, Miss Wilson, thank you. I know this is quite cintillating for all of you out there, but we're halfway through. >> Good evening. Jessica Wilson, water resources manager, and I have uh aquatic vegetation improvement AQ25 resolution 2025-85 this evening. This is the same one you see every year for aquatic services management. This is a city coordinated service and these are elective services that are requested by residents and aligns with the policy in the water resources management plan. There are four water bodies. the first arrowhead lake and that has services assessed this year for 2024 services related to irration and vegetation control. That's for each of those lots that is adjacent to the lake. At Indian Head Lake, there's aation services and DNR water use fee in 2024 that are part of that assessment for all those water bodies adjacent to the lake. for Lake Nancy that is uh uh vegetation and algae control uh with a um uh some cost share with the city there for the algae portion of that work for lots adjacent to Lake Nancy. And then at Mil Pond, it's for mechanical harvesting and then also the Brownale ramp repair. This is the second of a two-year split of that repair work. There's a tiered assessment here uh and the cost is split among those tiers that's kind of described at the bottom of that uh itemized role there. And the Brownale access ramp was replaced in 2024 that was partially shared with the city and split over two years. So the recommendation is to adopt the resolution 2025-85 for the amounts shown for those water bodies. It's a one-year assessment. Excuse me. Uh, any questions for Mr. Wilson from councel? All right, stand by. Uh, this is another public hearing matter. Uh, I'm going to now open it up for public testimony. Is there anyone that wishes to testify regarding this proposed series of special assessments on these lake properties? Any Dina? All right. See, no one coming forward. We'll turn now to the potential test testifiers from the virtual world. I don't have anyone hanging on the line with me right now, but I'd really like to give them an opportunity to call in. >> Um, so because there is that brief delay, I would recommend we wait one minute. My clock shows it at 7:59. I'll come back to you at 8:00 p.m. or when I have a caller, whichever is first. It is now 8:00 p.m. and I still don't have a color. So, I think it's safe for you to move forward with the agenda. And I think that also signals the scouts time, right? It's been an hour. Stay all night. We'd love to have you. >> Yeah. All right. assessment for aquatic vegetation removal on some of our Adana Lakes. Those property owners that live on the lake are the beneficiaries here. Um, is there a motion to close the public hearing in this matter? >> So moved. >> Jackson moves. Member Pierce the closure of the public hearing in this matter. Any further discussion? All those in favor of closing the public hearing on this matter say I. >> I. Opposed. Carried. public hearing is closed. And then the proposed resolution uh is resolution 2025-85 which establishes the aquatic vegetation special assessment role uh embodied in improvement number AQ25. Is there a motion to adopt that resolution? >> So moved. >> Second. >> Member Jackson moves. Member Pierce seconds the adoption of resolution 2025-85 which is the aquatic vegetation special assessment role embodied in improvement number AQ25. Any further discussion? All those in favor of adoption of the resolution as stated say I. >> I opposed carried. That resolution is approved and adopted and we are on to the next matter. Now we are switching over to Derek Utton, our facilities manager, who has a couple of uh matters for us to address in terms of maintenance of uh 50th and France district and the Grand View District. >> Good evening, Mr. Mayor, members of the council. Uh as you mentioned, yes, I'll be talking about two separate districts today. Uh they're both our special services or maintenance districts. Um the first of which is number G25. That is the Grand View District. Um just for some identification purposes, um this district mainly lies to the west of Highway 100 um with Vernon Avenue uh to the north and I guess also to the the western side of the border. So it's mainly um retail businesses. Uh the city does have some vested interest in there with uh a parking ramp, water treatment plants, and a police impound garage. And then uh there is also the old public works site that's part of this as well too. Um it's highlighted by that map just some landmarks areas. Um we also have a uh shared use space with Henipin County. That's our their library and our senior center in that area. Uh really quickly uh the assessable costs for 2024. So these costs are uh costs that occurred a year prior. the city upfronts those costs then we assess them back to the businesses was $64,276.97. Um you'll see below that the assessable square footage that is mainly the footprint of all those businesses in that district. Uh 433,887 square ft. Um we then use a calculation to break that down as a per square foot cost to assess back to these businesses. You can see it's uh just about uh 15 cents per square foot. Um and uh below we listed the 2023 costs. So you can see that the entire 2023 costs were about $5,000. Um the question is is why the large increase from 23 to 24? Um we're trying to activate the area again, right? So uh members of our um Addison Lewis, one of our business development coordinators, myself, Chad Miller, and others met with a number of business owners in 2023, 2024 and talked about the district about improvements that we could made that we wanted to make. um we kind of centered those around some landscaping improvements in 2024. So you'll notice that we replaced a lot of the plantings on um the areas that were adjacent to um the Wells Fargo Grand View Tire and Auto and then a little bit in front of the the uh Walgreens and Adina Liquor area. And then we made some improvements to the parking ramp. Uh some people call it the Grand View ramp, others call it Jerry's ramp amongst other names. But we had some uh improvements uh and some structural work that we had to do investigative on that to make sure that it was still operational. So a larger uptake. Um this is something we talked about with a number of the businesses. We reached out to all of them. A number of them met with us personally or met through uh Zoom with these groups. So you can kind of see that there was an uptick in cost and we're we're expecting to see these costs kind of, you know, plateau at this level. We're going to continue to make these improvements, spend a little bit of money every year as we move forward to, uh, continue to try and beautify that area. Um, so with that, um, I'd like to recommend that we approve resolution number 202592 and improvement G5 or G25 for that area. >> Very good. >> That I'll stand for questions. >> Yeah. Questions for Mr. Rotten, member Jackson. >> So, this is uh we're assessing for work done in 2024. That's correct. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Other questions for Mr. Rotten at this point in time? All right. Let's open this up for public testimony. This is another public hearing matter. Is there anyone in the audience that wishes to address this proposed special assessment? Yes, sir. Now, um come on forward, Mr. Bich. Is that right? >> Yes, sir. >> Yes. You're welcome. >> Again, uh my name is Jim Bash. I'm the owner of the UPS store right across the bridge. Um, I don't think I had a chance to attend. I'm reaching 70, so I'm trying to retire. Uh, I don't think I got to any of those meetings that they had back in 2023. Um, one of the concerns I have as a small business owner is that with the bridge being out, obviously it's impacted our business quite a bit. Then I felt like uh when I got this email from my landlord, it was like a double whammy. On top of the bridge being out for about eight months, really affecting our business, which I thought, okay, come November, it'll be open. Hopefully, we'll get back to normal. Then I get this email saying there's a special assessment of uh I think for our property something like $5,000 some dollars which the landlord will obviously pass on to the renters. Uh as I heard about the what the special assessment was for the landscaping improvement. I'm going again I don't quite know exactly how that money was spent. Obviously, uh the ramp and the uh the landscape, but uh it seems like it's a bit excessive, especially to the small business owners that's been uh deeply impacted by the closure of the bridge. And I'm requesting the city council to take some of that into consideration and figure out a way as far as alleviating some of that cost, maybe spread it over uh maybe four or five years taking into account what's happened the past year in 2024 where over half the year all the businesses were impacted by the closure of that bridge. >> Thank you. >> Yeah. Are you in that are you in the jury's office building? >> I'm in the uh between the booze and the drugs the diner liquor store in the uh Walgreens. I'm that UPS store that's been there. >> Okay. in the little strip mall there. >> Yeah. I've been operating that uh business for 20 years and uh we've been deeply affected this year. >> You're the first one I've heard it described as >> Yeah. booze and drugs building. >> That's a good way to remember it. But uh >> again um my thought was >> we'll just suck it up and bear with the bridge needed to get replaced. We'll hang in there and hopefully things will get back to normal. But when I got this email from my landlord, like I said, it felt like a double whammy. >> And uh when the city uh makes these plans for these assessments, whether they're taking into consideration the impact of a major closure like that on the small businesses, then on top of that, coming back to them saying, "We got a surprise for you. Here's another special assessment." which I don't mind getting a special assessment and making payments. Uh I don't know how much improvement my business will have because of a ramp improvement and landscaping. And yet when the city decides to make these special assessments, I wonder what considerations are taken into place to say here's expenditure, here's what it's going to do for you. So >> this seems fair. Um >> from my standpoint right now, it doesn't seem fair. Uh I'm asking this the council to re-evaluate and maybe find some ways to extend the payments over a period of time and then to in the future when we're looking at something like this where you have a bridge that's going to have a major impact m maybe a road closure whatever to figure out again get back to the businesses what impact will this have on you guys? Uh we're going to do some special assessments to figure out can these small businesses handle that. And right now it's it's a nip and tuck trying to handle these fees as my expenses go up, my rent increases, my sales goes down. >> So >> yeah, thanks for that. And that $5,000 bill is not the bill not the bill for the whole strip from booze to drugs. It's from uh it's yours part of it. >> That's what I'm >> That's the way you're reading it. >> Summizing from the email that I got. Obviously, I'll have to talk to my landlord as to the specifics. But uh again when I hear about the ramp improvement and the the landscaping uh again I don't see what kind of impact improvement that it's going to have on my business. I know the impact that the bridge had on my business. >> Understood. So >> Mr. Rotten has maybe a thought there too. But M go ahead >> uh to answer that question. uh the $5,000 that he was referencing in his letter is to the entire strip mall. It's not just his business. So we we assess the building owners, right? And however they work out their lease agreements with their tenants, that's between them. We really don't have anything to say with that. So I I think that that question about how much of his portion is has to go back to his land. >> Okay, that's helpful. Yeah. Thank you. >> Um anyone else wish to testify regarding this proposed assessment? Anyone online? Okay. All right. Is there a motion to close the public hearing in this matter? >> So moved. >> Member Jackson moves. Member Pier seconds the closure of the public hearing in this matter. >> Uh any further discussion? All those in favor of closing the public hearing say I. >> I. >> I. Opposed. Carried. Public hearing is closed. Interesting issue Mr. Bash raised. Um we know there's been impact there. impacted 50th in France. Um, typically we'd collect these in a in in one year, but uh, we've also done things over time in the past. Um, like with street improvements, you know, people have what is it up to 15 years to pay off a street special assessment, you know, so it's probably not a conversation to hold tonight in in detail, but member Jackson. >> Yes. I have a a question for Director Hotton. Um, you said that this would be an ongoing is it going to be about $64,000 every year for the next couple of years or what what will the ongoing costs be annually? >> We're tracking actually a little less than that this year in 2025. Um, the biggest portion of this cost, as I mentioned before, is a the landscaping improvements, but b it's really our annual operating permits for those parking ramps. We have to have those inspected annually. Um that cost fluctuates a little bit depending upon what kind of maintenance we have to do. Um 2024 was a high maintenance year in order for us to get our annual operating permit through the city. 2025 uh the inspections were just done two weeks ago. So we'll have a better idea of that here in the next month or so. >> So this is going to be not just a one-time thing, but the business owners will be seeing it next year and the year after that like >> Yeah. And and it kind of predates me, but I believe that these assessment costs were much higher in the past. you know, not to the level they are today, but they were reflective of the times and the um I guess cost inflation of the whenever they were assessed. Um and a lot of the businesses were really uh you know, happy about being part of that maintenance districts and those improvements, trying to activate the area. So, we're just trying to bring it back to what it was before. So, um a lot of those um tenants I don't believe were involved in some of the engagement process, but the building owners and the property owners were those that chose to be anyways. >> Okay. Thank you. member Pierce >> just curious um the so the liquor store is in that same strip and so when you say the cost is allocated to the um landlords of the strip how does that how's the liquor store >> the liquor store is assessed as well too so we we are not a tenant in that strip mall we actually own the condo so that that is a separate idea from the rest of it but yes the city does pay their assessment cost for the maintenance district there as well as the one we're going to be talking about in a moment. >> Other questions for Mr. Rotten? Director Rotten um when to have a conversation pre or post motion. Manager Neil, a little maybe a little guidance from you might be helpful. I I you know because I think regardless of whether you're a tenant and you've got a traditional lease where you're going to pay your proet share of special assessments or you're the owner eating it, we we know that there's been impact over there for those folks. And if the council were so inclined to take that into consideration and as member Jackson points out, it's it's not just 2024, it's 2025 and it's 2026. might we think about some kind of a program where we can we can help relieve some of that stress that they've been under because of reduced sales due to the bridge closure. >> So I think it's worth remembering that the discussions that Mr. Atten uh noted happened before the project happened. Right? So there's discussions that are going on about what level of of additional service uh they want to see in in their maintenance district. We add that to sort of the obligatory piece the on the parking ramps and we move it forward in good in good faith, right? We expend public dollars uh in in that concentrated area with the with the bargain that uh we we assess it back and we get paid at some point in the future and we do the same at 50th in France as well. I I don't recall a time actually where we have delayed them. We've had that discussion. Uh but then they pile up because you know >> I don't think we've ever delayed them >> but maybe spread them spread them out. I mean delay I guess that's another way of saying spreading it over time but >> but our recommendation I think is to continue to operate this maintenance district. It's been it's been it has been one that that Mr. Hotton noted was high kind of relatively for a number of years and and then didn't go quite dormant but the cost went way down. uh now we have a set of property owners that are more interested in kind of collective uh collective benefits and and the maintenance district tool is a really important one for us. You >> have any sense of that strip mall that you know we're in there on a condo basis. We're going to pay our fair share but the rest of that strip is all owned by a single owner, >> you know. >> I believe so. Yes. >> Yeah. And do we know the square footage of it? And so most of those between Walgreens and liquor store, most of those stores seem to be about the same size square footage wise. >> I don't know off the top of my head, but I can get that information. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Just thinking about his prat a share of what that might be. And I think you made a fair point that it's >> less than 5,000. >> Yeah, it's going to be something less than 5,000. Maybe maybe a thousand, you know. I don't know. >> Remember Jackson? >> Uh yes. Um, so because these funds have already been expended and we're getting reimbursed, I think that the question is we need to reimburse the costs. But can is is this something that the spark funds might be able to go for to maintain these businesses? Um, >> I'd need to talk to Mr. Newendorf about that, but I don't think so because I think that's connected to job creation. >> I think it was it was connected to capital improvements. So, I don't know if landscaping is a capital improvement. >> Not not typically. >> No, not >> I think you're making a fair appointment, but we cut the deal with the build building owners >> that wanted these improvements. We advanced it on our nickel and it's got to be repaid for at least 2024. We can think about it for 2024, >> right? Some sort of relief for these guys based on what happened in 2025 with the bridge closure. >> Okay. Well, let's let's let's see if we've got a motion here. Um, >> no, I'm sorry. The public hearing is closed. Sorry, Mr. Bash. Um, it's just up here now. Um, okay. So, we got a resolution that's being proposed by our facilities manager, Derek Cotton, and that is to adopt resolution 2025-92, uh, the Grand View Maintenance District annual assessment improvement, uh, embodied in improvement number G--25. Is there a motion to that effect? >> So moved. >> Member Jackson moves. Member Pierce seconds the adoption uh of resolution 2025-92 uh which is the Grand View Maintenance District annual assessment by square foot embodied in improvement number G25. Any further discussion? All those in favor of adoption of the resolution stated say I. >> I. >> I. Opposed carried. Resolution 2025-92 is adopted. Okay. Uh you've got the next one too, Mr. Rotten. >> That's correct. Yes. So this is the second of our special services district. This is the 50th in France Avenue business district. Uh it's maintenance improvement number M25. Again, kind of a orientation for you. Um all of the areas that you're seeing there that are highlighted in that pinkish color are uh private businesses. Um the areas that are kind of outside of those private businesses on the uh the upper portion of that photo or the north is the north what we call the north parking ramp. That is a public parking ramp that the city owns. Um and then there's also a large kind of gray box in the southern area and that is what we consider the south parking ramp. So that's the one that's next to London and Verley's. So those are both u city-owned properties. Um and then all of the sidewalks obviously um the streets, public pedestrian pathways, things like that are all uh private owned businesses and there's a two other kind of oddities there. There's a strip of parking in the Luns Berly parking lot that the city owns and then much like the Grand View District, we own the condo that the liquor store resides in. Um so just kind of identify the uh private business footprint. Um same formulation that we have uh for the Grand View District where um we charge uh these businesses for maintenance in the district. Um the difference here is in 50th and France we actually have a dedicated staff person down there. Um that dedicated staff person does a number of things. They remove trash from the site aid to the overall general cleanliness of the spaces and the pedestrian and public walkways. um they deal with all the snow and ice removal during the winter months. Um which is kind of a large portion of the the costs for this and then they're really act as a liaison between the city and the businesses. You know, if this is businesses see something um they want to be addressed, you know, they have a person that they directly can go to down there. Um and so that's a big benefit to that area. Um accessessible costs in 2025 or 2024, excuse me, $522,951 and about 37 cents. You know, the rounding error there. Um, and then the accessible square footage of this is 452,347 square ft. Um, again, we're only looking at the footprints of the buildings. So, if it's a multi-story building, it's only really the footprint of that building. It's not each individual story. Um, and residential units do not count against this, too. So, there are a couple of apartment buildings and condos down there that that are not assessed through this process. Um, proposed assessment uh for 2024 is $1.15 per square foot. Um, and you can see actually there's a decrease um from what we uh came back here in 2024 and assessed. Um, that was about $570,000. Um, and that was really, you know, attributed to a large repair project we had in the south ramp where we had some structural deficiencies. If you remember, we had to actually shut the parking ramp down for a number of weeks and months um in in the that summer to make those repairs. Um, we finished that work out and finished paying for that work in 2024. So some of those costs are from that. So I guess our recommendation for the night is to approve the session assessment for resolution number 2025-93 for improvement number M25. And with that I'll stand for questions. >> Questions for manager Rotten. >> Uh you caused me to think of something when you talked about the apartment buildings. Some of the apartment buildings down there have retail on the first floor. That's correct. I >> I assume those are getting assessed. >> Yeah. So that's where that footprint comes in. So the the Nolan mains area that is all retail on the first floor as is I think the the 50 France building too also where there's some cooperative apartments above but it's all retail on the first floor that gets assessed. >> Okay. Good. Uh well this is another public hearing matter. Let's open it up for public testimony. Is there anyone in the audience who wishes to come forward and testify regarding this matter? this proposed special assessment at about a$1.15 a foot I think. Hearing no one seeing no one coming forward. Do we have anybody online? >> I don't have anyone online yet. I would recommend we wait one minute. My clock shows that it's 8:24. So I'll come back to you when I have a caller or 8:25, whichever is first. >> All right. Thank you. It is now 8:25 and I still don't have a caller, so I think it's safe for you to move forward. >> All right. Very good. Um, is there a motion to approve resolution 2025-93, which is the 50th of France maintenance district annual assessment role embodied in improvement number M-25. >> Did we close >> close the public hearing? No, we're waiting for online people to >> Okay, that's right. Okay, I got ahead of myself there. Uh, is there a motion to close the public hearing in this matter? >> So moved. A second. >> I got a motion second to close the public hearing. Any further discussion? All those in favor of closing the public hearing say I. >> I. >> I. Opposed. Carried. The public hearing is closed. Uh, the motion requested by Mr. Rotten uh our staff is that we approve resolution 2025-93 which is the 50th and France maintenance district annual assessment role embodied in improvement number M-25. Any further discussion? Is there is there a motion to that effect? >> So moved. >> Member Jackson moves the approval of the motion as stated. >> Second. >> Member Pierce seconds uh resolution 2025-93. Any further discussion? All those in favor of adoption of the motion and the resolution as stated, say I. >> I. >> I. Opposed. Carried. Resolution 2025-93, the 50th in France maintenance district annual assessment role embodied in improvement number M25 is improve as approved. Uh and then we are on to a couple of matters. Thank you, Mr. Rotten. Thanks for being here. Uh and our engineering director, Chad Milner, has the next couple of matters which involve uh some potential uh street reconstruction special assessments in some neighborhoods that we've reconstructed. >> Thank you, Mayor. We're here to talk about two 2024 neighborhood street reconstruction projects. Um but first, we'll say what do we do to try to keep these mounts as low as possible. So, we publish these maps well in advance so people can start to prepare financially for these things. We have meetings in advance. We try to do our bid documents and the production of that to get them out first. We want to be the first city out there bidding every every spring. Uh we know we create quality bid documents because it ensures less confusion and we're getting these really tight bids. So, we're doing something really well on our bid documents. And then the contractors know we're going to manage our contracts fairly. If there's errors or stuff that's different that they find in the field, we're going to treat them fairly. And all those things lead to lower assessments mounts which you're going to see now uh embodied in a couple resolutions. So we'll start with the Concord BNC neighborhood roadway reconstruction. Resolution number is 2025-88 improvement number BA464. This is the project map. It was south of Aliv Road north of Highway 62. There are multiple funding sources within our street reconstruction projects. This is the list of those amounts within the street is the assessments. Right now with our change in our assessment policy a few years ago, we're at 63.12% is what we're assessing residents for the street reconstruction portion of the project >> at the public hearing. >> Can I interrupt you for a moment, Director Milner? I'm looking at the agenda here and um it looks like the Concord BNC neighborhood on the agenda is reflected in improvement BA465, but we're talking about 464, which on the agenda is shown as being related to the South LB neighborhood. Do we have a mistake on our agenda? uh we can check that out but I think the most important thing is the resolution number for the application of >> as you go along here it may come it may come clear so let's let's just keep that in mind >> um we talked about the project cost at the December 11th 2023 public hearing we estimated the assessment at $13,400 per residential equivalent unit or reu um on December nomber 19th the council authorized that project and tonight we're asking for an assessment amount of $9,87369 per REU. After the packet was published, we received one voicemail us giving some feedback about the assessments. We would recommend approval of the special assessment embodied in that resolution number 2025-88. And I'd stand for any questions. Yeah, check those numbers. >> The resolution that's printed up is 465. >> Then I'd make a motion to that effect. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> Thank member Jackson. >> All right. So, what you're looking for is approval of resolution 2025-88, which is related to the Concord BNC neighborhood roadway reconstructions improvement. >> Yep. But it's a public hearing first, mayor. >> Yeah. I know. Okay. Uh, and it's thanks for the reminder and that's embodied in improvement number BA465, not 464. >> Thank you for that question. >> Okay. All right. So, this is a public hearing matter. Uh, good work on keeping costs down. It's still a significant amount of money. We know that. And as we're Did you want to talk at all about our our transition period, our 16-year transition period, we're taking pressure off people over time. Well, I mentioned the council approved the assessment policy about four four years ago and the current amount went from 100% assessments. We are now at 63.12% of the assessments. The other 36.88% is covered by the general tax levy within the city. So, we are reducing those numbers based on that policy approved by council. >> Okay. All right. So, I'm going to open this up for public testimony. Is there anyone in the audience that wishes to come forward and address the council on this proposed assessment? >> Yes, ma'am. Come on forward and uh give us your name and address, please, too. And pull that microphone down so it's a little bit easier to hear you. Thank you. >> Linda Sonic. We live >> Say that again, please. >> Linda Sonic. >> Okay. >> We live at 6212 St. John's Avenue. And my main problem with this assessment is I don't think the work is done. Our water shut off is still six or seven inches above the ground and it's my understanding they're supposed to be buried in the ground and then also they had to undo part of the retaining walls along our driveway and those haven't been restored either. So, we've called I've called the project manager and of course they have plenty of time to finish this before the bill is due in November, but I'm just sort of it's not done yet. Where's the punch list to make sure that everyone else's projects are done? >> Did you get her address, Director Milner? >> And do do you have thoughts on that? >> I can answer questions. >> Okay. Yeah, we'll do that when you're done. >> Yeah. Thanks. Thanks. >> Okay. Anyone else? >> Good evening. >> Good evening. My name is uh Chris Girtton, 6109 St. John's. Um my calculation shows if we were So we're, as you know, assessed $9,873. um at the 5% over 15 years, I'll end up paying almost $17,000 for this project. Um certainly not saying it didn't have to be done. Um we're new to the neighborhood, so we got uh this is pretty surprising to us. Um and uh just want to say in general, the amount with having three having three kids in college right now and trying to figure this out is pretty tough. Um but anything you guys can do in the future to help keep cost down even more. I know you guys did a great job keeping cost down on this, but to just every day my wife and I own a small business in Dina. Um, this is real money and it's uh, again, not saying it didn't have to be done, but this is not going to be easy for us to pay at all. I just want that kind of reflected in the in the record. Thanks. >> Thanks for that. Thanks for coming in this evening, Mr. Curtain. Anyone else? Okay. Uh let's go to online. Nobody online. Um is there a motion to close the public hearing in this matter? >> So moved. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> We got a motion by member Jackson, a second by member Pierce to close the public hearing in this matter which deals with um the proposed special assessment for the roadway reconstruction project that was done in the Concord BNC neighborhood. Uh we had a couple of issues that were raised and we go back to Director Milner now to address the issues of the two concerned residents that came forward to address the council. Director Milner, >> let's vote. >> Me >> vote to close the public hearing. >> We didn't vote. >> We didn't vote. I know it's is these are a lot of public hearings tonight. >> All right. So all those in favor of closing the public hearing say I. >> I. Oppos. >> Carried. Public hearing is closed. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you, mayor, members of council. Um, the first matter, the water shut off in the retaining wall and driveway. We got a two-year warranty. It's on our list. Our inspector, Mr. Brandon Freeman's aware of it, and he's working with the contractor to get it addressed. Any work on the water systems, not part of the assessments. U, but doesn't matter. We should get it done and we know it's an two items that need to be corrected and he's working on that. >> And then what about the uh the payoff over time? >> Yep. You have 15 years. You can either prepay a portion of it when you receive the notice before November 1st before it's filed with the county or you pay it off over 15 years with interest and that's the number that that individual is referencing that 15-year payoff. >> Okay. All right. Thanks for that. Any other that prompt any comments or questions? Member Risser. >> Um two questions. when you noted that we had a voicemail regarding this area, was that for um this area or was it for the South Dale B? >> We received one we like I mentioned this one we received after the packet was published. We received it either late yesterday or early this morning. >> Okay. So I >> we couldn't get it in the packet. >> Okay. And I have not heard that. >> Um >> and it wasn't assessment related or objections. It was just a comment on the overall project and similar to what the comments you heard this evening. >> Okay. Now, if memory serves, when we were talking about um the assessment and we were about to approve it for the Morningside neighborhood, um two residents came forward and said the work was not finished and we ended up delaying the charges for that whole neighborhood. I believe that was um I think I'm remembering it correctly, but um Paul Thompson and Mindy Ellers came forward, if I've got her name right, um and demonstrated that the work was not finished and so the billing got delayed. I'm wondering if we should be considering that in this case. I would say not uh respectfully because that project it was built in half of it remember was part of the flood risk improvement project in Weber Park and literally the job wasn't completed in that case. There was restoration that needed to be done. There was a two-year overlap on 42nd Street. So in that case I think it did make sense for the council to decide to delay it and it was multiple projects over a much bigger area. These are these are punch list items that we do on a normal basis that we would come back and fix and it's on our list to fix. >> You have any idea when it will get addressed? >> I do not. Hopefully this year yet. Brandon's aware of it and he will work with the contractor to get it done soon as possible if it's something that can be done yet this year. >> Further questions? Other questions for Director Milner? All right. Uh, Director Milner has recommended that we uh approve resolution 2025-88, which is the Concord BNC neighborhood roadway reconstruction special assessment embodied in improvement number BA-465. Uh, any further discussion? All those in favor of adoption of the motion as stated, say I. >> I. >> I. Opposed. Carried. >> I'm going to abstain. >> Abstension one. Uh the motion to approve resolution 2025-88 uh relative to the Concord BNC neighborhood roadway reconstruction special assessment role embodied an improvement number BA465 is approved uh and adopted. >> Mr. Mayor, may I ask for clarification in who made the motion and who seconded? I'm sorry. >> I think it's member Jackson Pierce. >> Oh, that was for closing the public hearing. >> So, we need a motion for closing. >> I'll move the resolution. Yeah. >> Yes. >> I thought we had a >> Okay. Second. >> Do we want to vote again then? >> I thought we did. >> So, was that >> That was Jackson and Pierce. Second. >> All right. Well, we'll we'll vote again. Just to be clear. >> Um, all those in favor of approval of resolution 2020. We got a motion, a second. Motion by member Jackson, second by member Pierce to adopt resolution 2025-88. The Concord BNC neighborhood roadway reconstruction special assessment embodied and improvement number BA465. Uh any further discussion? All those in favor of adoption of the motion stated say I. >> I. >> I opposed. Carried. Resolution's adopted. >> One abstain. >> Abstension. Still got the abstension. And that's uh and we've got a carried motion. And then we've got the next matter is proposed special assessment regarding the South LB neighborhood roadway reconstruction special assessment improvement embodied in BA 464. Director Milner, >> thanks Mayor, members of council. Please note again the BA number on the presentation is off. It should be 464 like you just read. So we'll talk about the Southb neighborhood roadway reconstruction completed in 2024. This project is just north of 66th Street and south of Highway 62 as shown on the map. Again, there was a variety of funding sources with this project. Uh the street reconstruction portion is what we're discussing tonight at 63 plus% at the December 11th, 2023 public hearing and authorized by the city council on December 19th of 2023. We had an estimated assessment of $1,900 per REU. We're asking the council to approve an assessment of $1,5929 per REU. We received one voicemail that was in the packet. And after the packet, we had one email objection that came in uh late again last afternoon, early this morning. Uh we have that documented, but we're asking to the council to approve the special assessment embodied in resolution number 2025-89 and improvement number BA464. >> Okay. Would you go back and tell us a little bit more about the email that came in, the email objection? >> Yeah, we've seen that in previous assessment hearings where people can object to it and that gives them that opportunity to file with district court per state statutes. Okay. >> Over the next 30 days. So if they want they can appeal it at district court. >> Very good. Okay. Thanks for that. Other questions for Director Milner at this point in time? >> All right. This is a public hearing matter. Is there anyone in the audience who wishes to come forward and testify regarding this proposed special assessment? No one coming forward. Is there anybody online? >> I don't have anyone online. I know it probably seems silly, but I think it's important that we wait a minute just to give people time to call in if they'd like to. My clock shows that it's 8:41. Um, I'll come back to you at 8:42 or when I have a caller, whichever is first. >> Okay, >> I'll try not to get ahead of myself this time. I I think it's safe for you to move forward with the agenda. >> Thank you for that. Um, this was a public hearing matter and we need to uh think about closing the public hearing. So, is there a motion to close the public hearing in this matter? >> So, moved. I second. >> Get a motion by member Jackson, second by member Agnu to close the public hearing in this matter. Any further discussion? All those in favor of closing the public hearing say I. >> I. >> I. Opposed. Carried. And uh next um Director Miller has asked us to consider uh adopting a motion to approve resolution 2025-89, the South Delb Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction Special Assessment Embodied and improvement number BA464. Is there a council member who cares to make that motion? >> So moved. >> A second. >> Member Pierce moves. Member Agnu seconds the approval of resolution 2025-89 which is the Southdale B neighborhood roadway reconstruction special assessment improvement embodied in BA464. Any further discussion? >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Um Jackson >> Mr. Boltz wrote in wrote in to us or he called and this was transcribed about some pretty serious water damage um in the course of now I know this is the assessment but um but in the course of the construction his unit um experienced some expensive water damage. How is that handled? Is that a liability or uh what what does what kind of relief is available to him? So when a comment or concern comes in such as they think damage occurred because of construction, we review it at a staff level, then there's the option to submit it to the contractor for their insurance to check it out. That's why we have insurance through the contractor. >> Okay. >> In this case, it wasn't it was deemed that it wasn't caused by the construction project. Was just unfortunate timing that it happened when our project was also happening in the street. >> Okay. Thank you. >> All right. Any further discussion or comment? We've got a motion, a second in front of us. All those in favor of adoption of the uh motion, and I can restate it, which is resolution 2025-89, the Southdale B neighborhood roadway reconstruction special assessment embodied and improvement number BA464. All those in favor of the adoption of that resolution say I. >> I. >> I. Opposed. Carried. That resolution is adopted. And that completes the work of uh Director Milner with respect to the public hearings. And that takes us through the uh as member Jackson pointed out the public hearings that we had this evening, all eight of them. Uh now we're on to the recommendations and reports portion of the agenda. And we've got a few matters to address there. Uh one is resolution the first one is resolution 2025-98 which accepts donations on behalf of the city of Edina. Is there a motion to adopt resolution 2025-98? >> So moved. Second. >> Member Jackson moves. Member Agnu seconds the adoption of resolution 2025-98 which would accept donations to the city of Vidana by uh organizations or residents in our community or beyond. Any further discussion? All those in favor of adoption of resolution 2025-98 say I. >> I. >> I opposed carried resolution 2025-98 is adopted. I can tell you that we have some uh very generous donors in this list and then there's some inkind donations as well. Uh what jumps out of course is um uh someone who's just been an unbelievable supporter of her hometown which is who is Pacier Irk who has done so much for our community. And again here, Braar Golf Course, $3,000 donation to the Memorial uh fund uh tournament in terms of a sponsorship and then $1,500 in Memorial Garden Fund, PA Stones. Uh and other generous donations as well. All those donors names will be on the city website. So, thanks to all those donors and a special shout out to Pacy who continues to be such a great supporter of the city. Um, okay. The next matter in this portion of the agenda is uh a potential approval of a subdivision that's been recommended or or sought, I would say. And u Kerry Teague, you've got this matter, our community development director, and uh we're going to let you make that presentation and we're going to continue the conversation on this matter which we talked about a few weeks ago. >> Yes. Thank you, mayor. Uh the applicant is proposing to divide this property into two uh city code compliant lots. This parcel was originally platted as four lots. The original owner combined the four and built one single family home. Uh the planning commission unanimously recommended approval of the request. There were no additional comments uh on better together. So staff and the planning commission are recommending that you adopt resolution 202583. Anybody have questions for Director Teague on the council? Okay. >> Member Jackson. >> Yeah. So, in the in approving this, are we deciding where the driveway is going to be or is that still open for them to decide as they develop this? >> It's still open. It sounds like the developer is leaning toward having one access uh off of uh Warren and then the north lot would access off 64th. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Any other questions for Director Teague? >> All right. Um, is there a motion to approve resolution 2025-83, which would approve the subdivision both on a preliminary and final plat basis at 6417 Warren Avenue? >> So moved. >> Member Jackson moves. >> Second. Member Pierce seconds the adoption of the motion as stated which would approve resolution 2025-83 which is the subdivision preliminary and final plat at 6417 Warren Avenue in Dina. Any further discussion? All those in favor of adoption of the resolution as stated say I. >> I. >> I opposed carried resol resolution 2025-83 is adopted. the subdivision both from a preliminary and final plat standpoint is approved at 6417 Warren Avenue. Uh and then um the final item in this portion of the agenda is uh a site plan review and variance request that we heard a few weeks ago at 5036 France Avenue South, which is the Bario restaurant site. Addison Lewis, our community development coordinator, has this matter. And uh Mr. Bernett is here. Yeah, there he is. Uh, Mr. Delpra is back there is with us again as well and and uh and the whole team. Uh, all right. Let's let's talk about this matter. Mr. Lewis, go ahead. >> Good evening, Mayor and Council. Um, so this is a request for site plan review and variance at 5036 France Avenue South at the September 16th meeting. Staff provided an overview of the request and we held a public hearing. The proposal is to add a second story to the existing building which is proposed to be used as a restaurant. The addition triggers a requirement to provide 14 additional off- streetet parking stalls on the property and since none are provided a variance is required. Uh based on the findings in the staff report staff the staff recommendation is for denial of the request. However, resolutions for approval and denial have both been prepared for your consideration this evening. Uh the planning commission voted 5 to1 to recommend approval of the requested site plan and variance. Uh they also recommended that accommodations for additional bike parking be considered and as we discussed at the last meeting. Uh that's uh being looked into districtwide already. Um so with that tonight staff is seeking a motion to either approve or deny the the request this evening and I'd be happy to answer any questions you have. >> Yeah. Questions for Mr. Lewis at all? Council member Risser. >> Okay. Just um for clarification, my understanding is that in 2022, we upgraded our code for parking and it was to codify a policy basically. Okay. And I'm wondering why the way we codified it, you know, we we sort of pinned ourselves or put ourselves in a corner where it's very challenging to give or allow variances to be awarded. And so I'm wondering what was the thought process back in 2022? I don't I don't know if you could offer some insight into that, but I feel like we're really painted into a corner here. >> Sure. So, it was to cottify a long-standing policy that went back to 1978 to actually allow the property owners at 50th in France to rely on those uh parking ramps for a floor area ratio up to one. Um, you know, prior to it being codified, it was just a policy or practice by the city to allow that. Um, so by codifying it, we actually provided relief to the property owners. I mean, without codifying it, um, from a legal standpoint, it could be argued that they would be required to provide 100% of that uh, 100% of their parking requirement and that they wouldn't be exempt for any of the floor area ratio. Um, so this is providing some relief. Um, it was to codify the standard or the, you know, the policy that had been in place. Um, at any time it could have been changed. We could still change it, but that was why that was done. and follow up because I know it's confusing to me because there was another situation and this was in 2023 where the Bule site um at 390650th Street where they're putting in a restaurant in an area that functioned as storage. Um, we the HA awarded a $225,000 Spark award to that project and there was zero conversation about the regulations that we are raising for Coutino Delario and it it really feels like we're not applying the code in an even way. Could you comment on that or perhaps that's something for attorney Kendall to comment on? Yeah, I can just say that, you know, that project didn't there was no expansion of the building for that project. It didn't increase the the floor area of the building. Um, this is a building addition, so it's increasing that floor area ratio. So, that's why, you know, at that point, we look at it to see is it increasing above a floor area ratio of one and that's why that additional parking is being triggered. And yet when we look at section 36-123 approval required, it says that you have to get a site plan approval and there's several conditions that are listed including um if you are number three expand or change the use of a building or parcel of land to modify a building, accessory, structure or site or land feature in any manner which results in a different intensity of use. And when I went back and I reviewed the HRA meeting, it was very clear that the motivation for awarding the spark money was to make a space that was underutilized become more vibrant and get more um people flowing into it. And in fact, I believe it is a space that was designed to function as a restaurant and to have 100 people um capacity there. And what we're talking about with Albario is 75 seats. So it again really feels like we're out of sync here. And perhaps Attorney Kendall could comment on that. >> I don't know if I have additional comment on that. It sounds like Mr. Lewis is saying that the the Spark grant awarded by the HR um that was not a city council action. did not trigger a zoning ordinance review. It was simply a HRA action. I >> think my point is that according to code section 36-123, there should have been a site plan review. And yes, it only went before the HA, but why didn't it come before council? >> My understanding is that it the space was not changing the square footage and the utilization. I mean this I guess the space was maybe empty at the time but prior to that it had been a space that could h could have something like 100 seats or whatever it was and the proposed use was not changing the number of people that would be permitted to be in that space when it was open. >> Right. We know that there are buildings at in 50th and France that um exceeded an F of one prior to that policy going to place. And so, you know, those are are grandfathered in. Um, in in the case of that music venue, they weren't changing they weren't increasing the floor area of the building. So, that's why it's it's it's different than this. If they were proposing an addition, you know, then that's when we would be looking at that to to look at the increase in floor area to see if that triggered additional parking required. >> F applies to 36-1312. We're talking about 36-1311. Um, item P, restaurants, at least one space for each 100 square feet of indoor floor area. So, I'm not talking about exceeding the 1.0 F. We've got two ordinances that are applicable is my understanding. >> I guess I don't have any additional comment. I I feel it's a different process. We could discuss, you know, how we're looking at parking when there's just a change in use and there's no expansion. We could discuss that, but that's not, you know, the case for this project. This is a different type of situation. >> My concern is it it seems like it should have been looked at with the parking and parking never came up at all in the agreement. And I feel like this really kicked the can down the road and was very unfortunate for Catino Delbario because had this been addressed when this arose perhaps we would have and I do really think we need to look at our parking ordinance. Uh because there is it does not appear that there is a clear legal pathway toward getting a variance. >> I I am finished. Council member Jackson. >> So to follow up on that, if a clothing store were to change into a restaurant, would it have to um reapply for parking purposes? >> Uh in in an area like 50th and France, we have historically not, you know, re-examined the parking requirement for an existing building if they're not expanding. >> Or if Yeah. So the changing use that might potentially bring in more people doesn't trigger the zoning code >> if there's no building if there's no change in the floor area ratio. >> Yep. And yeah 15%. Yeah. >> Um so I actually have a some questions. When we're looking at a variance, there are three elements um that under the practical difficulties. Yes. Um that are there it's uh due to unique circumstances of the pro property the variance will not alter the essential character of the locality and is it reasonable? So um for sure this is a reasonable use. Um but is the variance being caused by the use of the property or by the property itself? Is that kind of the standard that we look at when we look at um sort of practical difficulties? I think of like a driveway can't get down a steep slope so it has to go around a different path than it would otherwise. Is this caused by the land or by the use proposed? >> You're right. So, typically when we're talking about, you know, circumstances unique to the property not created by the land owner, we are a lot of times it's like a unique geographic feature of the property, you know, maybe there's a wetland or a tree they're trying to avoid. So, something like that. In this case, you know, the the reason why the staff recommendation was for denial and and we said that that criteria was not met was because, you know, the issue is there is no space on the property to provide additional parking. Um, but that's not unique to this property. It's it's true of a lot of the properties at 50 and France. So, um, that was why it was also recommended that, you know, if we're looking at this and and thinking this is a great project, um, we we would like this whether it's on this property or the property next door, then then maybe we look at amending the code so that it could be done on any of the properties. >> So, yeah, we kind of talked about that um at the public hearing last time. What would the process be so that it would be we could change the code so it' be fair to all the properties at 50th and France? I mean, it's this is a great project. I'd love to see it go forward. Um, but I also want to be fair to the other properties and I think that maybe we need a code change in order to do that. H how what would the process be? Could we sort of ask them to withdraw their application and we change the code and then they come back or how would that work so that we could make sure this goes forward but in a manner that's fair to all the properties at 50th in France? So, I think because of the 60-day clock, we'd probably want to take action on the variance either way, but you could direct us to prepare a code amendment to change that section of the code, and we could do that in 30 to 60 days. >> Well, um, yeah. So, I mean, I hate to like pass a variant if we passed a variance. I mean, it just it doesn't feel right to pass a variance and then change the code or I mean, we could cure it, but that doesn't that isn't really a thing you do with a variances. Um, I'm kind of going around in circles here. Um, I'd hate to push it off for two more months. What when does a 60-day clock expire? Well, I think the 60-day clock expires October 23rd, I want to say, but we could ex we can extend it. Yep. October 23rd. We get an additional 60-day extension before we have to take action on the variance. >> And then >> I think the you know the applicant too, they may have their own timelines. I don't know >> right >> how an additional 30 to 60 days would impact them. I guess it, you know, depends on how confident you are or comfortable you are as a council with, you know, making a change to the code. >> Yeah. And so, yeah, to make a change to the code, what is there a notice period that has to happen and how long is that? >> We do a public hearing notice and have a public hearing at the planning commission council. I mean, typically there's a two meeting process with the council. So, I guess that's kind of up to you, too. you would want to continue to do that or you know wave second reading of the ordinance. That's why I think it could be done in as little as 30 days. >> Mayor, I just want to point out I I do think it's possible whether you want to or not is up to you. I do think it's possible to approve a variance and then change the code later and that would make the variance kind of obsolete at that point, but it would still be a valid variance in the interim. It may not be the most desirable option, but it is an option. And I go, are you >> I'm done. >> You want to think about a little bit? >> Thank you. So, first one like very specific question. When we were going through the policy update, whether it was 2022, 2023, how did we land on the F of one um to kind of be able to leverage the parking, the district parking? >> Yeah. So that was what the policy was when it was adopted back in 1978 was to allow businesses up to an F of one to rely on those public parking ramps. And then in 2019, the 50th and France small area plan was completed and this policy is acknowledged in the plan. And sort of um there was sort of a feeling that it should be continued and upheld because in in the plan it talks about how at the time at least there wasn't additional capacity in the ramps. And so they said that if there is additional development um it can't be accommodated by the ramps. It'll need to provide its own parking. >> Okay. So, we were purely codifying what had been in place since the 70s. >> Correct. >> Um, we didn't go back and do an assessment of the capacity and kind of the the overall state of parking within the district necessarily >> between 2019 and 2022. No, I don't think so. But as recently as 2019 when that small area plan was done, um there was there was some study because I I think I don't know if it was a a parking study that was done as part of the Nolan mains project, but there was data on the parking demand and the supply and a finding that there wasn't excess capacity or excess parking at that time. So there was a desire to keep it in place as recently as 2019. That was six years ago. Things have changed since then, so it's maybe worth reconsidering now, but um as recently as 2019 was when it was last kind of looked at and decided that it was kind of worth keeping where it was. >> Okay. So it it validated the one and so if we were going to go back and as we're kind of having some of these conversations about potentially changing the policy um the code like what would we be then advising city staff to go and change the code about like do we have clarity on that because I I just want to make sure I understand if if we're saying go and kick off this 30 to 60 day process what is that direction for I personally would have like where I would want to see this change in policy go is to relax um the the parking requirement that we would have >> um so whether that spec specifically is increasing you know the the F whatever that requirement might be um but I I just want to know if we just in 2019 did an assessment. Are we going to necessitate additional assessments to be conducted to really fine-tune how we want to augment this policy? Um and and I only say that because my inclination is to go with what um Dave Kendall just suggested of we can approve this variance tonight. Um I do think it's it's an amazing project. It's really going to invigorate the the restaurants um at 50th in France. I love to see it. I love the overall look. I love what it's doing. Um we also heard from others at 50th in France, from all the businesses with Rebecca Sorenson coming in, there is overall support for this. Um especially from those who would be impacted by potential policy changes to the parking. Um and so because of all of that, and I think I mean obviously this is kind of the business side of it, right? But I know that bario closed on October 1st and so I'm sure that there's kind of pressing timelines too um for when I think we owe it to the the business owner as well to kind of make a decision. So that's what my recommendation would be is we approve the variance tonight. then that doesn't put us up against a really strict clock to make a really good determination of how should we be evolving this parking policy at 50th in France to make it as equitable and progressive with the changing kind of dynamics within parking today. Thank you. >> Thanks for that member Pearson. We'll go back to member Russer who has got a few additional thoughts. >> Thanks Mr. Mayor. Um, so I I agree with uh member Agnu. Um, I I do think this is a a a really awesome project and I think in general um we would want to consider relaxing uh parking. Um and so I was also leaning towards um approving the variance and then circling back on the zoning challenges. The only question which I think is is tangental to um member Agnu. How much time would it take us to do well I guess I'd say it this way. Um, I wouldn't want to go through the process of adjusting the zoning in like an arbitrary fashion. Like we should take our time and do the due diligence, make sure what we really need in that space is what we recommend. Um, and so I I actually wouldn't necessarily want to tie it to this particular project either. Um, and so if you think about it in that time frame that we don't want to time box it to 30 or 45 or 60 days, um, how much time do you think, um, we should be taking to to do the due diligence on the zoning side? >> Um, we could put our heads together and think of kind of a process of how we'd want to do that. I would think maybe at least a few months if we're going to engage with 50th and France businesses. >> That's not how I would do it. analysis, maybe maybe 3 months is more reasonable. >> Then really take the time to visit with the district to figure out what do we really need? >> Um and then bring that back to well that would go through planning, right? You have public hearing it come to council um as well. So that's what I also would be um recommending we do. >> Back to member. Is that it for now? Yes, I'm I'm done. Thank you. Back to member Russer and I think member Jackson got some >> Okay, I have a visual and part of this is because I was not engaged in the parking conversation that happened and because 2022 was before my time on council, but um I grew up in Minneapolis near the 50th and France area and so I know this I even ate at the Red Barn which was on France Avenue and I don't know if any of you other people did but um you know when we think about the 50th France area and just the changes that have happened and um we think about the small area plan for that France region. On the very last page, page 80, it says modify zoning code to codify and revise longstanding policies regarding shared parking at 50th and France. Okay, so it was not just codify, but it was also to revise. And the image, it's not coming up, but what I have is an old picture from the Adina Historical Society that shows the street car um coming through 50th in France. The reality is that gets ripped out in 1950s. Very briefly, you know, we end up having these large cars. We don't start making compact cars in the United States until about the 80s. Okay? And so in the 78, you've got this desperate drive and you don't have the parking facilities that we have today. You've got larger cars. You've got the transportation system that was ripped out, you know, a few decades ago. And so you really do have this situation that calls for putting on controls, but now we've got people living in the 50th and France area. We've added all these new apartments. We've got people who will just walk to restaurants who live there. We've got the new bus line coming through. So, we've got a lot that is happening that is really mitigating the need to have the policy that was created back in 78 um literally taken and put into law. And so I really feel like this is so frustrating to me because I feel like there were so many opportunities to try to get this um the actual code that we have that we're wrestling with today done in a much better manner. And I know there are other municipalities where they have set up their parking codes so that they can grant variances. And I I really do think that we need to do that. So, I'm gonna stop there, but that that is what I >> although I am really torn on this because I do not want to approve something that is not there. There is that. Anyway, >> thank you. Um, member Jackson, then I'll make a few comments. >> Yes. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. What's the um what's the dimensions of this lot approximately? Do you know? I I was paging through >> I want to say it's about 40 feet wide. >> I don't know if I have I don't know if I have a plan. >> It's about 40 feet wide. So, I'm thinking this is a really narrow lot and it's not particularly deep. I just think as a business maybe it does um present a unique piece of land that can't be accommodated. Um I can't accommodate parking on it. Um it's it's very small and it's a high-profile place. So, I think you could make the case that it is a very unique piece of property um and would be pretty unusable if we had to put 14 parking spaces, right? That we're looking for 14 parking spaces. >> Yep, that's correct. >> Yeah, I think I think that you could make that argument that it really doesn't you you couldn't have a business of any size really and accommodate the parking that's required. Um you couldn't have a two-story building there. Um and and it's just it's silly to require it to be one story um in a in a business district. So it's it's a pretty unique piece of land um in in that respect. >> Yeah. And we did put together a res resolution of approval for you and did include findings in there. And one of the, you know, uh, findings we had with respect to the uniqueness factor is that this parcel is actually adjacent to another property that has, um, has a parking lot available with another use where the hours do not conflict. So, it's actually a great, um, you know, situation for shared parking. Um, that's not a situation that I guess you would say is super present throughout the whole district. Um, at least not where the parking is right adjacent to the building. So, um, that's another thing that's a little bit unique about this one as well. >> Well, and there's no way you could bury parking or put it up. It's just it's just too small a piece. I'm not going to go with the neighbor next door because I think the idea that the parking has to run with the land. I I I kind of like that requirement, but I think we could make a waiver of the requirement of the extra 14 spaces. I mean, the agreement with a neighbor is wonderful and I hope they go through with it, but I wouldn't make a legal decision based on that because it isn't um it it isn't the type of requirement that a variance should because a variance runs with the land. The decision should run with the land. Um but I think this is just such a tiny piece of land. There's no way you could accommodate a reasonable use um and have those extra 14 spots. So, I think you could make the case that um that this is caused by the piece of land. That's all. >> Thank you. When you when you think about this area, I thought member Risser reminded me when she talked about the red barn. I don't remember the red barn, but I I kind of remember Arby's being down there. Maybe that was the successor to the red barn. I I'm not sure. But the I do remember a time when there was parking down there adjacent to buildings and that historic sort of obligation that people had to have parking next to the store that they operated. And of course people that came before us and planners that were before Kerry wisely thought back in the mid70s, hey, this isn't going to work anymore. This whole area is unique onto itself because we're going to be able to build out this entire area. And what we're going to do is we're going to hide parking behind the retail. And I I've seen some old articles where they thought, "Oh, that's really European." I don't even know if it is European, but somebody down at the Star Tribune thought it was a European model where they hid the parking behind the stores. And so there were three ramps to accommodate all the the unique features of the entire neighborhood. And I think you've done a good job of trying to capture that in the in the motion that's in the affirmative of saying that the property owner secured access to additional parking through a private agreement for shared parking with the adjacent property owner. Uh the property is unique in that it is adjacent to another property with surface parking. Uh and the and the hours of the adjacent use do not conflict with the hours of the proposed restaurant. I thought that was that was uh clever on your part. So I mean for me I feel like it's arguable as to it's arguable that they did in fact meet the standards for variance that there are practical difficulties that the um the standard required to look at practical difficulties includes as member Jackson noted the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner. I think we all concur with that. uh we we got uh the variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. I think we all concur on that. Where we got hung up and we we're maybe at variance here is that the third prong of that test was the landowner's problem is due to unique circumstances of the property. The whole area is unique is what I would argue and it's it's it's a problem for every property because of the uniqueness of the entire neighborhood. And fortunately in this circumstance, he's got an agreement for parking with the guy next door. And so I think member Agnu hit it right on the head. I think we we go with the uh we go with the variance. I'm comfortable that they meet the standards for issuance of a variance myself and then we go back and we look at the code and we try to figure out what would be as she stated eloquently I thought uh ease or what was the word you used? Relax. >> Relax. >> Relax. uh the parking requirements to make sure that it applies to everybody. I mean, it may be at the end of the day we say there's no F involved down here because of the nature of the uh parking circumstance. Um we're all relying on public parking and it's first come first serve and particularly at night. We know there isn't any pressure on any of the ramps. There's all kinds of empty spaces available at night. Plus, we're going to have these other forms of transportation available. So, I think the best thing to do is to is to uh approve this matter tonight on an affirmative vote, uh, you know, prove the variance and then get after the code and do it in a logical way. And I thought your notion of engaging the business owners down there and the tenants on on how to address that uh uh that parking requirement that exists just based on tradition when people are trying to be fairer is something that we can resolve and so um I would support member Eggno I don't know if you want to move that resolution 2025-80 which approves the site plan review and variance at 5036 France Avenue South >> so moved >> second >> and member pier seconds further Discussion. All those in favor of adoption of the resolution 2025-80 which would approve the site plan review and variance at 5036 France Avenue South. Say I. >> I. >> I. Opposed. >> Nay. And that was a very reluctant nay. >> Uh matter is approved. Resolution's adopted. >> Thank you. >> We're good to go. Yep. What's the schedule? >> Uh starting soon. >> All right. starts next week. >> Thanks. Thanks everybody. Thanks for being here tonight in case we needed questions answered. >> Uh, okay. We don't have any more action items. Oh, let's throw one hearing in there. >> Uh, yeah, let's confuse the mayor one more time. >> Um, so we're up to we're down to manager's comments. I don't think we've had anything come in, >> Click Allison, that we need to be mindful of. All right, manager's comments. >> Uh, thank you, your honor. I got a couple of things. Um, one is just to give you um, it's just a reminder to council that we are having a close session with the council uh, scheduled for uh, 5:00 on Wednesday uh, October 22nd. And we'll do that up in the community room. We'll start in close session. Um, when that's completed, we'll go right into uh, the work session scheduled for that night. And this is a work session uh excuse me an attorney client um meeting to discuss legal strategy for our ongoing discussion with the DOJ on the Grand View um Grand View ADA compliance issues. So that's what we have tonight. Uh that's what we'll have on that Wednesday night. Uh also wanted to give you a quick update on just where we are with the aquatic center project. It is moving forward. Uh they are out there with heavy equipment digging a hole in the ground. I think that's part of it right there. Uh where you're looking down this so this area is the area that uh used to have the cabana o on top of it. Uh they're they're excavating that out and that's where they'll build the new uh the new pump room in that area. Just another look at it. This project started immediately after the close of the pool season uh and is on track right now. And we are looking for uh another group of contractors to come out uh yet this yet this year uh to begin getting uh sent to do sand blasting on the other pools uh so that they can be coated, painted or whatever we're using for for that. So more um updates on that to come. Uh, finally, I just wanted to to let the council know of an award that uh former resident of Adina received. His name is Jim, excuse me, Jim Nelson. And he's been recognized by the National Association for Industrial and Office Parks, NYOP, a very important um kind of business real estate group. Uh that's a national group. They selected Jimostumously to receive the 2025 President's Award. Nelson was chosen in recognition of the exceptional service and inspirational leadership to the commercial real estate industry. Selected from nominations submitted by fellow NYUP members, the president's award is the highest individual honor and celebrates Nelson's enduring legacy and profound impact that uh he had on those around him. And I count myself as one of those people. He was one of the first people I met kind of professionally when I came to Adina in 2010. um such a kind and um a kind and important man who had who did a lot of great things for the Twin Cities, not just Adina, but he was an Adina guy through and through and uh I miss him. >> Well said. Thank you. Dr. Richard. >> Well, I just want to thank Lieutenant Schultz who is wearing the pink patch for October and breast cancer awareness month and just really want to do a shout out to the effort to raise awareness of that and voice my appreciation. U if you haven't gotten your mammogram recently, go out and get it. It's an important thing. um early detection is the best um way to have a positive outcome. So, I really appreciate the awareness raising that the police department. Thank you. >> Thank you, Council Member Jackson. >> Thank you. So, I have something happy and something serious. Um on Friday afternoon, we all got three of us were there and uh we were all invited to or four of us. Yeah, we were and we got to go to a groundbreaking ceremony for the new Southdale Library and it was a super exciting day and I just wanted to highlight two things that um stuck out to me and one is that the county actually worked on this for 15 years. I was talking with the former counter county administrator and he's like, "Yeah, we looked at the whole center and knew we had to either put a whole lot of money into changing it or replace it." And so for uh former administrator Huff, it was a big day because 15 years of his effort and then it was 18 years for the arts and culture commission. Um several people have come in and out of the commission over the 18 years time. And they all wanted to replace or repair our art center. And so this project is going to be a long time an accomplishment of a longtime effort of a lot of people which was really exciting. Um, the other thing is I've been having lots of conversations with people about our proposed levy and I they've been really thoughtful conversations and I in talking to this one gentleman I realized we've got sort of a perfect storm going on. We've got three things that are happening. One is our property values are increasing because we've got a shortage of homes for sale and that's caused by a lot of things. um primarily because of high interest rates. People don't want to relocate and get a high interest mortgage when they have a low interest mortgage. But that's caused the shortage of homes has caused our prices to go up, especially in 2024 dramatically. At the same time, in our complicated Minnesota system of property taxes, it's the waiting of different property types changes over time. And currently the weight of the property tax burden has shifted from commercial to single family homes and that makes the tax burden heavier on our single family residences. And then thirdly, we have these generational expenses in the city and they really are once in a-lifetime or generational sort of things because our city was developed initially between 1958 or mid 1950s and the mid1 1970s. and the mid1 1970s were 50 years ago. So in the last five years, I just want to talk about some of the big expenses because um they're big. One is the shift to street reconstruction from the assessments. As the gentleman said today, these assessments are real money um and they're extremely ownorous on single family or single homes. And now we're pushing that onto the general fund, but that's been over $2 million in the last five years. We've hired six firefighter and paramedics um originally through a safer grant and we're absorbing that cost. That's about a million dollars. We have six new employees in the police department. We are building a new fire station that has been needed for has been identified for a long time and it's happening and we're replacing the pool pump house which we've talked about but that go dates back to 1958. Um, we've spent between $2 and $3 million for the construction fund and park construction fund to address um asset preservation and deferred maintenance. And um that's a those are all expenses that are pretty unavoidable and they've been increases in the time I've been in office. Um but I just want people to know I I I take this I don't quite understand why the critics are talking about transparency. All of our budgets are available online. You can compare them year-over-year. They're written according to national standards, the ACFR standards. All cities follow these accounting standards. So, it's completely transparent as to where our money is going. And anyone can analyze um up and down what we're doing and compare to other cities. But these three things together are the perfect storm. We have control over the city expenses, but we don't have control over the increase in property values um because of the shortage of homes or the shift um of the property tax burden from commercial to residential and it is I take this all very seriously. It's a squeeze. It's a big squeeze and um and unfortunately it's all happening at the same time. >> Yeah. Thanks for those thoughts. Important thoughts. Um Council Member Pierce. Uh thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um so last week, um Braar uh hosted the adaptive golf open, the first ever in the state of Minnesota. And um if you're not familiar with it, it's um it's an um it's a two-day event. I guess it's a three-day event, I suppose. They do a practice round, but there's two rounds of golf tournament style. And um all of the individuals um have some type of disability um whether it's neurological or physical. Um and it's pretty awesome to be out there and and see these individuals golfing uh 36 holes. Um and um Brayar has quite a history um in this space. I believe back in 1979 if I recall. Um we've got clinics um out there on a weekly basis uh where we're able to help individuals that that need some assistance to enjoy the the game of golf. Um and so it was it was really cool to be out there um to experience that. Um, and one of the the um I didn't know this, but one of the um spokespersons um is a fraternity brother of mine and I so I'm I'm there walking around and I see him and he's on the poster um and he plays golf in what's called a Verircat um cuz he's paralyzed from the waist down in this Verircat U which is actually made I believe in Minnetonka. um he's strapped into it, it elevates him to the right position to swing the golf club and that's how he he golfs. Um so it's really um great to be out there um to spend some time with those athletes um and just looking forward to hosting that in years to come. Uh but just a shout out to the Braar staff. everything they do out there is really top-notch. Um, and so we we have quite an asset out there and um really great people uh running uh Bremar and so hats off to them and uh we look forward to those athletes coming back um again next year. Um and then the second thing I um just had a couple of comments on the um budget. Um I I've been thinking a lot about um just the difference between being in the private sector and the public sector. And one of the things that I'm really challenged with is in my day job there are there are forces right that are natural forces that cause me um to have to operate within constraints. And so I've never had a job before this one, uh, where I had P&L accountability. Um, and I had no true market pressures to force me to make decisions in a more succinct way. And so if I need to spend $600,000 to buy a new printer or whatever, um, which is true, printer cost $600,000 in a manufacturing plant. Um, I'm there's market pressures, there's revenue, there's margin, and I could borrow money, right, to to buy that printer, but I still got to pay that through revenues, increase in revenues. Um, and so I have that type of a conversation for everything. Now, that's simplified. in government, we don't have those kinds of pressures that are just natural market forces. Um, and so I like for us to try to figure out a way to have some type of an index that helps us, right, really understand what those forces are. Um because I think a lot of what we do and and I for this year for sure hats off to staff for taking the year to say these are the projections for the levy and then us saying well no we want that to be different. That is a pressure that the council uh placed and I feel confident that we're going to come in um under 10% for that levy. Um, but that's work that we've done for the whole year to get to that. We could do that every year. um which we should, but I also think it'd be great if we're able to to really come up with a way to to to put some pressure on the system that uh forces us to have a different level of conversation around do we add this service or do we add that service or do we say no um right that's the one of the biggest challenges I have found in this job um and So, I have a bunch of ideas. Would not surprise anybody. Um, and then we'll be um having that conversation cuz I I with U Manager Neil because I feel like I need to learn more about it as well. Um, but that is one of the things that I've been thinking about. Uh, but I don't want it to go I I don't want to um gloss over it. The staff did do exactly what we asked them to do. And I could make it personal as I feel like I specifically said this can't be right. We need to make a different uh we need to make we need to set a different course. We need to sustain our levy and we spent a lot of time talking about how to do that. Um and so I think we're going to achieve that. Uh so hats off to staff there, but there's um there's going to be more work to be done. So that's it. >> Yeah. Thanks for those thoughts, Joe. Member Agno. >> Thank you. Um, so I'm in my last month now of maternity leave and all I do other than like city council and groundbreaking ceremonies and going to look at lighting at night is walk around our city. Um, all of our amazing trails and paths and pedestrian ways. And I've noticed over the last I don't know like two or three weeks there are these large like stickers or labels um of like hey yield to pedestrians and kind of helping better orient um bicycles and pedestrians. And I've absolutely love the stickers. I don't know if they're stickers or how they were actually applied um but I think that that's been a great addition. So, just wanted to acknowledge that and thank you because I've seen them at multiple locations across the community and and they're fantastic. >> That's it. >> I agree. Thanks. So, some really nice uh budget observations as we continue this process, both of you, I think, um describing pressures in a in a different way. I think we we're sensitive to them because we know what other units of government are facing. We know what our residents are facing. Um, and we know what those federal pressures are, those downward pressures that businesses and people are facing. U, so we've we've got to be and I think I know we will be just because of this group. I know we'll be really careful and mindful of all of that as we go through this final stage of trying to figure out how to make this town run the way it should run as effectively and efficiently as we can. Um, so that's yeah, just a one tag along observation there. Uh, on the adaptive open, uh, I was really grateful, uh, James was able to go over there to help kick it off and and they said I was over there on Sunday for the awards and they said he just did a great job of of teeing it up and they were really proud of him and I thought the observation you made about our staff. I heard that on Sunday too from so many people from the Minnesota Golf Association people to people that were participating and they were there from all over the country. Um, and then the young guy who won the overall was using one of those chairs. uh had I think he he'd lost the use of his lower body in a skiing accident about three years ago and he was a real strong young guy and uh I don't know what he shot but um he he he was a national champion you know so here he was at the Minnesota event and as James says that next uh next year they'll be back and I think they're believing now that they have the ability to host a national tournament or that we have ability to host a national tournament and why not I Edina is going to be the host for the US Women's Open in 2030. Hazeline for the RDER Cup in 2029, maybe Braar for the US Adaptive Open in some in the foreseeable future. So, it was it was really enjoyable being out there on Sunday afternoon, too. And uh Jack Rice's who wife Edy, who was so involved with the MGA, was out there and right immersed in the middle of everything. Um, I put up on the middle uh screen there. I don't know Jennifer if you got you can tee that up a little bit or show it. When when Jim when um Scott Neil was talking about Jim Nelson, uh, it made me think he was also talking about John Harris who as many of us know who played golf as you drive into the golf course it says John Harris Drive. The reason it says John Harris Drive is because John Harris, who spent most of his adult life in our community, won the US uh men's amateur championship in the course of his golfing career and um really quite a feat. uh ended up at uh being a member at at Augusta for some period of time and in fact uh at his uh was at his visitation the beginning of the funeral. I had to run to a meeting with Scott Neil and our congressperson. But um somebody told me there were even flowers there at the funeral at Mount Olivet from Jack and Barbara Nicholas. we must have gotten to know during his days being a member at uh Augusta National. Uh another guy I mean their the reason is that there's only a cross on this program is because he wouldn't want his picture up there. He'd be like Jim Nelson. Just uh kind, self- aacing, gentle, uh humble, uh just a wonderful, wonderful guy and just a tremendous personality that cared so much about our town and the people that lived here. uh gave us a lot of advice just um kind of voluntarily about Braar when we were redoing Braar and and the years I know him and and had a chance to play golf with him several times because I knew some of the guys he played hockey with. In fact, his as I was standing at the um visitation, uh Bruce Carlson came up who did the um the display that we have on Edina Hockey that was over several years ago at the historical center. Uh Bruce Carlson was on the first state championship team uh for Edina, but he was also on a national championship team at the University of Minnesota in 1974, I think it was, with John Harris and uh and some of the other people that were at the funeral, including Buzzy Schneider, who lives here, but was on the 1980 Olympic team, the Miracle on Ice. So, uh a great athlete, a humble human being, uh wonderful wife, Jennifer. our thoughts are with the family. So, um, thanks for all you did, John, for the city of Vina and all of us that live here. All your friends and family miss you greatly. And, uh, rest in peace. Thanks for that, Jennifer. And then uh the reason that uh James had to cover for me on Friday night was because I was down at the uh leadership uh meeting of the US Conference of Mayors in Oklahoma City. The the current mayor of Oklahoma City, David Holt, uh is the president of the US Conference of Mayors for this year. And uh our first stop on Friday morning was over to the Oklahoma City Memorial, which was the old Mura Federal Building that was bombed. Timothy McVey remember back in the 70s and 168 people killed there and it's really it's really quite a special memorial has a wonderful peaceful feeling and then uh David uh Holt who's also the dean of the law school at Oklahoma City University crafted an Oklahoma City declaration basically a human rights declaration that many of us signed off on and I'll I'll get a copy of it for uh Jennifer to put on online all the mayors there I think probably 50 to 70 of us that signed that Oklahoma City declaration. And then we had we went to um have conversation at one of their taller buildings in Oklahoma City and we had a I think two and a half hour session with US Senator James Langford from Oklahoma who you're if you recall um before the presidential election was working on a bipartisan immigration bill and he was a real gentleman I thought and real sincere and honest guy and discussed housing and and FEMA and policing and immigration, a variety of different topics that uh that we walk through with him and ask questions on. Uh cities are really keen on working with the legislative branch, with Congress to try to get some of the things done that cities need done. Uh just I see a note here to myself, uh Jennifer, uh the mayor of Hartford, Connecticut came up to me. He said, "I've been looking at your website. I really like your website." and I'd like to talk to your your tech person about your website. So, Hartford, Connecticut is admiring our website. Um, a lot of conversation as I mentioned later that day on on a on a variety of topics and Jane Caster, the mayor of Tampa, who was a former police chief there, did a FEMA review. Uh, we looked at uh the road bill with Andy Ginther from Columbus, Ohio. We looked at um and and talked about at at a working lunch the impacts of the House and Senate bills on expanding affordable housing in different communities. Uh stay tuned on that. Uh Karen Bass was there from Los Angeles who's chair of the homelessness task force gave us an update on homelessness. Uh and of course they've got remarkable number of challenges out there with their homeless population I think approaching 50,000 people. A city unto itself. um remarks by Wells Fargo uh about small businesses uh which important to all of us here in Indiana with small business being the key to our success uh economically. Uh crime survey uh some uh talk about a new seeking a new partnership with the white house and congress uh there the mayor of Providence gave a report on that. Um and then uh Charles Ramsey uh who is the uh adviser to the US Conference of Mayors, a former police chief of Washington DC and Philadelphia uh wanted to talk a little bit about mayoral and city council member personal security. And so I think we're going to see some things coming in the future here about um uh how to you know maybe a a playbook for maximizing the protection of your elected officials because even locally people are are facing some challenges. So it's something that we'll be mindful of as well. Had a video presentation with the mayor of Chicago uh talking about the impending uh National Guard situation. Uh I wrote down a comment he made. He said when we respond with care and not force, we are saving lives. And uh that's been their motto in the city of Chicago. So those were those were some of the things. Uh we talked about the roll back on climate protection. Uh and um there was a women's mayor's leadership alliance update. Uh we had some Brazilian mayors there that that we visited with for a while and of course they're in the midst of all this tariff business. Um, and public health. We talked a bit about public health and vaccinations as well. So, I won't go into any more detail on that. Uh, also, one thing I did want to cover was data centers. Both the mayors of Phoenix and Mesa have embraced these data centers that require a huge amount of energy and water. and um the mayor of Mesa in particular um some of his are cited in neighborhoods that maybe are near residential neighborhoods, but they're commercial industrial neighborhoods and the the the noise factor is really quite significant. And uh they they I think they wish they would have thought these things through a little bit more effectively, but um it was interesting to listen to them. So uh we should be thinking about that. And then there was one other um oh uh Phoenix knows how to fight a lithium ion battery fire. They've got a special team that does that work. And so I thought uh we should have our uh our folks contact them. I can ask their mayor for information on who to contact on fighting lithium battery fires in case we ever have any of those here in town. And I thought because we may see and a request some of these older buildings are being converted to data centers, you know, like you think along Highway 100 south of 70th, >> if some of some people come with the idea converting some of those to data centers, we need to know what the capacity of Excel is, we know kind of what our water situation is over there, but uh it might be something that we want to look at in advance. And I did get a copy of the Mesa revised ordinance on just on data centers that we should take a look at as well. Um, so that's it for me. Uh, that caused anybody else to have anything they wanted to talk about? >> Okay. Is there a motion to adjurnn? >> So moved. >> Second. >> Second. A motion by member Jackson, second by member Pierce that we adjourn the meeting of the United City Council this Tuesday, October 7th, 2025 at 9:48 p.m. Uh, any further discussion? Those in favor of adjournment say I. >> I. Opposed. Carried. >> We stand adjourned. Good night. >> Okay. Good night. >> Good night. >> Can I get back to you? I don't want this anymore. I'm not going to go to this. >> Okay. >> So, >> I I'm being worried. So licks.