[music] Heat. Heat. [music] [music] >> [music] >> Heat. Heat. >> [music] >> Welcome everybody. Um, happy holidays and merry Christmas and happy Hanukkah and everything. And um I'll call this meeting to order and then we will go around and do introductions as we always do and everyone in the room will um introduce themselves our guests or whomever. So um I'll start with Sarissa. >> Sarissa Saraki, senior management coordinator. >> Derek Nelson, city attorney. >> Darren Nelson, finance director. Mike Fung, city manager. >> Kimberly Wilurn, city council at large. Paula Rome, w three. >> Rebecca Shack, W two. >> Brad Reome, mayor. >> Betsy Foster, Bolton, W one. >> Steph Calbert at large. >> Rachel Suzic with Golf Public. >> Ellen Larson with Golf Public. >> Kelly OD, recreation director. >> Kevin Fox, fire chief. >> Will Manchester, public works director. >> Andrew Whittenberg, communications manager. >> Julie Wish, community development director. Derek Mezer, deputy fire chief. >> Sarah Westy, assistant recreation director. >> Damn, resident. >> Jerry Rudig, resident. >> Ilitzki, resident. >> Tom Stard, resident. >> Kevin Ringoffer, citizen. >> All right, everyone. will welcome. Um we've got this is a uh special study session that was originally scheduled uh to be a regular meeting and um and oftentimes after we get our budget passed, we can cancel this meeting, but um there are enough things on the docket that Mr. Funk and I um and staff talked it over and decided that getting together for one last time [laughter] would be uh would be the right thing to do. So, um, with that, um, we've done introductions. Our first business item is long-term asset planning, which is something we've talked about before, um, and is, um, is a major issue. So, with that, I'll turn it over to Mike. Thank you, Brad, and council and staff and and guests. Good evening again. Just wish everyone a happy holidays, merry Christmas, and however you celebrate your holidays. So, it's that time of season. So, let's go ahead and just jump in. uh in talking to Brad, we thought um this conversation should hopefully last about an hour and 15 maybe 20 minutes and then we'll go into agenda item two and then hopefully around 7:30 we'll get into close session. So with that uh staff has about a we haven't timed it out but I'm going to estimate a 20 to 30 minute presentation. So we we want to go as quickly as we can on our end and then allow council at least 30 to 45 minutes for for for additional conversation. uh the the discussion questions that we've teed up in the staff report and I'll start off with the two questions we'll ask you at the end and that is after the presentation does the council need any additional information and then secondly as we go through this conversation does the city have interest in pursuing local sales tax as a potential revenue source of funding to really kick off uh tonight's conversation first we always uh point to our strategic plan and in our strategic plan under our strategic IC priority infrastructure and asset management. As you know, as we just talked through this recently, we do have a very specific desired outcome, which is to develop an annual capital improvement plan that supports the sustainable maintenance and replacement of assets. And so, really, tonight's conversation falls within that realm of really looking at at our assets. And as you know, we have lots of assets ranging from water and sewer pipes underneath roadways to roadways themselves, our facilities, meaning our structures, our buildings, trails, parks. Uh so we do have a lot of assets and tonight's again focus is really looking at those long-term assets and planning around its replacement. Certainly, as we talked about tonight, it's financial consideration goes without saying in terms of these are substantial investments. We we know cities own [snorts] um expensive assets and just like at our houses at some point we need to look at replacing and improving those assets. Uh we do try as you know council and staff to leverage as many tax dollars as possible and at the same time looking for outside funding sources whether it be grants uh partnerships with the with the private sector along with other financing sources such as our finance our um fees and franchise fees and user fees. Um, you'll hear tonight that local aim sales tax, which we've talked a little bit about, but it's been a while, is another funding source outside of property taxes. And Mr. Nelson has a slide that illustrates property taxes versus sales taxes. Uh, as noted in the staff report, and again, I think I've already kind of covered this. Uh tonight we're really wanting um to have a conversation with you about how we prioritize these capital projects across different asset categories, looking at a general timeline and sequencing of this framework. And we've got a slide at the very end that gives you a sense of if things were to put into motion what that looks like in terms of projects and project timeline. So we want to share that with you. Uh we want to also identify and evaluate the funding sources because we do have um several to choose from whether it's property taxes, sales taxes, um other types of user fees uh that would look to support these investments and then at the end just certainly looking for a conversation and some next steps and thoughts from you on all of this to really jump into it and for tonight's purposes u looking at the these major improvements. Uh the first one is trails. Uh as you know, mayor and council, we do have in our CIP a whole section dedicated to trails and we have a trail improvement plan. These are on our website. If we do need to pull it up, we can certainly pull it up here this evening. But as you know, we have um a trail plan. Uh we're making our way through that trail plan. In fact, we've made some substantial improvements to our trail system in the last five years. But as you know u when you look at the buildout of our entire system that cost in today's value is hundred million. Uh we do have a revenue source and we'll talk a little bit more about this in some coming slides. Our revenue source on that is franchise fees where we collect 2 million a year and let me give the simple I mean really simple math on that is if you have two million a year coming in we're looking at a 50-year build out of our system and we've had previous study assessions to that regard. In terms of the Mars, um, as you know, that was part of a facility study that occurred here about a year and a half ago. There's been conversations at the council in previous study sessions. I think three other times in the last year and a half where council, you've seen this. As a recap, we did attach uh that document in your packet. Uh, what's noted on the slide are are three options. One, and I'll start with the bottom one, number C. 2C is 15 million. Uh that's that deferred maintenance option which is slightly in totality a little less than 10 million but all of these include the 6.275 repayment for that inner fund load which was part of the initial purchase and then the 2 million that we had for operational costs. So in total 15 million for that deferred maintenance. Uh 1B I'll just move upward. 1B is 32 million uh which includes the deferred maintenance plus some other items uh as noted in that staff report or in that report. And then 1A uh includes uh really this facility additions which would be on the west side of the facility. So adding on to the building uh for enhanced opportunities. Uh the next is then fire stations. Again, this goes back to probably the latest conversation we had uh earlier this year. Uh four stations at roughly 12.5 million each. That's a we a a new building uh cost, estimated cost. So, four stations at 12 a.5 million or 50 million for our four [snorts] satellite fire stations. Uh we've had opus on our radar screen. In fact, we got state bonding dollars a few years ago uh in the amount of 725,000 for purchase of land and also planning. And as you heard from recently Matt Kuma, we're in 2025. We're looking at doing an engagement process to identify those potential costs. As of right now, we say 30 million, but again, that's not identified. It could there's there's a range in there. I think a really safe number to use at this point for discussion purposes is 30 million. Uh we've also then talked about the community center uh remodel. Uh as you know we took bids on that almost two years ago now and we paused that. So we have a community center estimated cost of 4 million. And then with the Willis Center there's a whole host of options. Maybe the simplest way to say there's kind of an alocart type of approach to the community center ranging from 250,000 upwards of 26 million for improvements. So in total excluding the trails. So take out the 100 million for trails items two through six on the low end just shy of 100 million upwards of 151 million depending on the options and and where we land on those discussions in terms of and this is I call this a proposed strategy and this is a I say it's a foundational work and a foundational conversation on what are ways that we could fund this activity what is some potential packaging of projects in different ways of looking to get there. Um I'll call this kind of above the line. You'll see in the middle there opus and I'll come to that here in a second. So above the line uh in terms of that strategy that would look to utilize local option sales tax and before I go through one, two, and three, I'll turn your attention over to the right hand side of that slide just to keep in the back of your mind about local option sales tax. Uh in terms of the estimated revenues annually, uh we're looking at it that would be around $6 million. There was a as you know a sales tax study that was done by the University of Minnesota that's included in your packet. Uh we've asked them to update those numbers. We don't have those yet. Uh but they are looking to update those numbers. Um short of getting those numbers, we're estimating at staff that would be approximately 6 million a year that could be collected in a half cent sales tax. as you do the kind of reverse math on that uh in terms of collecting six million a year. Um I'll talk about five million in a second, but think of five million of that six million would equate to uh roughly 75 million in projects. So the concept would be collecting sales tax and that's how cities use this money. They collect that sales tax and then use those dollars to pay for principal and interest payments on debt. And so we could issue debt as a city around 75 million. Again, it depends on the length of the debt. Uh, this estimates a 20 I think it's 25 years, Darren, with a conservative interest rate of around three and a half%. So, you you could issue debt over 20 years, you can go issue debt over 30 years, and it kind of depends on some of those factors, but just keep in mind about $75 million in projects. Uh the other thing and uh our team over here at Goff Public, so Rachel and Allen will talk a little more in depth here in a few minutes about sales tax and the landscape of sales tax, but know that um as you consider or as you think about sales tax, one of the one of the statutory requirements is uh there's a maximum of five projects. So when cities have asked for sales tax, uh you can only note or can only ask for five projects. Um, one things that we've clarified, for example, is we've talked about four fire stations. You cannot ask for funding for four fire stations because that would be four projects. And so, again, keeping in mind that you have the ability to ask for up to five potential projects on a ballot. And then there's ballot strategy. Um, we're not going to go too deep into b ballot strategy tonight, but just understand that how we frame this up. Again, if you're depending on how that's framed up, we'll want to take that into consideration in terms of the ask and how much could be potentially asked, etc. So, with that kind of as the backdrop, just going through trails or excuse me, going through then uh one, two, and three noted here. Uh, as it relates to trails, as I noted here a few minutes ago, the city currently receives about $2 million in franchise fees from funding from that funding source. As you know, that's been difficult to keep up with our trail projects. And when we look at our CIP uh next five CIP plan next year, five CIP, five-year CIP, sorry, that we've got projects, I think two projects in the next five years just due to current obligations due to balancing the again $2 million coming in. As you know, that's not stretching as far as we probably want it to go. So the the thought process would be here is that with trails of that $6 million in sales tax that could be collected really earmarking 1 million of that for trails and that way that would supplement the 2 million that that's currently coming in. So then in total the city would have three million in trails um that would accelerate that trail plan and I think propel a number of projects that um many of our residents continue to ask for. Um Will is here and so later on if there's any questions about the trails or if we want to pull up a trail plan we have the ability to do that. So that's the thought process around trails again using 1 million of that 6 million [snorts] in sales tax. That remaining then 5 million could be utilized then for items two and three. Uh again the marsh as noted anywhere from 15 to 41 million in projects. And so I think part part of tonight's conversation is again where does the marsh fit into perhaps a potential sales tax and then what's the scope of that type of project? And then in terms of the fire stations in talking with Chief Fox, uh while we do have four stations estimated at 12.5 million each with this strategy is that we would look to improve two stations, station two and station five. Uh there are the ones in most need. Uh that would be 25 million. Again, two stations at 12 a.5 million each. Um and then the the current the other two stations uh we would look to do some remodeling what we call in the short term. So, the next I would say in the next two to five years, we look to do some remodeling in the short term with a potential rebuild of those stations in the future. And we'll talk a little bit later on some of those timelines and how that could fit into with debt coming off at some point because, you know, back in 2020 when the city uh remodeled the current police department, built the new fire station, that was a $30 million debt issuance. So, we have debt sitting out there. And so the idea is that when that debt falls off, that could be replaced with these two fire stations uh in the long term. >> And Mike, just um for our guests and um for people who are not as familiar as staff is just identify the locations of the station um each of the stations because I don't I don't think the council thinks in terms of station one, two or three. It's [snorts] station by whatever and so forth. So, if you could just identify that for us, I think that would be helpful. >> Yeah. Thank you, Mayor. I'll quickly turn it over to She Fox. He'll he'll have the actually the the road address is at his fingertips quicker than me, so Kevin could do that quickly. >> Thanks. Uh good evening, council and mayor. Um yeah, so our five fire stations that we have total in the city, we have four satellite stations and our central station. So, our central station, as everyone knows, is located here on the city uh campus. We have our station two which is located on the northeastern part of the city at Hopkins Crossroad and essentially 394. And then our station three is in the southeast quadrant of the city off of Roland Road just east of Baker Road kind of that's the station that kind of services the Opus area. And then our station four is located in the southwest corner of the city on Excelsier Boulevard right next to Purgatory Park. And our station five is in the northwest quadrant of the city located at Carlson Parkway and 394. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you, mayor. So with I'll call again the above the line is to really look at trails the marsh and two fire stations of a potential ask for sales tax. The other thing with sales tax and you'll hear again this from Rachel and Allen is there needs to be regional significance and so we will have to demonstrate regional significance when a city or county or jurisdiction asks for sales tax. in talking with staff and talking with I say with legal counsel's been involved in our meetings um and and other um team members where the marsh fits into it is thinking about the marsh the marsh has um Kelly correct me if I'm wrong over with our membership our membership spans over 90 cities in the metro I say metro but generally the metro area so our membership expands well beyond just Minnitankka residents um and so that's there's a regional significance with the marsh and then certainly with our fire stations. Uh for for Brad and Rebecca who's met with us and our legislators, that's part of our part of our bond request too is the regional significance and the amount of calls that certainly out of station two in [clears throat] serving the Redale area and our interstate system in and around Ridgedale easily can demonstrate regional significance on that front. Um so that's the thought process about um one, two, and three. We're going to jump down to the bottom. Community center and Willis. So, community center again estimated at 4 million. Willist estimated at 6 million. So, the math on that is 10 million. Uh council, as you know, uh we as a city have recently positioned ourselves for a future $10 million bond issuance. And so that certainly is a opportunity to look at um that as a those two projects that would fit nicely into that $10 million bond issuance just given their related costs. And then going back to opus and I apologize on the formatting. It's correct on my screen but anyways the form um in the middle there then is opus. It's estimated at 30 million. There's a number of options there and it's not one or the other. It could be a combination of all these in terms of utilizing sales tax perhaps. hope may perhaps we slide opus into the sales tax conversation uh going back and asking for state bonding dollars a local bond issuance and then park dedication fees and so there's a number of funding sources that could certainly apply towards opus it's really unknown now until we get through 2025 and understand the full potential of what that looks like >> any questions there going to pause there because this is I think we'll probably go back to this a few times >> anyone Go ahead. I'm sorry. >> So, so the five [clears throat] projects just to be clear, >> the stations, the trails, the marsh, the community center >> and >> it's two stations and each station is a project. >> Okay, that's what I mean. So then just tell me the five. >> So we can ask for no more than five, >> right? with the ones above I call above the line the trails would be one >> marsh would be two and then two fire stations and so that's four >> okay >> so you don't have to ask for five >> okay we're not asking for five >> we're just considering open >> right right now this is a baseline discussion uh >> okay you as a you that's something you as a council will need to decide is what if you want to do sales tax okay what would be the ask >> it could be one project if you see it being one project it Could be two, it could be three. The we're noting four here as a potential pathway, but it could be as many as five. >> Thank you. Yeah, the law just limits us to five, >> right? >> Okay, >> good question. That that answer your question, Py? >> Thank you. >> At this point, I'm going to hand it over to Darren. I think the next slide, uh, Darren's going to highlight a little bit of the U of M extension report. >> Yep, absolutely. Thank Thank you. Thank you, Mike. Uh good evening, mayor, council members. Uh we had a U of M extension office did a sales tax report for us and they've been doing it for a number of different jurisdictions throughout the last several years. But we had a report that was issued back in August of 20123. It was attached in the packet today on that end of it. Uh the first report that we had them do was actually um it utilized data from 2020 from the sales tax data from the state dating back to 2020 which was obviously our COVID year on that on that end of it. 2021, you're kind of still in COVID time frames as well, too. And so, sales tax data from the state is always back a couple years, so it's not real current on that end of it. And so, um, as Mike mentioned, we are, um, in contract with the U of M to update that that data now that it's a couple years old, hoping to get, um, 2023 2024 sales tax data on on that end of it and such like that. So, uh, but just kind of going through that report a little bit, just looking at, um, the trends that they saw, the, um, the history of what Mitanka sales tax generates. Um, the history on that is that it's about 54% of the sales tax generated in the city is from non-residents, so people out people that are living outside the the Minnetonka city proper limits on that end of it. And so, that leaves us about 46% of of residential sales tax on on that end of it. Um, and based off that 2021 number at a half a percent local sales tax, which is what we're looking at at this point in time, that would would have impacted a resident each resident about $411 per year on that end of it. So that's if you have three people living in a household, it's $411 times three. Or if it's one, it's just that that one person times $41. So they kind of compare that to the sales tax to property tax as well, too. Um, and we can kind of jump back to that, but there is some effects of local sales tax as well too. So, we have some surrounding cities that don't have sales tax. And so, what does that impact to the purchaser to the to the consumer when they're going to purchase goods and service or goods and services that are applicable to sales tax? kind of from what they've seen is that there really isn't an impact or really isn't a direct correlation between the consumer deciding to not purchase goods in a city that has an additional sales tax compared to a city that that doesn't. Um, some of their data that they that they reference though is outstate. So, they're kind of regional significance as well too, which maybe plays into the factor a little bit more on that end of it. Whereas in the metro area, you are able to travel to a different city a lot quicker than you are in in in the outstate area, greater Minnesota on that area as well, too. So, um, but historically, they have seen that there really isn't a big impact on that consumer making it a choice based off a local local sales tax piece of that. And then they kind of talked a little bit about property taxes and sales tax. relate property taxes to um not being impacted by your income. So the people that are on a fixed income or a limited income, property taxes don't take that into account. Property taxes are based off the value of the property. Um and it doesn't take into consideration that the income piece of that um by the household. Whereas the sales tax piece of it, you always kind of think of as a regressive tax on that end of it and and it is, but there are certain items that are exempt from sales tax in Minnesota. So you got your basic necessities of food and and clothing that are exempt from the sales act which kind of aids in um providing a a tax-free purchase on those items as well. So what kind of what they've seen is that that our contributions that um residents would make in the form of a of a tax. So is that tax that they would pay with a sales tax is actually less than what they would pay uh for with a property tax. And so I got a chart here on the next or a couple scenarios here on this next slide a little bit comparing the property tax and sales tax on [snorts] looking back I went the wrong slide. Okay, sorry. Um comparing [clears throat] the property tax to the sales tax and in 2021 we were able to generate $5 million in sales tax. And so we kind of back that into a principal and interest payment um based off of project wise. uh we had about 75 or $80 million in bond size there, which would be a $5 million principal and interest payment. That has a pretty big impact to the property taxes this year. So, if we're looking at our property taxes this year on the budget that we just passed, um it would have increased the levy from our 7.9% would have added 9% to that levy increase. So, we'd have been at close to an 18% levy increase. And granted, you don't have to do that all in one year. you could have split that levy increase over two years potentially for a bond issuance to that nature. So it would have been, you know, maybe four and a half and four and a half or something of that nature, but you would have had to increase taxes 9% to pay for that um $5 million in in revenue coming into the city. Um and you'd have to do that that obviously for the term or the life of that bond on that end of it. Comparing that to the sales tax. So, if we go back to the 2021 data [snorts] that's in there, um, and that was $41 per resident, and if you looked at the per capita number of households in the city, so that's 2.27 based off of 2023 US Census Bureau. You multiplied that by that $41, you get to about $93. So, you get about half kind of in that that ratio that we're talking about before was 54 46%. Um it's kind of a 50-50 type of um difference there between resident and non-resident. That's kind of where this kind of plays out on on that end of it. Just on the rough map, this is very high level. Just kind of putting some things together on that end of it. But um you can kind of see the sales tax impact has a seems to have a little bit less of an impact per per resident or per um per household member on that end of it. And I'm just so I think I just pause there real quickly and really what we trying I think as Darren's mentioning really just trying to show the differences between how you might fund for these projects. So we know sales I mean sales tax not going to be popular with everyone that that's a given. And for cities that have approved it we've seen anywhere from obviously 51% up to a 70% approval rate in these sales taxes. They're not unanimous. There will be there will be folks opposed to a sales tax, but we want to be able to point out to you that if there if you're not if you're not interested in a sales tax, which is fine, we just making sure you understanding the implications that has for property taxpayers. So, to put those capital costs in the property tax, that you as a council, we'd have to be looking at structuring debt payments, but eventually looking to raise a levy 9% for $75 million worth of improvements. And conversely, the sales tax has less of an impact. It's not on the property taxes, but it's paid for residents when they go shopping. >> Um, thanks. I have a question. So, there was mentioned that these projects must have regional impact or regional significance. So, you know, Marsh makes sense. I know that we have people from many cities that belong to the marsh. Um trails probably same thing because people from all over the place use our trails. Um fire stations. I know that we have cooperative agreements with other um communities, but is it regional enough to pass muster at the legislature? >> Uh yes. I I'll start off and then certainly look to Rachel and and Kevin to chime in because I so we look at fire station 2 in particular Deb that's servicing that Ridgedale area and so for the Ridgedale area we have over a million people that go to Ridgale on a monthly basis. uh we can look to the commuter traffic on the interstates where we have close to 50,000 vehicles that are traveling on our interstates and that we look at the call volume so that during during the day station two that station is the busiest just due to the activity in and around that area. Then at night that shifts to other other stations and other service areas just because people are leaving the city, the mall's closing down, uh workers are going home and then call volume lines shift to other parts of the community. So yes, I think we've got a very good argument in terms of looking at the regional significance of of our fire stations. Feel free to jump in and add. >> Yeah, I guess the only other thing that I would add is um in the current process uh Oh, thank you, Ellen. um in the the process that's outlined in state statute right now and the requirements for meeting kind of this regional significance threshold um it's not clearly defined and so it is a little bit subjective so I think um when we have stats and data that we can point legislators to and and make a case for regional significance then that you know there's a little bit of room for interpretation there and so that's part of what our team does uh at the capital is help make that case to legislators >> you know and and I would add that the statistics bear that out. If if um according to the U of M study, um 54% of the money is going to come from non-residents of Minnitonka. That certainly speaks to the regional strength of Ridgedale and that is a fire station that that services Ridgedale. So I think I think that all ties together and makes for a pretty strong case on that point. >> Anyone else? No, I just wanted to ask um I'm assuming that the calculations were based on kind of our our current residential versus office um kind of split so that if something should happen and that percentages should change and we should have less you know if if a prop if more burden goes to the property taxes um then does that make any difference in terms of trying to raise that five million or not? Uh, not necessarily other than the shift of between commercial and residential. You're still requesting $5 million of property taxes. It's just how is that split across your across your tax base at this point? So, >> okay. Thanks. >> Yeah. >> Anything else? >> All right. >> All right. And then just a just a reminder about our community survey. So, we did ask in both our community survey and our business survey about sales tax last year, earlier last year. Earlier this year, actually. Um, and this was our from our community survey and it was asked about uh would you support for each of these projects a local sales tax or a property tax increase for that purpose? And so um there's different numbers across here. I can kind of run through them real quick, but the first one is the upgrades to city fire stations where you can see there the split was pretty much equal. It was 37% was supported the sales tax and 40% supported a property tax piece of that with 28% um neither I guess on that. I guess um and so that's a little bit telling there as well too of like it feels like a public safety support is more there for a property tax versus the sales tax but um can go a different [cough] so the next one is adding parks and park amenities to opus area here you can see sales tax was at 55% and property taxes at 20%. So there was kind of a clear line there that said prop sales tax was more popular for that amenity than than the property taxes. 30 line 35 was renovations to Mitaka Community Center which was 42% to 27%. And then renovations to Wilson Center was 47% sales tax and 19% property taxes there. Again pretty pretty definite on the on the split there. And neither was pretty consistent across that 20 to 30% range on that end of it. Uh looking at the Marsh, it was very similar to the Wilson Center there as well too at 44% to 22% and then City Trails was um supportive again at 50% to 25%. And that was before they asked them uh or let the participant know that um part of the sales tax comes from outside of city residents as well too. So they the next follow-up question was um would they make more likely to support the sales tax increase or somewhat likely given the information of information that 54% of it was coming from outside the city. Um and 24% um and 43% were much more likely and somewhat more likely to support a sales tax at that point in time. That was from the community survey. Then in the business survey simplified it a little bit there and just asked them if they would support oro oppose a local sales tax. And there you can see the strongly support and support was about 62% of the resident or not residents but businesses that were surveyed there. Um and then opposed was was actually quite a bit less than that was at 16% and um and Julie can maybe speak to or can speak to that as well too if there's any questions on on that. But um from a business standpoint, it kind of makes sense as well too. A property tax is an expense whereas a sales tax is a pass through >> um to them on that end of it. So >> I think that is all I have. >> That is it. If it's all right, um mayor council, we'll turn it over to golf public and know if Rachel, you going to kick things off? >> Yes. Get us started. Awesome. Thank you so much. Uh happy to be here. I know that uh I think and I have [snorts] had a chance to meet some of you at the Capitol before. Um great to be here with you tonight. Uh you can go ahead to the I don't know who's controlling control just >> okay. Yes. Perfect. Um so before we start diving in we did just want to point out um there are other we have other colleagues on our public affairs team. So John Paul Yates Elizabeth Emerson George and Caroline Burns are also members of the Goff public affairs team. Um, and so even if they're not maybe as visible to you all, they are still very helpful to Ellen and I behind the scenes and contributing a contributing [snorts] a lot uh for the city. Uh, you can go ahead. So, uh, we just have a couple quick slides just on probably for you all just like some reminders of uh, kind of overall legislative dynamics uh, to be aware of as we head into the 2026 legislative session. Um, we do have a new uh house uh Democratic leader in Zach Stevenson, but otherwise uh you know, governor and lieutenant governor are the same for this next year. Um, our speaker of the house, Lisa Famoth, is the same. And then our Senate majority and minority leader. Um, Aaron Murphy for the DFL in the majority and Mark Johnson uh in the minority [snorts] for Republicans. Um, so a lot of the kind of key players are are still the same. Um, >> um, there are also two, um, House special elections coming up. They're both presumed to be safe DFL seats. So that's what this would show. It's expected to hold at 6767. >> Yep. And we can go I can just Oh, yep. And then we can go. Sorry, I already did this slide. And then um just a reminder again to about kind of the general timeline. So uh it's not a budget year this year. So we have a little bit of a later start. Uh in 2025 session started in January for 2026. We won't start until February. So, we've got a little bit more time uh to kind of ramp up and and make plans and get things going. Um session will adjourn in uh mid to end of May as usual. Um and so just again kind of a reminder of what all we have to look forward to in the next uh six months or so. Um [snorts] and so from here, unless folks have any questions just about kind of high level things, I think we have just maybe one more slide on kind of overall legislative trends. Um so we can keep going. Uh we do expect as I mentioned it's not a budget year. Um and so traditionally in a non-budget year the focus is really going to be on policy changes that don't have any major cost affiliated with them. Um as well as bond a bonding bill. [snorts] I will say you know the sort of uh trend of passing a bonding bill in an even year has been uh has not been the case in in recent years. It's you know any year you can pass a bonding bill as a bonding year. Um but there will certainly be a lot of focus and conversation about bonding um in 2026. Uh as as you all might know if you uh paid attention, they just released an updated economic forecast for the state uh just a few weeks ago. Um and there is still the state is still sitting on a surplus for the current bianium, but we are still projecting a a deficit as we look out to fiscal year 2028 and 2029. Um so we expect there to be, you know, some conversation about possibly a supplemental budget. um maybe folks will want to spend some of the kind of immediate surplus that's available, but definitely there's going to be interest in um in cutting kind of some of some of that long-term spending uh to address that deficit, which is again kind of a conversation that played out during 2025 as well. Um it is uh 2026 is an election year. Uh as you all might know, uh we've got midterm elections coming up and so in 2026, uh we do expect just the kind of the energy and dynamics around that. Um especially with [snorts] uh House Speaker Lisa Damoth running for governor against Governor Walls um and just the primaries that are happening. All of that stuff just takes up a lot of energy. You have legislators really using kind of their time and space and that public arena to to make their political cases and try to set things up for for the election. And so that'll take up uh a lot of time. Uh and then again as with uh 2025 [snorts] uh you have a tied house um and a very narrowly divided Senate. you just have a one seat Senate uh DFL majority and so really to get anything done there does have to be some amount of bipartisanship um which is seems increasingly difficult uh these days and so that also just kind of complicates the the dynamics. All right. And Ellen's going to talk a little bit about specifically the tax committee um because that's where the conversation around um special authorizing legislation if the city does choose to pursue local sales tax uh a local sales tax proposal. Um that will all happen [snorts] in the in the taxes committees. >> Yeah. Um so these are the leaders in the tax committee. So in the House they're doing a split co-chair model. So it's like a DFL co-chair and a Republican co-chair and they kind of switch off committee days. One person sets the agenda one meeting, the next time it's the next co-chair who sets the agenda. So that's for the DFL. Aisha Gomez from Minneapolis and Greg Davids from Preston in southeastern Minnesota. And then in the Senate, um, Senator Anne Rest is the tax chair. It's her she's announced it's going to be her last term. Um, and she is a really long tenur member of the legislature with a lot of experience in taxes. Um and then Bill Weber is the uh minority lead on that from um southeastern Minnesota. So um kind of just the general dynamic of the tax committee, it can be pretty difficult to pass a tax bill in non-budget years. Um honestly, the reason we get a tax bill in budget years is because it has to go through as part of the deal or there probably wouldn't always be one as well. Um, it's been several years since there was a non-budget tax bill that wasn't vetoed. I think it was 2014 maybe. Um, so that's not a great outlook. Um, but there will likely be debate around federal conformity. The full federal conformity with the bill passed in the summer would be prohibitively expensive. Um, but there will likely be some some debate about partial conformity. um which would be then like a bill moving out of the tax committee. Um the dynamics between the committees is is pretty interesting. It's much more of a fight between the two DFL chairs um Aisha Gomez and Anne Rest than it is between um the Republican and DFL co-chairs in the House. Um Aisha Gomez and Greg Davids have a actually a pretty good working relationship and we saw in the working groups into special session in June um that they were much they were more united than Gomez and rest were as the two DFLers. So that could create some interesting um increased tension between the house and senate which already um happens a lot. Um like I said chair rest will be retiring. She has said that she's really interested in moving sales tax uh reform as part of her last year. Um Oh yes, perfect. >> Um so part of the the impetus behind sales tax reform is a moratorium that was passed in 2023. Um, so they authorized some new ones, made some exceptions, and then passed a two-year moratorium so they could do a study group and um really figure out what they want to do with local sales tax. Legislators agree that they don't like how it's working right now, but they didn't really know what they wanted to do with it. So they went to um, you know, study group, which is the the legislaturator's favorite thing to do. So this group produced a final report after a year. Um there wasn't really much that happened, but Chair Gomez and Chair Rest each put together um their own kind of packages on sales tax reform, and there was actually a lot of overlap in these. Um so, Chair Rest would like to pass one of these large um reform bills as kind of the movement on sales tax this year. And Rachel is going to talk a little bit more about that. >> Yeah. And I'll just say what we mean by reform legislation is um establishing a process in statute that does not require individual cities to go to the legislature for approval. This microphone, sorry. Um and so so she Yes. So she has uh Chair Rust has said that she is um very interested in in getting something done and that is a top priority for her as she kind of finishes out her tenure at the legislature. Um, we do expect that there will be some amount of tension between kind of the the pursuit of this broader authorizing legislation and individual cities who want to pursue their own special authorizing legislation. Um, we know that there are, you know, a couple dozen other cities from what we from what we've heard who plan to bring their own bills forward. Um and so there's very much still like a path forward um for Minnotonka to do the same, but that will also be happening at the same time as this conversation around broader broader legislation. And um we'll get to uh just some of the [snorts] just things for you all to be aware of of kind of how um how that might complicate uh what you all are may pursue uh yourselves. Um we do on the next slide. Um, so we've got two slides just at a very high level overviewing the current process. I don't know that I need to like go through every step of this with you all. And I'll say I did very closely adapt this. The League of Minnesota Cities has a really excellent resource outlining the process. Um, so basically what's on these next two slides, uh, just with a little bit more detail. Um this is more just for your awareness and and to refer back to um perhaps for our f our discussion later tonight. Um or just as you all as a city continues to consider um whether or not this is something you want to pursue. Um but really just the the things that are most impactful for our work at the legislature um is if this is something the city wants to pursue, you do have to adopt a resolution and then submit um the resolution the supporting materials. That's where we make the argument about regional significance and provide that data and information um to the House and Senate tax committees um by January 31st of 2026. Um since that that would be the the session that we'd be pursuing something. Um and then step three is get legislative authorization. It's one little step. It makes it seem so easy, but again that is where our team uh at Goff would would be working at the capital and working in the tax committees to to get that done. And then um every again everything here I'm probably not going to go through but just this is kind of what would happen after um you get legislative approval and just to know kind of what the additional steps look like. Um and so yeah, so if we want to go to the next slide, um Ellen, do you want to walk through just some of the So yeah, um and just I'll introduce it a little bit. As Ellen said, um both Chair Rest and Chair Gomez had introduced their own kind of broader authorizing legislation during the 2025 session. Um the bills were heard in in their in the House and Senate committees, but that was kind of it. Nothing really happened. Um, but we do want to just make you all aware of some of the kind of key differences between that current process process that's laid out now and what um, Rest and Gomez have proposed. And I think we're especially interested in what Chair Rest has proposed. Um, not to say that it's not important to consider both, but [snorts] she has made it very clear she feels really strongly that kind of her the way she has outlined things is what she wants to see cities do. and and just given her tenure and the fact that it's her last session, we're just we feel like we need to kind of put a little bit of extra weight on that. So, I'll let Ellen kind of walk through some of these key differences. >> So, [snorts] obviously the main difference is it would bypass legislative approval. Most of the reason for reform is that like every time there is not a tax bill, then all of these results just like there's a huge backlog. It's not the best use of the legislaturator's time to go through all of this. So both of these proposals would kind of use the Department of Revenue as [snorts] to serve in a little bit of like what the role the legislature was doing. So they would require a approval from the Department of Revenue the year before you put it on the ballot um in a referendum and you would submit materials to them. Um yeah, they both bypass legislative approval. Both bills would have some form of local sales tax equalization distribution, so distribution to communities in the surrounding area. Mhm. Um >> and those look a little bit different in both of their proposals and it would also look different like in the metro versus non-metro. So, um for instance, I think what has come up before is [snorts] um like if like uh Rochester has a different ability to generate revenue from a sales tax than the community is a much smaller town surrounding Rochester. And so there's a sense there's a feeling that there needs to be some amount of equalization. I think that would look very different in Minnetonka and especially you know there's um what's the word? There's exceptions if if you know if the surrounding cities in Minnetonka also have a local sales tax obviously you don't like you wouldn't need to share revenue with those other cities because they're generating their own tax and you don't have that same kind of disparity between a big Mitankka and the surrounding cities. So that's a little bit looks a little bit different. [snorts] >> Yeah. Um, and then both proposals have uh as part of it regional significance. Cher Gomez's is much stricter, which I think kind of falls in line with how she doesn't really love local sales tax. Um, it's just kind of her opinion on the matter. >> Minneapolis already. >> So, it would require um supporting documents from surrounding local governments um to kind of prove the regional significance. The other thing I want to note about that first bullet point, um the requirement to submit materials to the department of revenue the year before. So in the current process, if Minnesota or Minnotonka uh gets legislative approval during the 2026 legislative session to to move forward with their with their uh referendum, you could you could hold that vote in the 2026 nove November 2026 elections. Um you have to do it within two years. So, you could also do it in 2027, but you would have the ability to do it much sooner. Whereas, if um if there is not any special authorizing legislation passed and it's just kind of this broader process that's established, then the soonest that Minnotonka would be able to pursue this is in in the 2027 elections. Um so, it does affect [snorts] the timeline depending on what happens at the legislature. Um and so that's something again that [clears throat] our team will be tracking very closely. And um again assuming that you all intend to pursue this. Um that's just yeah something we thought was important to make you all aware of. >> Um and I think that might be our last slide. Yeah. So um so again if folks have questions we'd be happy to answer them as best we can right now. Um >> any questions? Y >> so many. Um, so it sounds like under the current landscape it would be difficult to get something special legislation this year >> because of the intended changes to the process and the fact that it's not a [snorts] budget year. >> I would say yes. There are definitely some challenges, but I think, you know, if if Minnetonka was the only city trying to pursue special authorizing legislation, that might be a different conversation. But if there are a couple other cities that are all putting forward, you know, the same type of proposal and are all saying it's important to us that we get this done now and are able to move forward on this, like that does carry some amount of weight. Um and and I think that also [snorts] um like when our comment earlier about you know there's not often a tax bill um there's not often a tax like omnibus bill in a non-budget year but there could be no but like there could be um you know a very small version of a bill that has just an omnibus that just has special authorizing legislation for cities. Um and so >> there are many different paths to get something across the finish line. Um, and so you never know, right? Like you we definitely won't get it if we don't ask for it. And and asking for it, even if it is challenging, just given kind of some of these other dynamics outside of our control, doesn't mean that we can't still find a path to get something done. >> So, so two other questions. One is, so if >> it's a little bit like buying a power, >> so say we, you know, we make our proposal, it it it doesn't go anywhere, >> what next? um for you know from your perspective on that ask if if if it doesn't go anywhere this year what's the best course >> um forward after that and >> um I'll ask my other question after that. >> Yeah. So, I think it would depend um on if kind of this broader authorizing [snorts] legislation does pass because then I think that is again even if it's not maybe the preferred timeline, that is still a pathway um to getting something done. Um, you know, as Ellen mentioned, one of the reasons that legislators are interested in pursuing kind of this this larger reform is because, um, there are many years where where cities do bring this special um, special authorizing proposals forward and there isn't a tax bill or they don't get done for whatever reason, so they bring them back again and again. Um, and so like that would be another option. Like this is something that the city could choose to pursue again during the 2027 session if needed. Um and so it's yeah it it depends a little bit on you know what the what the other kind of context is and what else maybe does happen this year or not and what the best strategy would be. >> So that just made me think of another question. So let's say that that the the reforms happen >> we start sort of sending materials to the department of reg revenue not the legislature. Do they become arbiters then? Are they do do they have they have the power of denial? And so it's a whole other you know like it doesn't seem like we lobby the department of revenue. Like it just seems >> they would somewhat become like an arbiter but instructions would be in like the bill proposals instructions for how they decide that are like laid out exactly. So, it's not really like a lobby situation. They would look at it somewhat impartially and just like does this meet the requirements, doesn't it? There's not really a like I don't like this part of it. >> It's not as subjective as having to go to legislators and get them >> to decide that you're meeting the regional significance and kind of meeting these other thresholds. Would you anticipate difficulties because if if we go with if if [snorts] um Representative Gomez's uh version passes and we need to get signatures from neighboring cities who may also be um you know going to the trough so to speak, is it going to be hard for us to get I mean is going to be hard to get signatures from neighboring cities when we're both trying to ask for the >> then it would who >> I that might be more an or question for for you all um for just depending on kind of what your what the dynamic is and the relationship with your neighboring cities but I would say >> if we're all going for it >> yeah we might as well sign each others >> but I would say I mean how many cities touch Minnetonka I think we have eight neighboring cities >> not all eight are going to be going for the same thing the same time and we have collaborative relationships so I think I think our relationships would work for us and so I'm not I mean >> you know um [snorts] does that mean we'd have unanimous support? No. But I think we'd have good support among neighboring cities that matter. My amateur judgment. >> No, I I would just Yeah, I would concur. Um as mentioned by I think Rachel because of the two-year moratorum, there are >> there's a backlog. >> There's a backlog. There are we're hearing I think as noted over 20 cities having the same conversation. I'm talking with the city manager of Plymouth. Plymouth is having the very same conversation we are having tonight as well because Plymouth is looking to go forward with their ask. Um they're their one of their main legislators is Jenny Representative Clebornne. Uh she's been in contact with Representative Aim. So there's there's a growing sense of support from not just our I say just our two legislators but in the legislative arena to do something um because the moratorum's been [snorts] lifted. I think I I asked Rachel and Ellen like well are they going to put another moratorum on? Well, could that be an outcome? And I don't think that's probably likely because they would have done that already. So, I think they're looking to do something. And so, the idea is that yes, there's risks of going to the legislature to ask for this. >> Um yeah, they could say no. Um but I think we're going to be optimistic that um there's going to be enough pressure there to do something just due to the backlog >> because you mentioned you know a dozen cities. >> It's it's over 20 I think Mike. Yeah. >> It's over 20 cities that are >> Yeah. Okay. >> And Weisetta has been also I mean two then in terms of our neighbors we have Plymouth is looking to do it. I know I think Weisetta has um kicked the tires a little bit on that one as well. Um so that they may be having that conversation. >> China Excelsier Roseville St. Excelsier has a local action sales tax. Chan Hassen already has it. Maple >> Grove. >> I would I would just say about it like we don't want to promise you like action at the legislature that we don't know is going to happen. But if they wanted to extend the moratorum, it would have been very very easy to this past session and they would have done it. And it's pretty common to like introduce an idea in the first year of a session that doesn't so this is like a no cost. It it's a policy. So, it's pretty common to introduce that in the first year and then actually work on it in the second year. So, I think the signs are pointing to them >> doing something. We just don't >> Yeah. >> They're not really sharing their plans right now. >> And it's it's unclear if it could be like a bothand situation. I think that might be ideal, right? Is they they allow >> these individual special authorizing bills to move forward in addition to kind of this broader reform. Um I don't know why it couldn't be a both and but but right you're you're dealing with people legislators are people and people are complicated and so um so I think that's where as we get closer to session and then obviously as session begins and we're able to kind of see how things are shaking out we'll be able to just have a better sense of kind of what what we're working towards and then how we need to adapt our strategy and make sure that we're positioning the city as best as possible to get something something good done. Good. And I I know we're we're bumping up to 8 o'clock. And so last slide that we have and I know there's probably a lot more questions and [snorts] comments just looking at an estimated timeline because I just want to also give you the council a sense of what does this all mean in terms of we're having a conversation today. When could a project occur? And I I just use the fire stations as an example, but I think this applies to even the marsh or anything else that might be on our list. And that is um and here we are in you know very lefth hand side of that our initial conversation here in December of 2025. We look at when a referendum let's say things we did the resolution and we went to the voters this November and the voters said yes in November of 26. That's the soonest anything could happen. >> Um, and then you kind of play out when our first tax receipts would come, when you would look at doing a potential bond issuance, when you would actually hire an architect to do some work and do the bidding and actually get to the construction. I mean, really, this plays out. You get to really the middle of 2029 before you see perhaps a project completed. >> That's that's if [snorts] that's the fastest anything. that is the absolute fastest scenario. >> So again, I go back to my opening comments is, you know, go, you know, this there this is not this is long-term planning. And so even in the sense of thinking, well, if we do a sales tax, something's not going to be built next year. It's it's going to be three years away before we actually get to a final cons final completion. Now, my understanding is um another kind of what if what if scenario in there is if the council's interested in sales tax and again you do the goes to the legislature, they approve it. Now, the city then has two years to put that on a ballot. So, you you could go to the legislature in this next legislative session. That gives you two years to put something on the ballot. You could, as I mentioned, do something November of 26. the latest you could do something is November of 27. Then obviously keeps pushing that out. >> And then just a quick point too and um if like was indicated, okay, it's a non-budget year, we get it out there, but the likelihood of something happening in that budget year is is probably not particularly high. So then you go add another year. So basically, do you add a this is the quickest. So would you add a year to this timeline if um they said we introduced it in 2026 20 you know it doesn't really happen until 2027 so everything just moves moved back a year so then we're at um >> you know 10 October of 30 >> you're at yeah probably mid >> for a complete fire station correct [snorts] >> okay >> did are the equalization costs factored into the estimates that we were given tonight do we know how much it would So you may not have them. >> Yeah, that would only be if um if the city has to go through the process that's laid out and either rest or proposal. Um they're a little bit different from each other. We have shared kind of the full language and summary with with Mike and um yeah and yeah. So, um, [snorts] but I would say until that the the math on that is probably a little bit more complicated. And so, and again, it's also unclear at this point like how exactly those even apply to the city. So, that's something that we can look into. >> Doesn't Hopkins already have a sales team? >> I believe they do. >> Is Hopkins Hopkins on that list? We have a lot of folks around us who already have sales tax. >> I'd have to look at that list. It's in it's in our packet. I have to look at the list in the packet. >> So, mayor and council, that that ends our formal part of just kind of laying a lot of stuff out to you in terms of of this. So, then kind of really circling back to then we've got needs in this city. And again, I I want to reemphasize there's no there's nothing you have to do as a council. there's we don't have to do any of these projects and so I make sure I'm clear on that. Um >> but it's also our our responsibility as staff to show you what are some of those big projects looming. Um and this [snorts] is an again an exercise of understanding what projects are out there. Um I think your funding options are are pretty limited because we're there aren't dollars there not going to be federal dollars that can help pay for these projects. there aren't going to be um state dollars that are going to be available to pay for these projects. It does really come down to um what a phil philos philosophical discussion on where does the revenue come from? Does it come from property taxes or does it come from a sales tax? And I mean really that kind of gets to the heart of the question and it's about timing, you know, and in terms of how and when you want to um kind of try to schedule these. How do we try to fit them in? We know inflationary costs keep escalating. The price of these projects are not going to decrease as we know. Going back to the trails project, I when I first started with the city in 2019, Will Manchester, that number was that same trail list was I think 55 or 60 million and it's now estimated over 100 million. So, we know the the costs keep escalating um on all these projects. So, [snorts] with that, uh we're going to pause as staff uh Brad and council and >> we have some questions. as we cheat up for you, but then any anything you need from staff, we're here to chat with you on that. >> All right, great. Yeah, Rebecca. So I I I just have a couple I I guess a big question but um my understanding is you know there's a there's if we want to pursue this and I think that we have to assume we're pursuing if we were to pursue it in 2026 that we're pursuing it based on what the law is now and not based you know we can't go down the rabbit hole of what the whatifs are. Um, it feels like, you know, that that we have some work to do in the next six weeks to make that happen, but correct me [snorts] if I'm wrong, that's just a first step and we have a lot of offramps as the, you know, as this moves forward. So, we present it to the legislature and then say they approve it, theoretically [snorts] we wouldn't have to elect to put it on the ballot. So, that would be an off-ramp, right? And then obviously the voters deciding that's a big part of this big contingency. Um and then the council has to adopt the voters's decision. Is that even maybe this is a question for Eric is that does that happen? The voters approve a sales tax and then the council's like uh we're not going to implement that. I can also maybe defer to Goff, but typically when you have special legis legislation that's passed at the state level, it's a requirement for any type of special law that's passed for the city to adopt a resolution approving the special law and then you transmit it to the state um that you've adopted the law. So it it's it's yeah, it's largely sort of a a proforma requirement. It's not necessarily imbued with >> discretion to an offer, but there are a couple opportunities. I just I guess I want to put my mind at ease is that we're not making the decision in January that we are going to have a sales tax. There's a lot of opportunity for us to change direction as we consider some of these things going forward. Is that right? >> Yeah. And I'm glad you mentioned that, Rebecca, because that that is correct. And so if the council were to look at doing this resolution, it is not committing the city to a sales tax. It's >> or even to a referendum >> or even to a referendum. it is the first step in this kind of lengthy process. And so there are opportunities beyond [clears throat] that um to pivot, if you will. And so some of those other whatifs would be if you did a resolution in January, the legislature could say no. That could just stall out this year in the legislature and we'll be perhaps back at it in 2027. Um if the legislature does approve it, then you're correct. I think we would want to then as a city talk about next steps in terms of a whole there's a whole marketing campaign campaign that happens too and Andrew Whittenberg's here our communications manager and he's been part of our team conversations in terms of um how does this get how do we do community engagement because there's some real defined statutes on what a city can and can't do in terms of promoting and advocating for a sales tax. So we'd have Andrew really heavily involved in that. So, there's marketing that happens. Um, there's a decision on if you do want to put it on a on a referendum. If is it is it November of 26? Is it November of 27? >> But another way, if we don't act now, we're kind of on the sidelines for at least this year, if not, you know, beyond that. >> Correct. that taking action does allow the city that opportunity to have further conversation because yes, you would close the door for till next legislative session. >> Got it. Thank you. >> Thanks, Rebecca. Other questions for council? >> Um, you know, I've got one. Um, the discussion questions. Does the city have interest? I mean, we're not we're not making decisions tonight, but let's say the council, you know, you're going to you're going to be um um counting noses on this and um assuming you get more than four. Then what is the process? What's the next step? Because um we're not going to pass a resolution tonight. We have to do that in a regular council meeting and so forth. So, just kind of if you got if you got four noses um nodding in the right direction, um what would be and and you're in a hurry, what's the um what's what's the next steps look like? >> Yeah, thank you, Brad. Um [clears throat] can you go to that proposed strategy? So, it it does come down to then priorities because the resolution will need there's some specificity around the resolution. Now, the resolution isn't written in a way where it gets at the um ballot questions, but you have to be very specific in terms of the project and the dollar amount. And so >> we'd want to bring, you know, if you have some direction tonight on maybe some of these that maybe interest you, um, we'd want to know that as staff, uh, because we'd want to come back to you in January, uh, with a further conversation on really pinpointing which of these projects you would have an interest in, including in a sales tax, and more importantly, how much. And so, uh, for example, with the marsh, if there's an interest in including the marsh in a sales tax, we we you as a council will need to identify how much, you know, is it is it 15 million? Is it 32 million? Is it is it 41 million? So, yes, you you're going to have to be very specific [snorts] in terms of that resolution, >> but the specificity that's that's that's tonight, too. >> That is not that does not have no >> January. >> Right. Okay. Got it. Tonight is just a general conversation to gauge your interest, kind of lay out everything as we have and kind of first understand if there's interest in pursuing a sales tax, then we would want to come back to you in January to flush out even further like the things I just mentioned. >> So, I'll ask the question another way. I mean, you know, um we're not voting tonight, but um you know, are there are there any council members who would not want to pursue this? Um, or do you think we want to keep our options open and keep moving forward? >> I want to I want to keep moving forward. Um because I just think our options are >> limited and I think [clears throat] [snorts] >> as things progress over the next few years and federal funding and programs dry up, I think [snorts] this this will become one of the only funding options pretty much for anything we want to do in the city. So, >> and um any other anyone else want to add to that or anything? I you know I've talked to Mike about this. He knows I think you all know I'm not a big fan of sales tax. I'm just not. But but I also am a fan of um having options and um this is going to be your decision next year, not mine. So I'm not going to state a strong opinion on this. I think that um you know and I and I think the data um support um a position contrary to my opinion um because you know I've I mean I I this this particular chart that we have that shows the cities that have uh sales taxes and um you know I mean golden I was at Menards recently and I looked at my I looked at my receipt and I thought that's almost 10% and my arithmetic you know um was was correct. I mean, um, Golden Valley sales tax is 9 my 9.775%. I mean, people notice that. Now, we're not looking at a one and a quarter%, um, uh, sales tax. We're looking at half a percent, but but, you know, I mean, given the way our sales tax is structured and, you know, the LAA money and the different things that have been passed, I mean, it's starting to add up to, you know, be very noticeable. And so, I'm very mindful of of that. But I also agree with what Deb said and you know I mean I'm a believer in si you know local control and having options and so I I think it's prudent regardless of what I think of the sales tax personally >> because it is regressive. Well, it's well, it it's a lot. It's a lot of things. I mean, it's just a lot of things. And >> you know, my argument >> my argument in some ways is that as a council member, >> if I put it in the property taxes, >> my local voters can hold me accountable. And I feel that that's intellectually honest and if they think I'm raising taxes too much, um, they can fire me. >> Um, and I think I think that's appropriate. I'm willing to be accountable. I I'm not comfortable saying, well, gee, we can get you we can get half this money from people who don't live here. Well, you know what I mean, there is no free money. So, that's my I don't love sales tax, but at the same time, I do know that cities need flexibility. So, I would tend to agree with all of you that retaining the flexibility is important. Um, and you get to make the decision next year. I [laughter] can I can watch I can watch I can watch from the sidelines, you know, regardless of what my opinion is. Um, you know, I think I think given the limited number of tools cities have um to you, you know, for for revenue generation at times when things are getting tighter. Um, I think it's prudent for the city to move forward with this even though I think it's a tough decision because I think I think um, you know, the I I think our our residents are starting to feel nickeled and dimed and I think the sales tax contributes to that. So those are those are my pros. I've argued both sides that of the question how which I often do. But um you know I think I think it's prudent for us to move forward with this whether I like it or not. >> So I think you've got I think you've got enough noses. Mike, [clears throat] >> I'm good. >> Y >> So can I ask a question about the strategy then? So if we said a million dollars, if we said yes to number one, that's really $25 million, right? >> And that's a third of the pie. >> Well, we just have to do the projects, right? >> Well, we have to identify what we want to what we want to >> It wouldn't be a third of it. It'd be it'd be less than that because you're collecting $80 million of principal and and interest over that 25 years. So, >> right. But if if this estimates that over the period of the term that we could that there's 70 million $75 million in projects that it'll support. >> Yes. But your your payment your collections >> you're not paying interest. You're taking >> Right. You're just taking that million dollars and putting it direct into project cost. Okay. So, it's one million out of $6 million of collections. So, >> so, but you also want direction on on the projects that we would support. And I'll I'll tell you my my priorities. Um, you know, I I think that I would certainly support the two fire stations. >> Yep. Yeah. >> And then I would I would go for um the option C on the marsh, the lowcost option. get the deferred maintenance done and get it up to snuff. And I have a vision for other ways of maybe funding some of those higher test options. So that's those are my preferences. >> And then, you know, the million dollars for trails, um, I kind of view that as as important as trails are in our community, I kind of view that as nice to have. And we have other avenues. I mean, we can, you know, um I mean, I know when we submit, we we did the franchise fees, um it was made very clear to us, well, it's a franchise fee, but it's really a tax. You don't, it's not like it's optional. Um it appears on our our utility bill, we have to pay it. And oh, by the way, um because it's not a tax, it's not taxdeductible on federal tax forms. Um it's it's a fee that you pay, but you get no you get no tax benefit from it from other either the state or the federal government. So, you know, um I'm I'm kind of come see come on the trail aspect of it. So, those are my priorities. >> I would say fire stations. I mean, I think we probably all agree that those are the number one priority. Um, you know, I'm I'm of a different mind on the trails only because particularly because of I think it does promote a lot of alternative commutes particularly to schools. you know, we're hearing so much about traffic related to schools >> and you know, if we talk about, you know, some of the comments we've heard from folks about say um Essex to not that I'm partial to that segment, but to McGinty >> and people telling us, well, my kid would bike to school if there was a trail there. I do think we would get a lot of it would help the congestion. Um, so that in my mind is kind of the the thing. And then I would like to see the marsh I mean I would like to see us be able to do some of the I think we could get closer to um we could definitely cash flow plus if we were able to do 1B. I just don't adding the numbers up. I don't know if we can get there, but um I think we would see some definite revenue benefit by doing that. But I could be sold on option two on the marsh as well. >> Yeah. >> Do you want answers to every for everyone on that on this or >> the more the more discussion you have, the more helpful it is for staff? the more information you get, the happier I prefer to see 1B as or marsh plan B as well, but um because just one thing just like I agree with everything you said about trails um and I agree on the fire station in the primary. So if we had to prioritize for me it would probably fire station, marsh and then trails. Uh just because the marsh has become such a community hub right now and um you know we see other cities around us. You know it's basically if we had a community center like a large community center like um Plymouth does just did this big $80 million community center. It has all of the things that we have under one roof that we have between our current community center, city hall, um, and fire station and police station and Williston and the marsh. And it's just that we have it split up into into, you know, different buildings. But, you know, other cities have this and, you know, I think um, it it has become, I think, even more so than Williston or the community center, the central hub. um and an identifier and really um important yeah place for the for the city and residents of all types. So for me that would be um a priority and I would prefer to see one uh whatever 2 1B um the 32 million um if we could but again that would be my stronger preference if we have to to go down to to the 15 million. I would be able to live with that, I guess. And I'm looking forward to when we cash flow and hoping that maybe we can look at some um other ways to um help that cash flow um perhaps through different fee structures for residents versus non-residents if we don't get this because right now it is a regional um destination. Now I know lots of people from Orino. I've know people from Mound and Nitrista and All Points West as well as Plymouth, >> Minneapolis. >> Yeah. Who are coming in to use it. >> Yeah. >> Other comments? Well, I would I would more agree with um Rebecca and also the mayor because I would go for trails as well, obviously the fire stations first, but the trails and for me it's it's the schools for sure. I mean, >> um it's it's that's a public safety issue to me. Um, and but also if we're going to talk about I mean climate change and the sustainability and other um ways to to travel throughout this city, I would say [clears throat] trails is >> and as a person who runs throughout this city, it can be lethal in some of these places. >> Um, so I would I would and I would >> say the person that got hit by a >> Yeah. I got hit [laughter] by in it was in Hopkins, but still, you know, >> that wouldn't have happened in Miton, >> but it was >> Yeah. So, you would like >> But I mean, and then and I think that I would I would tend to go toward um option C for the Marsh, >> you know. Just if I can add a little bit, um we had a recent meeting, Mike and I had a meeting with um Hop School District and it was a and we our normal kind of quarterly meeting and you know the conversation was that they um they um increased the perimeter um where they would made it larger so it reduced bus service. >> Yeah. >> You know so that rather than picking up kids within a mile or They now made it two miles and that that cut bus service and they had to do that by a budget necessity. I mean it was not an easy decision. It was controversial and you know you know so I'm going to modify my view my comments a little bit on the on the trails because if we can provide safe routes to school for kids and give them the opportunity to ride their bikes to school I think that's positive for the environment. It's positive for the kids and frankly it's positive for school budgets that are under you know we know about budget strain and school budgets are under tremendous budget strain. So I'm going to I'm going to modify my little bit a little bit and say you know what doing more for the trails makes sense. I mean and it's only you know I don't want to say only a million dollars but it's it's that's the cheapest thing on the list and we can add that and then do the thing the other things in in an appropriate order and and and make some progress. I think that probably makes a lot of sense. So, I'm I'm modifying my vote a little bit. >> I I agree with that. I mean, [clears throat] you know, environment being one of my top priorities, um it it just makes sense. And I mean when you think about the fact that we've actually built since we since we did the franchise fee for trails, we've built many sections of trail and instead of the amount getting smaller in the need, >> it has almost doubled in in a smaller number of segments that we need. So, >> um, so I think for all the reasons that you just enumerated, I'm I'm definitely for trails, but fire stations are number one for me. Um, and I would say as far as the marsh, um, as much as the 41 million is tantalizing and I actually feel like it would have a greater return on investment because we could get more rental income from what we were trying to accomplish there. Um, I think I think a reach goal would be the uh option 1B and um if we had to I could I I mean I think just dealing with a deferred maintenance, [clears throat] but I'd like to get a little past that and really make sure that we can capitalize on a on a you know a really good um facility that is already attracting and you know is break is almost breaking even in a very short time period. So, >> so we're I'm looking at my watch and I want to be mindful of time. So, I want to make sure Yep. I want to make sure that that everyone who wants to get some licks in gets them in. But we want to keep moving. >> Yeah. Uh so, basically what everyone else has said, fire stations, definitely trails also. Um for the marsh, I'm leaning towards 2B to see if if we can't make 2B work. Um, and just to the mayor, I think there's still a a place for like some of the alternative >> funding like I think we'll still pursue that and we could, you know, maybe get one 2A done with that. >> Well, yeah. And that's that's the thing. I mean, I I think that that there are alternative paths to I'm not saying I'm opposed to one A or 1B, but I don't want to pay for it with with um with um bonding. I'd rather do and I'd rather do item two, the deferred maintenance. And that doesn't mean, okay, you're not going to see any of the improvements. The improvements will be evident. It's just that there's not going to be an expansion of the marsh. And let's get the marsh looking as good as it can be um with item um item two. and then and then let's find more creative solutions um for um making significant improvements to the marsh. That's that's kind of my wish list. >> So I don't know Mike, do you have anyone else? I don't want to cut anybody off, but I want I do want to move along. >> Let's move on. >> That would be Thank you, Mayor. And we'll bring this back to you in January. We'll keep filtering it down. And I'm hearing for the marsh one, there's interest in both 1B and two. And we'll kind of lay both those options out and kind of again kind of highlight the differences between those. So again, you're clear on what those are. >> Yeah. >> Yeah, I think that's good. And talk about what you get with with the lease cost option because I I I don't want people to think that, okay, it's everything would be the same and you get a new boiler. I mean I think you know and you know and some of the things that haven't worked as well there will work better. I mean I think it's more than that and I think it's updating it and making it so you know some clarity on on what you're getting for each of those I think would be helpful for this council to make the decision. >> So we're going to have updated numbers right on the estimates that will help. >> I think that's already updated. >> Fingers crossed. >> Oh from the University of Minnesota. Yeah we're hoping to get those early January hopefully. >> Okay. Sorry, mayor. >> No, no, that's fine. That's all good. So then, so we've covered this one. Thanks everyone. That that brings us to item B, the 2026 city council study session work plan. >> We did some work um to provide some direction to staff. So >> is this yours or is this is this your or Mike? >> Probably both of us. Well, yeah. Thank you, Brad. Again, appreciate your conversation on this. Um, Brad and Council Rachel Allen, thank you for coming. >> Thanks for coming. Nice to see you. >> Take care. Merry Christmas. >> Thank you. >> So, so thank you. While Sus is pulling it up, so real quickly, we thought we'd um just show you on the overhead here what was in your packet, and that is a draft of the 2026 study session work plan. Um, want to make sure we captured everything correctly. Um, and then just walk through this with you if we can. And then if you have some changes or suggested changes, please let us know so we can bring this to you on January 12th regular meeting for final approval. Uh, so a couple things in here. I'll just go really quickly. Um, again, I won't go monthtomonth, but just to point out a couple things for you. Uh so January 26 uh that study session in January e even maybe even January 12th and the 26 we'll talk about the same conversation we had here tonight because there's there's some more conversation we need to get buttoned up for by the end of January by for that resolution. Um February u we have Will come and talk about Trail Street and major CIP project review. So we'll do that in February. Again, that's always the kickoff also for our community survey. So, we'll have Peter Leatherman here and we'll go through that exercise. March, we'll call it kind of using a play on words from Julie. Julie used to say all things housing in July. Uh maybe March will be all things public policy. And so, uh kind of group those together in terms of the council policies. Um talked about that. Uh substance regulations. I think Kimberly had brought that up. and then short-term rentals VRBO. Now, uh we put this list together and two things that I want to point out to you and so Julie's here also with the short-term rentals and and the verbal conversation. I think Paul, you brought that up. Julie had mentioned to me that um that will get discussed during the zoning code rewrite. And so while we could have a conversation March 2nd, the zoning code rewrite, Julie, I think that's or whoever got the mouse, if you want to scroll down for me, we have a zoning code rewrite in October. Julie, do you want to speak to more about what that looks like in terms of >> Sure. Yeah. There's actually three check-ins that we need with you about the zoning code next year. Okay. So March would be one zoning check-in. >> That'll be a regular meeting, Julie. that uh no that would we could do that at March 2nd. That could just be a zoning update. Here's what we're doing. Here's what's happening. That sort of thing. Tell you what's been happening at the meetings with the zoning workshop. >> Oh, so we could Oh, so maybe on March 2nd, Julie, could we put a zoning code update, >> right? Instead of short-term rentals. And then on um July 20th, we would do a very deep dive into the zoning code as well as housing. And in that it would be drive-thru, short-term rentals at the same time. And then we would come back in October because you would have a final final zoning code. I mean, there's a lot of zoning stuff to do next year. And so, you would have one more zoning check-in before public uh engagement or before the public has a chance to see it. So, there's three kind of zoning touch points next year. And I'm sorry I wasn't here late last week when this was put together, otherwise I would have added it. Sorry. My fault. >> No. Can I just >> Oh, I'll wait until it's time to comment. >> Oh, yeah. >> Whenever you want us to comment. >> Uh, so yeah, thank you, Julie. Um, >> so what we could do, Julie? So, Julie's suggesting on March 2nd, do a zone zoning rewrite check-in. >> Is it possible to touch on short-term rentals? I know it's it was talked about last Monday. I guess my my only concern is it sounds like then that the anything that we do would not go into effect until the zoning rewrite. Is that is that the am I understanding that right? Because we had talked about it when we talked about it last year and and decided to go forward. I think the mayor made a a comment that um you know the the plan or the goal would be to have something in place before the summer season of this year. So is that I mean I didn't know if I haven't heard what's gone on since then. So I guess that would be my one concern or or just wanting to understand what's going to happen with that then if it would be part of that you know be waiting then another basically year then um to be part of the zoning code or it would be something that's considered separately. >> It's a heavy agenda. That's all I'm saying Mike. I mean so it depends on you know we have to write substance regulations at same meeting and so it depends on what's more important maybe uh to the council. doing this outside of the zoning work is troublesome. Um I think when you have multiple conversations going about multiple areas of the zoning code that that is hard to um manage. But I I'm open to whatever you want to do as a group. So >> we can circle back. We don't have to we can get to the other things. I don't want to >> derail us. Right. >> Yeah. Let's uh if it's okay, um we'll make it an edit. We'll call it zoning code checkin on March 2nd. And let's just we'll see where we are. Staff will there's something that we think we can do to try to move it along. We'll we'll do that. Um >> that' be appreciated. >> You know, I'm I'm trying to you know, I'm not going to be there. Okay. So, you know, I'm I'm not I'm trying to have not have a strong opinion on on much of anything tonight. I mean, I don't I'm not succeeding, but um you know that this is really your your all call and u I'll kind of leave it at that. I I'm going to >> and I'll just say this maybe let's just keep going through it and then let's let's circle back at the end of all of it. Um the other thing I'll just quickly mention is that what we what I tried to do when working with staff on this is make these manageable in terms of a timeline. So, as you know, we start at six o'clock. The idea is to have a couple items um hopefully two hour kind of a two-hour meeting, two and a half tops. So trying to also not overbear staff in bringing stuff forward, but also our time here as well. >> Um so March would be kind of policy discussions. uh April we'll have the uh the pre-budget kickoff with director presentations, public safety and master plan review, our first 30-minut open time. Uh we May then is the budget kickoff where we'll at that same time um discuss marsh operations, wreck facilities, priority based budgeting. That'll be a first kind of time with priority based budgeting and then Peter Leman will come back with community survey results. That's usually about maybe a half hour. So between those two items, big heavy lift on the budget, then community survey. June is where we used to have CIP EIP. We split those up. Uh so this year this June is CIP. And then also that'll give us more time to really kind of dive in a little deeper with CIP and it will like we said is coming in February, but that'll also give us a chance to highlight a few other things as well with the CIP. And then we had committed as council and staff to talk about Purgatory Park. So, we'll do that check-in in June. And if you want to scroll, Sarissa, please. Uh, July is then all EIP. So, instead of all things housing, all things EIP, which includes housing review, developer refinance policy, as Julie just noted, we'll do a zoning code checkin. Drive-throughs, I think, will be part of that whole zoning code rewrite. Uh, then in August, we'll be more general fund and levy focused. Also then a second discussion on priority based budgeting as that continues to move along. We do not have a study session September. Then October is all zoning code rewrite. That'll be a probably a pretty in-depth conversation because that as Julie just mentioned that'll be the third time that's coming back. So we want to make sure we dedicate enough time to the zoning code rewrite. Then November again all budgets regarding general fund, enterprise fund, special revenue b uh fund account. So really heavy in budget in November and then December is kind of our staple conversation. Before you know it, 2026 will fly by. So those are the edits we made. I quickly went through that. I think we captured everything that the council talked about. Tried to lay this out in a way that is manageable. Um then just turn it back over to you for comments, questions, anything we missed in here. Again, I'd note there's two 30-minute open times. This last year we had more than that. So, if you want to do more 30-minute open time, just let us know where you want to put those. And with that, Mayor Mike, turn it back over to you. >> Thanks. Um, any comments from council or any concerns you have or any questions you have? >> Um, once again, um, just city manager review at the end of the year. Needs to fit in there somewhere. >> Yes. >> And do we want to do that in December or November? I don't know. you. >> Well, I mean, December looks the 21st, obviously, >> like we're doing today. No, >> we have done it in the past at the end of a regular council meeting, but looking at looking at that calendar >> and maybe we can do that um just because we've actually gone ahead and you know updated the process which was um what took time this year but I just you know we have done it both ways So, I just want to make sure it's it's worked into the schedule at some point. >> Yeah, >> I'd rather not stay until midnight >> doing it. So, I mean, I'd rather add a study session than stay until >> it's fine. See how it goes. >> And nobody wants to stay till midnight. >> No, I think that >> Nobody does. Well, I don't think the 16th or the 14th would be effective timewise to do them. So then, you know, we see the regular council meetings either on the 23rd of November or the 21st of December seem like cuz the 7th is is the budget approval. So, that's not going to be it. So, >> I think we just >> suck >> maybe plan ahead when we're planning those >> agendas and see if we can't get it on the 23rd of November rather than >> we can do that. >> Maybe we could skip, you know. Yeah, if we can't, we have the 21st to >> All right. Okay. >> Anything Anything else, council? >> I just do have one. Um I just was wondering um I'll follow up with you on this on our next sit down is just that I think the roll out for purgatory signs and things has not been you know kind of because of weather and other things and so my only concern um is maybe that we be open to seeing what you know that June 15th because I'm not sure we'll have enough time with full signage um for for for purgatory to be able to really evaluate. So, that would be my only caveat because we're really going to only we didn't have signs out really this fall until very late and we only have a few out. Um, so it's not fully signed yet. So, that would be one thing in addition to what I've already mentioned. Not that we have to change at this moment, but just something for awareness, I guess. >> Yeah, that's a good point. Will Oh, I'm sorry. Will Where are the signs up? Yeah. So, everything is up for the off leash leashed areas citywide. There's a few that aren't up because of the weather just for the ordinance, but everything else should be in at this point. >> Okay. But that's just very >> But it just happened within the last two weeks. >> But but I think that just happened. I mean, within the last week or two, right? >> Correct. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Thanks, Will. >> But didn't we sort of make a commitment to commit? I think we did make a commitment. >> Yeah. >> Y that's fine. I'm just saying that there's not a lot of time to have you know like prime season >> and we may may maybe in June we may ask for more. >> Right. >> Right. Okay. >> There's nothing that precludes you from extending it. Sure. >> We'll get to June and see if we have enough data to actually make it. That was my only point not to change it necessarily, just to >> have it in mind. And then besides the um you know obviously the the short-term rentals, I acknowledge that you know that it would be more convenient to fold that in. Um, I just, you know, I know that there's a number, there's several, including one next door to me, but that shouldn't be the driver of of people who are specifically coming in and starting to buy um in Minnetonka >> to use for short-term rentals. And um and you know for for the few and there's not a lot of people who who you know live on lakeshore properties but a lot of them are paying incredibly high taxes um property taxes and um and not all of them are the Uber or the wealthy and you know people are buying up those places and then doing short-term rentals and you're having parties every single night next to you. I just went through that this summer personally and I know it's happening elsewhere. So, you know, if there's a way that that can be done sooner than later, I would much prefer that than to see what happened in Weisetta where they basically had a city kind of a very controversial um thing that hap, you know, process of of people really kind of getting out the pitch works a little bit and and bringing that forward. So that would be my only my main concern is that we you know kind of address this sooner rather than later so we don't have people who are maybe buying investment properties here in the next year for that purpose and then having to come back and say no and then we have oh well it was grandfathered in or you know kind of all of that stuff. So, I think, you know, dealing with something like that sooner than later than waiting it from my perspective. Um, you know, and and I'm willing to listen and learn to why that isn't. So, but I'll leave that for now and just kind of put that in there as my preference. >> Yeah. Thank you, Paul. I would just quickly add Brad that I'll connect with >> city attorney and Miss Wishnack here because I understand the concern of having these kind of dual tracks happening. Absolutely. >> Is there is there and I this where I want to ask our two partners here teammates on if there's a moratorum option can you do a moratorum while the zoning code rewrite plays out >> maybe that doesn't have to get answered here or maybe >> I'll let Eric >> could you do [laughter] you know what I'm saying is there could do a mortorium in in the interum >> well let me let me just throw out a suggestion and uh because I think these are relevant questions and I and I I'm uncomfortable for staff to say Yes or no on anything right now. But but but how about if we we agree that staff will look and see if there are any any options that would make sense legally to potent, you know, allow us to kick the can down the road to avoid the problem. That could be a moratorum, but but let's let's have the experts look at it a little bit more thoroughly before we make a decision. >> We're not supposed to make decision side anyway. >> If that if that if that makes sense for everybody. Yeah. >> Okay. Yeah. >> All right. >> Thank you. So, and then the only thing I want to say on this, and I said I wasn't going to say much. When Mike and I met today, we talked about um the um the um starting of the u April the 2027 budget director budget presentations and talked about the pros and cons of that because sometimes that can get to be a pretty long evening and um and so I threw out the suggestion and I'm one I'm one vote not a lot and I'm not going to be here next year but if we could really make those budget direction pres presentations, the kickoff ones really be an executive summary, you know, really, you know, no more than five minutes each and even there's eight of them. That's eight eight five minutes each is 40 minutes. So you can it's an easy way to eat up time and if if everybody can be disciplined because I like the I really like the idea of starting the budget conversation early. >> But but if there if you're going to have a bunch of three-hour budget sessions, I think that is counterproductive. So I shared that with Mike today. FYI, you guys get to decide. [cough] I had the same I think the same feedback and I think we could probably cut out the high the conversation about 2025. I think in the past there's been a slide about what were what was accomplished last year and just really talk about challenge challenges and anticipated issues going forward. >> Um not that the other information is not useful but I think we do so much talking about it. I think we have a pretty good foundation >> or maybe include the information but we don't need to review it verbally. Yeah, good point, Doug. >> Yeah, just second. >> If if >> that's Yes, go ahead. >> I just going to throw out there like looking at with budget presentations and then the public safety master plan review. I'm not sure there's going to be time for 30 minute open time. >> Yeah. Well, and I think and I think suggest I think staff could use some suggestions if we should move that elsewhere. We can do that. >> Yeah. And I don't know like >> where >> I don't know [laughter] where >> but I'm I'm just not sure there is >> and we've had times where we have been unsuccessful that this >> we had on the agenda and we didn't get to it. So, >> well, I think that's there's there's incentive built in, I think, to be efficient for, you know, and some of this comes from staff presentations, but at a council level, you know, if we want to get to that 30 minute open time, we we have to >> be prepared. >> Yeah. >> Be succinct. >> All right. >> Okay. >> Staff, you have what you need. >> Good. Yep. Perfect. Thank you. So, um, that that brings us to the close session and we're going to close the session. I don't I have had to have read a script, but I do want to say before everyone leaves, um, you know, it's my last meeting. Um, I've been to a lot of meetings. Um, you know, I'm really proud of the city and I'm really proud of the opportunity to that I've had to work with all of you. Um, this this is truly a professionally um, uh, run organization that is committed to excellence and I'm proud that I've had the opportunity to be part of it. And um and I feel like um I'm leaving the city in a good spot and uh I'm really proud of that. Um but I but this was not a this is not a me thing. This is a we thing. Um I couldn't have done it with all without all of you and I I just want you to know how grateful I am. So thank you. >> Thank you. [applause] >> Your state. >> All right. Well, um I will um do it. Do we vote on that? I'm going to take >> Okay. So then I will um I will move that we go to close session for the purposes of >> reviewing Mike's performance review with him. So I'll make that motion. Is there a second member Wilbur? Okay. >> Oh, sorry. >> Either one that's >> Mayor [laughter] Mayor May that two statutory bases you need to cite the the specific authority to go into the closed session and then the >> then the uh >> subject of the close session which you did say. So, okay. Pursuant to >> pursuant to Minnesota statute 13D.05 subdivision 3A, um that is the Minnesota statute that allows us to go into close session. Got a motion in a second. So, I'll do have to we'll roll call it. So, um a motion by mayor and a second by Council Member Wilburn. Um let's um and then all No, not all in favor. So Wilburn I >> Raley I >> Shack I Foster Balden I Oops. Deb Calbertt I. >> And Brad, wears some eye.