[music] [music] [music] Heat. Heat. [music] >> [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] >> Apologies I didn't call the meeting to order, which I will do. All right. Uh, Miss Kzen, please call roll. >> Wilburn >> here. >> Kelurn >> here. >> Raley >> here. >> Kley >> here. >> Foster Bolton >> here. >> Maxwell >> here. >> Shaq >> here. U before we go on to our uh next agenda item. Just some housekeeping issues. We have comment cards or signup cards in the lobby for anybody who is wishing to speak on items eight. citizens wishing to discuss matters not on the agenda, which are opportunity for folks in the community to bring issues to our attention that are not otherwise listed on tonight's agenda. We're also taking public comment on obviously the public hearing matters, which is uh agenda item 13A and B. Those are some liquor license. and on item 14A, the Purgatory Park off leash dog area. So, if you're here to speak on any of those items, I'd ask you to fill out um one of those cards and staff will bring them to me so that we're prepared for those of you who want to comment tonight. Anticipate the room will fill up a little bit and so I will only be taking comment from folks who have filled out a card. So, please go ahead and do that. All right, moving right along to agenda item four and that is approval of the agenda. Mr. Funk. Thank you, Mayor. Good evening, council. Two considerations for your for you this evening regarding the agenda. First is item 9A, which is bids for the Opus Trail Lighting Improvement Project. There are three recommended actions for the city council. I want to point your attention to the second recommended motion. Uh there was an incorrect amount noted of $2,560,000 for the total project costs. The correct total project cost is 2,135,000. This change has then made has been made directly to the staff report. And then second related to item 14A, Purgatory Park off leash dog area. Public comments received after the distribution of the packet from last Thursday. Those are now included in your agenda. So those are the two items for your consideration. With that, mayor and councel staff recommends a motion to approve the agenda as amended. >> Thank you, Mr. Funk. Uh, Council Member Maxwell. >> Uh, thanks, Mayor. I move approval of the agenda as amended. >> And Council Member Calvert. I'll second. I have a motion by Council Member Maxwell and a second by Council Member Calvert. Miss Kuzzman, please call roll. >> Wilburn, >> yes. >> Calbert, >> yes. >> Me, yes. >> Kley, >> yes. Yes. Foster Bolton. >> Yes. >> Maxwell. >> Yes. Jack. >> Yes. Motion carries. Um I'm just going to try something here because I'm getting some feedback to see if this helps. Bear with me. This might help. Okay. Um item number five is approval of minutes. And we have two sets of minutes. The July 20th, 2026 study session minutes and August 10th, 2026 regular meeting minutes. Um, I take a motion to approve those. Council member Calbertt. >> Thank you, Mayor. I move approval of the July 20th, 2026 study session minutes, and the August 10th, 2026 regular meeting minutes. And a second. Council member Romey. >> I'll second. >> I have a motion by Council Member Calbert, a second by Council Member Romey. Miss Kuzman, please call roll. >> Wilburn, >> yes. >> Kelbert, >> yes. >> Rome, >> yes. >> Kley, >> yes. Foster Bolton, >> yes. >> Maxwell, >> yes. Shaq, >> yes. Motion carries. Item six is special matters, and we have none of those tonight. On to item seven, which is reports from city manager and council members. Mr. Funk. >> Uh, thank you, mayor. Again, good evening, city council. Couple items for your consideration this evening. First is the Cedar Lake Road construction from Hopkins Crossroad to 169 is complete. I know it was a summerlong project. Uh so it's complete and open as school started here uh today. Improvements as you know were made to the pavement, damaged curb and sidewalks, pedestrian ramps, utility castings, traffic signals, and pavement markings. So it's a pretty significant project and we're happy to announce that is now open. Related to then hydrant painting, as you know, the city owns lots of fire hydrants and those tend to fade over time. Uh public works is uh starting hydrant painting this week. So you'll see crews out and about performing this regular maintenance to ensure visibility and to prevent corrosion. And then a week ago, Wednesday, we had our annual paper shredding event. Uh public works collected approximately 7,560 pounds of paper uh during that event. So we appreciate citizens coming and utilizing that uh that service here at the city. It does uh meet our sustainability initiative and we're proud for the residents that participated. Speaking of which, also coming up is then community dropoff day is Saturday, September 12th. It is 8:00 a.m. to 3 pm at the public works facility located on Minnitankka Boulevard. And then we also have our tree pickup event. So, as you know, we do our annual tree sales. Residents that purchased trees earlier this spring will be able to pick them up on SA on excuse me, on September 18th and 19th. And residents have been notified those that purchased those trees. So they should be aware that come in and pick those up. And then last I just want to mention that we are aware that we have received additional messages from Kinumi community members regarding their views on flock cameras and their software. We recognize that even with privacy safeguards in place, Flock has become associated nationally with broader concerns about surveillance, data sharing, and transparency. We do not believe that is enough to simply say that Minnetonka has configured the system responsibly. We also need to ensure that the technology we use continues to reflect the community's expectations. The public, excuse me, the police department has been working on a timeline to transition away from Flock for the past several months. Police have already notified Flock that we will not be renewing our contract and we are working with them to determine a time frame for the removal of their license plate readers. We anticipate this to occur in the next 60 to 90 days. As you know, license plate readers serve as a critical public safety tool, and we remain committed to ensuring our system not only supports the police department's ability to investigate and respond to crime, but also reflects the community's expectations regarding privacy, data security, and transparency. So, as we move away from Flock, we will continue to evaluate how to best proceed and provide this important public safety capability in a manner that is consistent with those expectations. And if residents have questions about our systems, uh, they should feel free to reach out to us. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Funk. I'm going to take another moment to reiterate um just because we had a whole bunch of people come in an announcement I made at the beginning of the meeting which is if you are here to speak on item seven uh rep excuse me item 8 citizens wish wishing to discuss matters not on the agenda um either of the public hearings which relate to liquor license or item 14A which is the Purgatory Park off leash dog area we need to have you fill out a card requesting to speak which are in the lobby there on that table and put them in the box. Staff will give those to me and we'll call up um to the podium folks to speak on the appropriate agenda item. Anybody who hasn't filled out a card um because we anticipate some some public comments tonight will will not have an opportunity to speak. All right. So, moving on. Council reports from council members. Anybody? Council member Calvert. >> Thank you, Mayor. So, as we wind down um during the summer, I know many many of my uh fellow council members are also on League of Minnesota Cities committees and we will be attending our last meetings um this coming month and uh these are policy committees that help us advocate um you know in on mass with our uh fellow council members from all over the state on things that matter to cities. ities and um and I also am on the metro cities committee on a metro cities committee that um deals with Met Council and our relationship with Met Council and um the kinds of things that Met Council does for instance are setting housing goals. um they sort of govern our our water water and sewer policy uh in the region and um so it's a it it's not a super sexy uh committee but it's important work. So, I just feel very lucky that I get to work on the improving services delivery committee where we deal with everything from elections to public safety and um flock cameras are a big topic for a lot of um people. So, thank you Mr. Funk for that um really important update since we have been getting a lot of uh communication from our um constituents about flock cameras. And um on the 12th, as Mr. Funk said, there is a community drop off day for items and it also happens to be a high holy day for the Jewish community, which is Rashashana, which is the new year. And we will not be having a meeting before then. And so I just want to wish um my uh the members of the Jewish community uh a very happy and sweet new year. And um and I just wanted to explain that uh when it comes to things like a community drop off day, there are a lot of conflicts. the city avoids having meetings with um members of our our commissions uh boards and the city council. But when it comes to community events, it's it can be very difficult to avoid. And that particular event is, as I understand it, always the Saturday after Labor Day, which is unusually late this year. So, um hopefully next year we can avoid um having a drop off day where people feel that they won't be able to participate in the drop off day, but that's that's why it happened. So, I just wanted to make an announcement. So, happy new year everybody. >> Thank you, Council Member Calbert. Council, anybody else? Council member Rome. >> Thank you, Mayor. Just uh two quick things. Uh I along with uh several other residents in Ward 3 are part of the Libs Lake Bridge I guess working group. Uh we are working with staff and also with consultants to kind of help with the redesign and uh rebuild of the Libs Lake Bridge. Um we're trying to do something that you know creates placemaking to highlight Minnetonka's unique place. We're kind of at this crossroads. We are at the end of Lake Minnetonka. Um we are the last bit and we're also the headwaters of the Minhaha Creek which eventually these waters end up in the Gulf of Mexico. So we're trying to uh make sure we honor that special place and kind of uh create a a a special, you know, bridge or something that is unique and speaks to our community and this special place. So, I appreciate all of the residents who came and are uh participating in that and am happy to have been uh invited to participate as well. Uh the other thing uh that council member Wilburn and I both participated um were you gonna Oh, in in the uh Excel's uh Habitat for Humanity Day with Mills Church build. So, that was really gratifying to see the progress there. and all the good work and uh glad that Excel is being a good community partner in that respect and uh and so thank them for welcoming us. Um I I also wanted to take a quick uh moment to congratulate staff. There was an article in the Mi Minnesota Star Tribune the other day about how some cities are having to face doubledigit tax levy increases while at the same time decreasing services. So, I really did want to take this opportunity to thank staff um you know and and everybody involved uh for working so hard to minimize our tax levy, our levy increases while also maintaining or even in some cases expanding services and our work to achieve our strategic objectives. And that's something so that we not only make uh our community a better place for residents right now in the current and the present, but we're also doing it for the long term and those who come after us. So again, thank you staff for uh your work on that. And I think uh for those of you who read that article article, um you can see what a a good job that Minnotonka has done. um and that we're not facing double-digit tax levy increases this year and we are not cutting services or recreation opportunities or things like that that other other cities are having to do. Thank you. >> Thank you, Council Member Mley. Anybody else? Okay. Um I will just comment about the first of all I want to acknowledge that today and tomorrow I think the first day of schools school and all three of the school major school districts represented in Minnetonka Weisetta Hopkins and Minnetonka school district. So I hope the school year is getting off to a good start although I know there's probably kids that are really bummed that it's happening before Labor Day. Um, and we're always so happy to partner with folks in the school district and and our police department's been great partners to the school districts and I'm just so proud of the work that we do there. Um, second, I'll reiterate uh, Council Member Calvert's wish for Shana Tova, right? She's she's coached me over the years. So, happy new year to all of um our Jewish friends in the community and um we hope that you have a lovely celebration uh over the next several weeks. So, with that, I will um we'll move on to item eight and it looks like we which is um citizens wishing to discuss matters not on the agenda. And uh there are no cards in the box which means that nobody signed up to speak on this agenda item. Um so I will move on to the next item which is item nine and that's bids and purchases 9A bids for the Opus Trail Lighting Improvement Project. And Mr. Kuno, you have that. >> Go for it. >> I do. Thank you. Good evening, mayor and councel. Uh bids were open for the Opus Trail Lighting Project on August 20th. There are three recommended actions for this project. Uh number one is a motion to award the contract for the Opus Trail Lighting Improvements Project number 24604 to Lake Town Electric in the amount of $1,67,000. The second action is a motion to authorize the public works director to expend the allocated funds for the project costs without further council approval provided the total project costs do not exceed the project budget of $2,135,000. Uh that is the corrected amount. And three, uh, a motion to amend the capital improvement program, the CIP. Uh, so this project uh, supports desired outcome of the strategic plan 5.1 improving reliability and efficiency in our utilities and facilities. Uh the pro the lighting project will replace the existing trail lighting throughout the Opus area with brand new LED lights. Uh council authorized the ad for bid for this project on at the July 27th meeting. Uh the existing lights in the Opus area along the trail are 35 years old and are due to be replaced. Uh the new lighting plan will provide enhanced safety by filling some of the gaps in the existing lighting system. The new luminires that are proposed for the project are highly efficient LED lights and the lighting is directed downward at the trail to help prevent light pollution. Uh the number of lights in that will be installed with the new project is actually about double the number of lights that are currently out along the trail. So, we'll really enhance the ability to use the trail uh in the evening and enhance safety, make people feel safer using the trail system. Uh we received seven bids for the project. Uh Lake Town Electric submitted a low bid of $1,67,000. Uh you can see several other bids were around two million or under. Uh the engineers estimate was 3,140,000 which staff was pleasantly surprised by the by the bid uh bids we received but then also a little concerned since the bids were significantly lower than our our engineers estimate for the project. So, uh, you know, we really dug in to review the bids versus the estimate following the bid and I guess came away with a a couple of insights, uh, that were that caused the the differences. The engineers estimate actually it had accidentally included a double count of the light bases for the project. We had light bases included in the bid for the lights themselves and then had a separate bid item for light bases. So they were double counted to the tune of about $400,000. Uh we also just the the b the number of lighting uh fixtures that we were ordering uh resulted in a significant bulk cost reduction for the contractor that we didn't anticipate. So there was some significant significant savings there just due to the total number of lights that were ordered for the project. And then during the bid, we had uh specified that the contractor install the new lights by directional boring the the uh wiring between the light fixtures. And we had a couple of contractors ask if they could trench that light in, essentially install the wiring using a different method. Um and we agreed to that, which also resulted in a significant cost savings for the project. it it will require a little more restoration on the back side of the project, but we felt that the cost savings really offset uh the the restoration effort on on the back side. So, I think a combination of those things and a a fairly good bid environment, the the bids that we've received this year, um we feel that we've received some really good bid pricing this year. Um I think a combination of those factors really led to the the pricing that we received on this project. also. So that that was the the difference between the the bids and the estimate. Uh if awarded tonight, we anticipate that the project will begin this fall. Uh the contractor will start doing work uh probably installing some bases and and trying to get some of the wire in the ground and then shut down for the winter and come back in the spring and finish up the project next summer or fall. the recommended actions for the project. Again, uh motion to award the contract for the Opus Trail Lighting Improvements Project number 24604 to Lake Town Electric in the amount of $1,67,000. Number two, to authorize a public works director to expend the allocated funds for the project costs without further council approval provided the total project costs do not exceed the project budget of $2,135,000. And three, uh, to amend the CIP. >> Excellent. Thank you, council. Any questions about this? Talked about it quite a bit. All right. Well, with that then I would be looking for a motion or any comments I guess if anybody has comment. Council member Calvert. >> Thank you, Mayor. Yeah, I was I in reading the packet I had been a little bit confused about some of the um uh amounts and uh later on Mr. Funk got back to me with your explanation of of why why I was confused. So, uh, thank you for clearing it up and I'm really excited that, uh, it ended up saving us money because that's, uh, music to our ears. And, um, unless somebody else has a comment, I'd be happy to make the motion, um, to award the contract for the Opus Trail Lighting Improvements Project number 24604 to Lake Town Electric in the amount of $1,67,000. Authorized the public works director to expend the allocated funds for the project costs without further council approval provided the total project costs do not exceed the project budget of $2,135,000 and amend the capital improvement program. Thank you, Council Member Romey. I'll second. Thank you. I have a motion by Council Member Calvert, a second by Council Member Romey. Want to make sure we didn't miss anybody's comments. No. All right, Miss Kuzzman, please call roll. >> Wilburn, >> yes. >> Calvert, >> yes. >> Rome, >> yes. >> Kley, >> yes. >> Foster Bolton, >> yes. >> Maxwell, >> yes. >> Shaq, >> yes. Motion carries. All right. Item 9B, bids for the Marsh roof replacement project. Mr. Kuno, that's you as well. >> All right. Thank you. Uh, bids were open for the Marsh roof replacement project on July 27th. There are two recommended actions for this project. Uh action one, a motion to award the contract for the Marsh roof replacement project number 25907 to Toro Construction including alternate one synthetic shingles in the amount of $432,712.30 and alternate three new gutters in the amount of $0. Uh and recommended action number two, a motion to authorize a public works director to expend the allocated funds for the project costs without further council approval provided the total project costs do not exceed the project budget of $535,000. Uh the marsh roof replacement project also supports initiatives to maintain and manage capital assets and preserve long-term investment supporting desired outcome 5.1 improving reliability and efficiency of the utilities and facilities for the city. Uh the project includes replacement of nearly 15,000 square feet of existing uh highly pitched cedar shake roof uh areas on the marsh. Uh the project does not include the flat rubber membrane roof areas as those were not damaged during the storm last year. So, in the summer of 2025, uh we had inclement weather that damaged the the roof of the building. In assessing the damage with the city's insurance provider, it was determined that portions of the roof needed to be replaced. Uh insurance coverage is providing full replacement of the the wood shake areas of the marsh. Um the add there were additional areas of the roof including the membrane uh that were not damaged. So we will not be doing any work on those. On June 22nd, council adopted a resolution ordering the improvements accepting plans and specs and authorizing ad for bid for the marsh roof replacement. The existing roof on the marsh uh consists of a wood shingle a wood shake system. Uh there's also uh approximately half inch plywood underneath that the existing shakes and drainage is managed by a 6-in prefinished metal gutter and downspout system. Uh the project proposed to replace all of the existing uh woodshake area and also included installation of new downspouts, drip edge, gutters uh and metal vents on the roof. We received eight bids for the project. Uh commercial Midwest submitted the low bid for the project. However, during the bid review process, staff determined that Commercial Midwest is not eligible to be awarded the contract. So, staff recommends awarding the project, including including alternates one, the synthetic shingles, and three new gutters to the lowest responsible bidder, Toro Construction. This project will primarily be funded through insurance. Uh there were some questions about solar in conjunction with this project. Um the proposed replacement does not preclude a future solar installation. Uh we are actually reviewing the ability to install solar on the marsh as part of a facilities condition assessment that we're currently doing on several of the facilities across the city. So that will be reviewed in that condition assessment. Yep. And uh we'll look at at doing a project like that, submitting uh for grants for a solar roof installation on the marsh in the future if that's possible. If uh awarded tonight, we expect the construction on the marsh roof to be completed this fall. So, the two recommended actions for tonight, uh, action one, a motion to award the contract for the marsh roof replacement project number 25907 to Toro Construction, including alternate one, the synthetic shingles in the amount of $432,712.30 and alternate three, new gutters in the amount of $0. And action two, a motion to authorize a public works director to expend the allocated funds for the project costs without further council approval provided the total project costs do not exceed the project budget of $535,000. >> Great. Thank you. All right, council. Any questions on this? Council member Rome, >> just one quick one. Um, the shingles on this are going to be are they class 4? What are we replacing? >> Uh, that is a good question. I I am not sure on the the classification uh but they are the synthetic shingle so they're not the wood shake that is currently on there. Um the synthetic shingle does have a longer life expectancy and it holds up to hail damage uh wind and hail damage much better than the cedar shake. It was actually a cost deduct uh to install the the synthetic shingle. So um those were some of the decisions that went into that factor. I'm just I'm not sure exactly what class shingle that is. >> Okay, great. Yeah, thank you. Is there time for one comment? >> Um, yeah, let's see if we have any other questions, council. No. All right, then comments. Council member Romeley, go ahead. >> Thank you, Mayor. Um, and I appreciate that extra information I did ask about that with my call this morning with Mr. Funk. Um the only thing I would like to maybe ask council and you know staff to consider going forward is building something into our processes when we have um projects like this um and other public buildings to kind of build in that um you know look getting an estimate for solar ready roofs and then also the estimate for the actual array installation so that we're looking at that you know from the get-go so we're not that doesn't somehow get lost in the way side and I know you're probably doing it that maybe doing that already, but just maybe making it a more formal part of the process. So, thank you. That's all I have. >> Great. Any other comments, council? Council member, it sounds like you'd like to make the motion. >> Oh, I'm happy to make the motion. That's what I meant to say. Uh, so I will make the motion to award the contract for the marsh roof replacement project number 25907 to Toro Construction for alternate >> uh one synthetic shingles in the amount of $432,712.30. 30 cents and alternate three new gutters in the amount of $0. Uh and to authorize the public works director to expend the allocated funds for the project costs without further council approval provided the total project costs do not exceed the project budget of 535,000. Thank you. And a second. Council member Maxwell. >> I'll second the motion. >> I have a motion by Council Member Romeyle, a second by Council Member Maxwell. Miss Kuzman, please call roll. Wilburn, >> yes. >> Calbertt, >> yes. >> Rome, >> yes. >> Kle, >> yes. >> Foster Bolton, >> yes. >> Maxwell, >> yes. >> Shaq, >> yes. Motion carries. All right. On to item 10, which is consent agenda items requiring a majority of vote. These items are intended to be routine in nature. They're placed on here by staff with the idea that we can pass them all in one vote. That said, if anybody council or anybody in the audience has a concern about one of these items and they'd like to pull it, they're um free to do so and we will discuss whatever concerns there are. So, we have um item 10A, resolution for the Minnitonka Boulevard lift station rehabilitation project. 10B, conditional use permit for an accessory structure more than 12 ft in height at 13511 Minnitankka Drive. 10 C, preliminary and final plat of Oakland Woods Estates, second edition, a two lot subdivision at 2213 Oakland Road. 10 D, a conditional use permit request for a detached accessory dwell dwelling unit at 1617 Liner Road. 10 C reaffirmation of a previously approved conditional use permit and final site and building plans for first international bank and trust at 10801 Weisetta Boulevard 10F resolution amending council policy 1.2 appointments to boards committees and commissions. Anybody wish to pull any of these items? Council member Kelver. >> Thank you mayor. I'd like to pull item 10 C. >> Okay. Do you wanna Council Member Wilburn? >> I just had a comment on 10A. So >> why don't you go ahead with that? >> Okay. Um so and Mr. Funk said it was okay to talk about this. So um I I had a conversation with him. I was at a recent recent climate uh city's climate coalition meeting and someone had suggested that m using solar for lift stations to power lift stations might be uh something that could be done since lift stations use so much energy and have such a high cost and so I was wondering if that's something we could consider for future lift stations. I realize it's not in the scope of this current project but so I just wanted to bring that up. >> Great. Do you want to make the motion on um all the items except for 10 C? >> Sure. Um I move uh excuse me passage of consent agenda items A, B, D, E, and F. And do have a second on that. Council member Foster Bolton. >> I'll second. >> So have a motion by Council Member Wilburn, a second by Council Member Foster Bolton. Miss Kuzman, please call roll. >> Wilbur, >> yes. Yes. Calbertt, >> yes. >> Yes. >> Kley, >> yes. >> Foster Bolton, >> yes. >> Maxwell, >> yes. >> Shaq, >> yes. Motion carries. Okay. Council member Calvert, 10C. >> Thank you, Mayor. Um, so I went to the site and there are two homes being built adjacent to the site in question. And then the proposal is to subdivide a a relatively large property um for two homes. Um one of the properties will be quite large because it will have um storm water storage basins and wetlands and so forth. And the other is is on higher ground. And in the staff report, I think it was in on page three or the project information, um it did talk about um uh that the uh imperous surface would exceed 20%. Um and and that in order that that I that in order to not exceed 20% impervious surface that either the footprint would have to be reduced by 820 square ft or more storm water storage would have to be created for this home. And I'm just thinking, you know, my home I think the footprint is,00 square feet and um so that you know that's a pretty sizable reduction. But my I have two questions. One is is is is this on consent agenda even though that's the case because the requirement does not yet exist and even though it doesn't exist because it is happening so close to a time where it is very likely to exist. Can we encourage the developer to maybe reduce the footprint a little bit to reduce the environmental impact? >> Miss Thomas. >> Uh thank you, Mayor Shack, and uh council member. I'll take those questions separately. The first is it is on consent um this evening because it does meet all of the minimum zoning and subdivision standards that are on the books right now. And so staff can't um recommend denial of that. It's it's really the city is legally obligated to approve this particular um subdivision. In terms of having conversation with the applicant, we we certainly can. I would just point out that the the draft ordinance as it is written says that um the cap without additional storm water improvements is 20%. It's not a variance to go beyond 20%. It's just that you have to incrementally increase your storm water management op um stuff. Sorry for the engineers in the room. um as you increase impervious surface. And so um I would suggest to you that this project would not have come to you in this form in the future if this ordinance is adopted because we would have turned back to the developer and said, "Okay, you have to either increase your storm water management or you have to reduce and and the footprint and and send that back to them so that when we came to you, the plans would actually meet um what the ordinance is requiring. Council member Calbert. >> Thank you. So, so my followup to that is since since the requirement does not yet exist and we can't require either thing, is storm water going to be appropriately managed for that development. >> Miss Thomas, >> uh, mayor and council members, yes, there actually is storm water management that's proposed. There's infiltration basins that meet our current rule, and so, yes, it will be appropriately managed. Um as per our engineers reviews um we simply in the draft ordinance want to tie as we look to sustainability and resilience we want to tie impervious surface to greater impervious surface to greater storm water management. >> Thank you uh council member Calbertt. >> So I unless people have more questions. Anybody else have anything else on this item 10 C? Not seeing any. Okay. Go ahead, Council Member Calbertt. So, I'd like to um move approval of the preliminary the preliminary and final plat of Oakland Woods Estate, second edition, a two lot subdivision at 2213 Oakland Road. And the second council member Maxwell, >> I'll second the motion. I have a motion by council member Calbertt, a second by council member Maxwell. Miss Kuzman, please call roll. >> Wilbur, >> yes. >> Calbert, >> yes. >> Raley, >> yes. >> Kley, >> yes. >> Foster Bolton, >> yes. >> Maxwell, >> yes. Shaq, >> yes. Motion carries. On to item 11, consent agenda items requiring five votes, and we have none of those tonight. Item 12 is introduction of ordinances. Um 12A is ordinance making technical corrections to city ordinances establishing boards and commissions. And we're going right to Miss Saraki with that. Thank you, mayor and councel. I will be presenting on the boards and commissions um ordinances tonight. Staff recommends a motion to introduce the ordinances and four votes are needed. A little background on the boards and commissions. Boards and commissions are established to provide advice and recommendations to the city council and they are established to the city code which outlines their membership terms, responsibilities, meeting requirements and other applicable procedures and or the ordinances are here tonight because of a overall boards and commissions review project city staff implemented this year and there are three areas of that review for The ordinances reviews, we completed that to improve consistency, establish uniformity, clarify language, and align ordinances with current practices. And as you just saw in the on the consent agenda, we updated the city council policy book. And after tonight, we will also start um to create internal boards and commissions manual. So the ordinance review process that included three meetings for each board and commission. The first meeting included myself, the city attorney, the staff leaison and other necessary staff and we did an initial review of that board or commission ordinance. The second review included myself, the city attorney. We met with the city manager to discuss recommended changes and then established the consistent language that you see across all boards and commissions now. And then there was a final review that included everyone listed above and we met together and reviewed the po proposed changes that you see tonight. So we established a formal layout of each boarding commission now. So they all include the same sections. So the first section establishes the board and commission followed by eligibility, appointment and term. Next is duties and responsibilities. And the next section is meetings, officers, committees and rules of procedure. And then last two sections are compensation and staff leaison. The consistent language that we established that is now shown across all boards and commission um is laid out right here in the slide. So total number of voting members is seven for all boards and commissions. We also established age requirements for youth or young adult members and that is 16 to 24. All youth and young adult members are now voting members. Um, we established general language for appointments, terms, reappointments, and removal of members. We also added more detailed language for the annual report that is brought to city council. In the meeting frequency, it now says meet as necessary to accomplish its duties. And we also added language to annually select a chairperson and a vice chairperson. And we also added general language regarding bylaws, ad hoc committees and open meeting law. Then lastly, there's general language relating to compensation and staff lays on. So moving forward, I will now just highlight the larger items that are specific to each board and commission. So DEI commission went from nine voting members to seven voting members. They had three-year terms and they will now have two-year terms just like all the other boards and commissions. And under their duties and responsibilities, we removed the line that said we'll be knowledgeable about federal and state laws that protect city indiv city individual city rights. for their park for the park board, the young adult was a non- voting member and they will now be a voting member. We removed um school districts requirements and removed the extra language about appointments and terms. And under their duties and responsibilities, we removed language about recreational and leisure time um facilities and recreational programs. We also remove the line that states when convened as the park board, the board shall make its foremost concern the parklands and park facilities of the city of Minnitonka through the recommendations to the city council of policies pertaining there too. And then we also removed language about the about the joint board with Hopkins. Um for the now it's called senior citizen advisory board. We will now be calling that senior advisory board. So removing citizen and we're also going to remove senior citizens language across the city code. So it will only say seniors and their membership will change from up to 12 voting members to seven voting members. We also removed extra um verbiage about appointments and terms. and we removed the duty that says advise the city council about the needs and status of senior citizens in the city. And that was just redundant on another duty that was listed below. And then we also removed the section relating to relationships. For the sustainability commission, they changed from nine voting members to seven voting members. They had five members appointed at large. They will now have four members appointed at large. We added a line about youth and young adult members and it says it is desirable to have one high school student and one a young adult over the age of 18. We removed language about school district requirements. We removed the exopicio member of the park board and also removed extra verbiage about appointments and terms. We kept the planning commission exopicio member and we and with that we added language um requiring it to be approved by the city council just like the other appointments are. And under their duties and responsibilities, we changed landfill waste to solid waste. And we removed the duty that said the commission will review and provide input to the city council on sustainability and climate change mitigation proposals. Um the next steps after tonight is to revisit the plan for current openings based on proposed the proposed ordinances and the updated city council policy book. We will examine current members terms and ensure they are still staggered for each board and commission. And with that and with the change of going to seven members, we no current member will be removed due to the change in membership numbers. positions will be removed as members reach term limits or decide to not be reappointed. So the total the seven membership might not be seen right away. It might take a couple years and then the goal will be to have the ordinances adopted on September 14th. Again, staff recommends a motion to introduce the ordinances and four votes are needed. Thank you. >> Thank you. Very well done. This has been a big undertaking and a lot of statute or ordinance review. So, thank you very much for that. Okay, council. Any questions about the proposed changes? Council member Wilburn. Um for the sustainability commission, can you tell me the the reasoning behind the removal of the language were uh providing input on sustainability and climate change mitigation proposals? Mr. Funk or Miss Rocky, do you want to take it? How do you She's looking at you. I need a little help on the specifics. >> Yeah, good question. Mayor, uh, Council Member Wilburn, it's a good question. Um, I also may need to rely on some other staff members to answer that. I, as Mr. Saki mentioned, the I'll just kind of tee up what Mr. Raki already mentioned in terms of the why behind all this is that these ordinances have approved different times throughout the city's history. So, there's been it none of these ordinances were approved at the same time. And so as staff looked at our ordinances, it often comes up, you know, we answer questions to residents about terms of these boards and commissions, the roles, responsibilities of the commissions, and just notice there's a number of inconsistencies. So we made this a a priority internally and spent this year reviewing it. And so as Miss Sra laid out, we had a number of staff members involved with each of these, reviewing all of the language. Um, I don't have a a good answer. I would need to get back to you on exactly why that language. I'm going to interrupt you, Mr. Funk, because Miss Thomas appears to have a uh at least a sort of an answer. Go ahead, Miss Thomas. >> Mayor and and councel, and I I can only jump in here because this is a commission that I am a staff liaison to. So, Mr. Funk and Maki had a lot of commissions to deal with. This is my commission. Um, we remove that simply because it's repetitive. The very first item uh that is listed in the duties and responsibilities currently um says that the commission will review, research, evaluate, develop and advise the city council on all sorts of things including practices regarding climate change mitigation and sustainability and so it just seemed um redundant to call it out uh separately. >> Excellent. Anybody else? Any questions, comments? Council member Romey. >> Thank you, Mayor. Uh, couple of questions and a comment. Um, first the meet as necessary. Um, so a lot of our boards and commissions are now going to you they're all meet as necessary. And I was just wondering as a matter of of practice and policy. How is that determined? You know, kind of by whom what's the process for doing so? >> Thank you, Council Member Member Romey. Each year um city staff establishes the 2020 or the next um city calendar and with this new practice of saying meet as necessary we will reach out to each board and commission and ask them how often they see it is appropriate to meet in the next year which has already occurred. Um so we will reach out to the staff leison and they will work with their board and commission to see how often it is necessary for them to meet. >> Okay. And then uh I guess two quick comments. Um I I appreciate the fact that youth will be voting members. It does give me um a little bit of pause because you know in some ways they could be tiebreers for some of of these commissions on on key items. And um you know I guess it will be incumbent upon the council then to make sure that we are appointing really qualified folks because I I watch a lot of boards and commissions uh usually on my treadmill while I'm at home. Um and you know I the the commitment varies right now. You know I've had uh kiddos during finals who have been almost falling asleep during parkboard meetings um and you know so on. So, I think, you know, I just want to just say it's going to be really incumbent on us um given the fact that they will all be voting members now to make sure that we're getting uh really good uh folks. And in fact, one commission, I think we're going to have two, the sustainability commission, we're going to have two young people. Um so, you know, that will be on us. And then a third thing is uh commentquest. Um, we have a council liaison position for the EDAC, economic development and and advisory committee. And my understanding is council >> member Rome, I'm going to interrupt you because we're actually dealing with EDAC on the next >> I I realize that this isn't about EDAC. So, um, this is about um having uh staff or council liaison to the other committees. Um, and I know that had been done years ago and I would like to just, you know, float that as an idea while we're doing this because we haven't seen as council members haven't seen any of this uh until Thursday. And so, you know, I know it's there's an introduction here, but um, you know, I would I guess ask my colleagues to consider if that would be, you know, an optional thing that we might want to include. Thank you. All right, council. Any other questions? Otherwise, we'll open it up for comments. Any com Council Member Calvert? Thank you, Mayor. Um, I'm wondering if someone on staff could answer a question, a follow-up question to what council member Romey because as I understand it, the reason that there is a council liaison to the EDAC was really specific. there was a specific reason why a council liaison versus the other um commissions um or boards. So, could you remind us what that is? >> Uh Mr. funk. I you know this might would probably have been a good one for Miss Wishnik but you're up >> and mayor and council member uh Calbertt first if I can mayor just go back to council member Rome's question comment just on the youth I that's correct I there's been I think what we had discovered is this what we call an inconsistency where some boards and commissions had youth participating as voting members mbers and some did not. So, it is really your decision if you want youth to be voting members or not. Staff is recommending they be considered as voting members. The rationale for that is it's oftentimes it can be hard to find that young adult. And so, when you do find them, they also want to feel valued that they're that they're showing up and be able to contribute and as a voting member. it makes it easier for us to actually recruit a youth because they feel they can participate and acknowledge that you're also correct that two things can be true at the same time and that is they're also a young voting member and are part of some pretty important decision-m uh in terms of the leaison so to both your question council member and to council member Calverts uh I don't know the history I I to the mayor's point Miss Wishnack is our probably our historian here to some degree because she's been the longest serving staff member when that uh EDAC was established again it was by resolution and so that's what the next agenda item is it's separated out because that's really converting from a resolution to and putting it into an actual ordinance in terms of the actual history of why that came to be I staff would need to research that a little deeper and get back to you with a with an answer >> can I follow up with just one comment then on that just a lot of other cities you know do have liaison I talked to a number of my colleagues you elsewhere and other cities at conferences are just coming across and they do and I think they might have a lot of value for us again if they were not mandatory but if they were optional. Thank you >> council member Kley. >> Thank you mayor. I was just going to say um I had mentioned this a while back um in regards to leaison to other um committees um in particular the DEI um and so I think that would be a um a good one to look at and maybe part of a study session one day. So anybody else? Well, obviously this is an uh ordinance introduction. I will weigh in on that issue. And I think this is something um maybe we want to talk about a little bit more before we kick it back to staff because when this comes back hopefully it'll be a version that we're interested in in approving. Um you know I I think there is a a dampening effect sometimes by having council members and certainly um the mayor. you know, I I feel like I'm one voice out of seven. And I will tell you that I've learned in the last eight months that um people don't often disagree with the mayor to her face. Maybe they do behind her back. [laughter] Um and I think there is a difference that happens and maybe um a lack of cander that we are asking boards to do important work to give us their opinions and sometimes when the elected official is in the room they're deferred to in providing a perspective or an opinion. So, in my view, I I put a lot of trust and faith in the boards and commissions and I um I think it's important that they do their work and that that work comes to us. That's my opinion. I wouldn't be I and I and I'll let council member cover later on the next agenda item speak to the EDAC. I mean that is not overly important to me either that there be a council liaison on there but I think we do appoint kind of a different our our eye on appointing the EDAC is a little bit different than how we maybe appoint other boards and commission members and there's no youth members on there etc. The other thing that I will mention is that all of the youth members that we had on boards and commissions have been voting members except for the park board and has been notoriously hard to keep that park board position filled. And I do think that maybe because they don't feel as valued because they're not a voting member. Who cares if they're there or not? And so they don't feel maybe as committed as they might be if they were if their opinions were considered as part of the overall vote. So, I think that's a I think that's a very positive change. I'm in favor of that. I want to turn it back to council just very briefly if we can to get some perspective so that staff feels like they have direction for when they bring this back to us um on this the council liaison piece. Council member Wilburn. >> Yeah. So, I do know of um at least one city, Bloomington, that has had a council liaison on their boards and commissions and are removing them um for the reasons that we talked about that having a having a council member there just sort of changes the the atmosphere and and people defer to them and you know um and it sort of interferes with the ability of the boards and commissions to to do their work. Um so for that reason I I think I would prefer that we do not have uh council leaison on the boards and commissions. Um I agree with uh with the mayor that we trust them to do the work and you know hopefully come to us with with good suggestions and and good information. >> Thank you. Um Council Member Maxwell I see you nodding. If you want to just briefly weigh in. Yeah, I spent a lot of time on the planning commission over the last since 2020. Um, and I agree with your comments, uh, mayor, that having a council member in the room would change the tone. It would change the debate and the conversation that I think we would have at that, um, at that level as commissioners and that as a council, we pick good people and we trust them to do their work and we delegate that work. I think there'd also be an added complexity of would the for particularly for planning commission would the liaison if we were to put one in be a voting member or not and if not what's the value of having them there are if they're participating in the conversation we can give them that guidance in advance we don't need to have somebody in the room for that conversation and then as a council we can watch the recordings look at the minutes we rely on staff to uh boil down the main points from those uh meetings for us so we can make decisions based on uh the input from that commission. So I think that having a council liaison particularly for planning commission would not be uh an increased benefit. >> Thank you council member Foster Bolton. >> Yeah, I agree. I mean I rely a lot on the planning commission to give me information. So >> I'm I'm changing things up a little. I'm going right down the line. Council member Kley, do you have anything more that you want to add? Um, no, but um I'm hearing different perspectives and I can see um so yeah, council member Calvert. >> Thank you, Mayor. Yeah, I'm I'm agreeing with with what people are saying and um if you want me to hold off commenting on the value of the liaison to the EDAC, it's just because it's just a different creature than the others. And and I'll just I'll just say this much. Generally speaking, um when I was on the EDAC, which was for at least six years, um I am the least knowledgeable person generally in the room. And so the purpose of me being in that room was to have them sort of understand the tenor on the like why we might have voted one way or another or why we're asking certain questions or sort of what the tenor is on specific issues about you know affordable housing or this or that or the other. But, you know, at least historically, the EDAC members have been bankers, you know, finance people, development people that really understand. And so, I'm just providing the council context about like votes that happen. I'm not I I at least did not try to influence. I just tried to help them understand what was happening in the room when they weren't on the day. So, >> thank you, Council Member Calvert. Council member Malia, anything you'd like to add? >> Uh, no, just I can uh fair points made. Um I one thing is just that the same thing about the EDAC could be said for the sustainability. We have lots of um experts and and some of our other commissions too. And so, you know, I personally was not commenting as a way to have council participate or influence in any way what was going on, but kind of, you know, kind of that bridging and perspective and and so that was my thought in, you know, the terms of questioning would it be worth reconsidering it in the const of this update. So, um, not not a hill I'm going to die on. Um, so >> Mayor, can I still jump in? I've I pulled up the background on the EDAC if you want me to fill you in. >> Yes, please go for it. >> Um, so in 1988, the city council established the economic development authority and that in the commissioners commissioners included city council members and the and citizens. And then city council decided it was in the public interest to reconfigure the EDA to have only city council members serve as the commissioners. And then the city council recognized the benefit of having the public serve on a commission. So they created the EDAC. I think it was 2010. And then they decided to include a city council member as a um non- voting member and then also include an alternate. So I think they decided since there was city council members on it before that they in decided to still include that liaison. So that might be a little different than the other boards and commissions. >> Okay. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thanks everybody for weighing in. Mr. Funk, do we feel like staff has what we need to bring this back >> as I mayor and council? Yes, I believe so. What I'm hearing is at this point, at least for the current ordinances that we're discussing, that we would not insert language for a council leaison. >> I think I think that's correct. >> I think we have enough information for the rest of it. Maki, do you have any? >> Great. Okay. Thank you. Well, then what we're looking for is a motion to introduce the ordinances. Council member Calvert. Thank you, Mayor. I make the um I move uh to introduce the ordinances for the boards and commissions. And a second. Council member Foster Bolton. >> I'll second. I have a motion by council member Calvert, a second by council member Foster Bolton. Uh, Miss Kuzzman, please call roll. >> Wilurn, >> yes. >> Calbert, >> yes. >> Yes. >> Kle, >> yes. >> Foster Bolton, >> yes. >> Maxwell, >> yes. >> Shaq, >> yes. Motion carries, and we will see this back on September 12th. Thank you. All right. Item 12B, ordinance establishing the Economic Development Advisory Commission. Saraki. >> Thank you, Mayor and Council. Um, again, I will be going through the ordinance, and this one is establishing the ordinance for the Economic Divi de Development Advisory Commission since it did not have an ordinance before. Staff recommends a motion to introduce the ordinance and four votes are needed. Um, I just went over the background a little bit, but again, the EDAC was established through a resolution in 2010 and through the boards and commissions review. We would like to reestablish it as an ordinance to align with other boards and commissions who all have ordinances. And again, this is part of the overall boards and commissions review project. And it follow the same meeting structure of the first review, second review, and final review as the other boards and commissions did. and it follows the same format as the other ordinances. I won't read through the sections again, but they are laid out on the screen. And it also includes the general language that is seen across all boards and commissions. Um they will have seven voting members. Their appointments, terms, reappointments, and removal language was updated. They also have a um a section about them writing an annual report to city council and they wanted to include their verbiage about having the work plan related to the strategic plan priorities. So that is just one slight difference from the other boards and commissions. They will meet as necessary to accomplish its duties. They also will annually select a chairperson, vice chairperson. We updated the language on bylaws, ad hoc meeting, ad hoc committees and open meeting law and also the compensation and staff leaison. Um we did update their duties and responsibilities slightly. Um under redevelopment we removed specific language regarding redevelopment areas and kept it broader. Under development and finance, we've removed the line that states development account and livable communities account budgets. Under housing, we removed the sections community development block grant allocations. We removed the term modest price and also the section related to home buyer and home rehabilitation programs. And we also added in that section grant programs and emergency assistance. And then we also added a new section for business programs and outreach. And we did just have this discussion on the last agenda item, but this is unique language to EDAC that is not seen across other boards and commissions. The first line reads, "In addition, the city council will choose a city council member and an alternate city council member to be a non- voting member and act as a liaison between the city council and the commission." And secondly, all the other boards and commissions under eligibility, it reads, "All members must be residents of the city of Minnitanka." And the current resolution reads, "All members must reside, work, or own a business in the city of Minnitonka." Um, the next steps for this ordinance is to adopt the ordinance on September 14th, and there are no current openings on the EDAC, so we don't have to revisit openings um for this commission. Um staff recommends a motion to introduce the ordinance, and four votes are needed. All right. Thank you. Okay. Council questions about this. Oh, Council Member Calvert. Thank you, Mayor. Um, in the uh proposed resolution, there were a couple of highlighted um words and they were on the first page and I'm pulling them up right now in section um proposed ordinance in section 160.010 010 eligibility in terms says eligibility all members must reside work or own a business in the city of Minnotonka. So that's proposed language. I thought it was language that was getting taken out and um so I just want clarity on that because I I feel strongly about residency. So >> thank you council member Calvert. Yes, we highlighted those because we would like council's directions on those items. >> That was existing language, correct? Yeah. >> Correct. >> Okay. >> Other questions, council. Otherwise, we'll move on to comments, particularly, I think, on those two highlighted portions. All right. Council member Calbertt. Thank you, Mayor. Um, as regards uh the eligibility, I feel very strongly that um anyone that sits on a board of commission live in the city um because actually recently we had someone that that claimed to live in the city apply for a board um or commission and I just think it makes it very complicated. Um, so I I kind of want to see residency. And then as regards to um the council liaison and alternate in the case of the EDAC because of the nature of the work and the relationship that the council liaison has had to that commission they are I think they are less likely to be influenced or kill um intimidated um by city council members because they like I say, you know, they they just have a command of finance and development and so on and so forth, at least historically. And um I found it very valuable to provide the sort of contextual information for things that were happening here on the DEAS without trying to insert my own opinions about things because I would report on you know how different council members felt um because sometimes there'd be an array of opinion and so it just gives them some context in terms of why certain things might be coming up um to for consideration so forth. So I personally think in this one instance there is value in it and I don't think that it has the same sort of dampening effect that it would in other commissions. Unfortunately, it I mean I think council member Romey is right that we have some you know a lot of expertise and some of our other boards and commissions including especially the sustainability commission. But I still feel like our policym has more of a dampening effect on that than it would um on the sort of um economic issues there. >> Thank you, Council Member Calbert. Um any let's just get feedback staff particularly wanted on those two issues. So if we can kind of do what we did we'll start with you council member Romey and work our way down this time. >> Uh residency I agree. >> Okay. Um do you have a strong feeling I suppose on the I'm the liaison. >> On the liaison I'm fine with that since I am the leazison [laughter] right now. >> Uh so I'm fine with that. >> Touch. Okay. Council member Kley, >> I also agree that we should have um person should have residency. Um and then also the I'm fine with um the alternative. So, >> council member Foster Ball, >> the same answer that >> Okay. Council member Wilurn. >> Yeah, the same. >> Okay. >> Council member Maxwell, >> uh I I could see the argument for someone who works or owns a business. I'm not going to push for it. I could see, right? There are already strict requirements on what we want. We need somebody with a legal background, someone with a planning background, someone with a finance background, someone with real estate, right? And so maybe if we had trouble filling a specific role, pulling from residents, that could be where there would be a drive to then, well, let's find somebody else who has a vested interest in the city who has that specific background. And that would be where pulling from someone who works or owns in the city makes sense. I haven't heard that that is an issue. So that's why I wouldn't uh push for that at this point. I would leave it as residents. >> Thank you. Um I'll weigh in briefly. I you know I don't have a strong feeling on either one of these. I I was talking with Mr. Funk about it today and I can understand how somebody who particularly owns a business in the community may have a deep investment and be a really good resource for the EDAC. But we we really have not had a we've we've stuck to residents. I think we just in this process discovered that we could have brought in that. Um, and we haven't had a problem finding really qualified people. So, I feel comfortable with it being uh a resident. So, with that, I think I think staff has what they need. We we've lost our screens, but I think we know what we're looking for is a motion to introduce the ordinance. Oh, Council Member Romey, just a quick comment as I introduced, just thanks to the staff for starting the Minnotonka Business Council because we are able to draw in expertise and opinion from local business owners in a way that we haven't done before. So, that I think that's a great avenue for for bringing in, you know, those opinions and expertise. And with that, I'll make the motion to adopt the ordinance. >> Thank you. And a second. Council member Calbertt. >> I second. >> Right. I have a motion by council member Romey, a second by council member Calbertt. Miss Kuzman, please call roll. >> Wilburn, >> yes. >> Calbert, >> yes. >> Romey, >> yes. >> Kley, >> yes. >> Foster Bolton, >> yes. >> Maxwell, >> yes. >> Shaq, >> yes. Motion carries. Um, again, thank you, Miss Raki, for all of your hard work on this. Well done with your presentation. Um, I know we've been talking about getting this work done for a lot of the year, and I know it was pending even before that. So really appreciate this huge step forward. All right, what we're going to do is we are going to take a fivem minute break and hopefully we can get our screens back up before we move on. As I before we go to break, I'm going to make one more reminder because I've seen again a lot of people come in. If you intend to speak on item 14A, I'm I'm sure you're not here on the liquor licenses. If you're here to speak on 14A, please fill out a card in the lobby and put it in the box and staff will pull all the remaining cards from the box as we come back from break. Uh, come back at 7:20. Okay, thank you everybody for your patience. We will recommence the meeting. Um, we got our tech. What you couldn't see was that the council all of our screens that we have sitting in front of us that we see the staff's presentations on went black, but we got it resolved. So that that'll help us do our job for the rest of the meeting. All right. So we are on item 13 public hearings. We have two public hearings. 13A offsale intoxicating liquor license for XCO LLC doing business as Glenn Lake Wine and Spirits at 144 8 Excelsure Boulevard. And Miss Thomas, you're going to take this one. >> Yes. Thank you, uh, Mayor Shaq and and council members. You did open a public hearing on this license request in July, uh, July 27th specifically. And you may recall that the license is actually required because the current owners of, uh, Glen Lake Wine and Spirits are retiring and selling the store to this evening's applicants. This evening's applicants currently own and operate a store in Jordan, Minnesota. And although the ownership is changing, uh there will be no changes to the current uh stores operations hours or staffing. The required police background checks have been completed and no issues were noted. So staff does recommend the council continue the public hearing from July and then grant the license. And I believe five affirmative votes are required. >> Thank you, Miss Thomas. council any uh well first of all we have a a public hearing open and I know that we have the applicants on the line our screen that shows our online participants is down I will say they were here at the last meeting they spoke they were lovely I don't think we need them to speak tonight and I understand that they're only here if we have questions other than that if there's anybody here who would like to speak on this item I'll ask one final time anybody not seeing anybody I'll close the public hearing. Council, any questions or comments on this item? All right. Then we are looking for a motion to grant the license. Council member Wilburn. >> Uh I move that we grant the license to [laughter] Glen Lake Wine and Spirits at 14448 Celsius Boulevard. >> Thank you. Council member Foster Bolton. I second. >> I have a motion by council member Wilburn, a second by council member Foster Bolton. Miss Kuzzman, please call roll. >> Wilurn, >> yes. >> Calbert, >> yes. >> Raley, >> yes. >> Kley, >> yes. >> Foster Bolton, >> yes. >> Maxwell, >> yes. >> Shaq, >> yes. Motion carries. Congratulations and welcome to Minnetonka. All right. Item 13B, on sale wine and 3.2 to Mount Beverage and 2 am liquor license to Shake Shack Minnesota LLC at 1809 Plymouth Road suite number one. Miss Thomas, thank you again, Mayor. Uh, Shake Shack will actually be lo uh opening for food service in the redeveloped Wells Fargo site here in the next few weeks. It will be the fifth Shake Shack location in Minnesota. Uh though there are over 400 locations nationwide, the restaurant does anticipate being open until 11:00 p.m. during the week and midnight on the weekends. The 2 a.m. license would simply give them the flexibility to stay open later in the future if um they decided to do so. Uh the information we have from Shake Shack indicates that they'll employ up to 50 staff at this location. All will be trained in our alcohol safety awareness. that will also be using ID scanners uh on site to prevent underage sales. The police background check is pending and will be available at the council's second hearing uh on this request. So this evening, staff is recommending that the council open the public hearing and then continue it to your October 5th meeting for your final consideration. >> Thank you, Miss Thomas. Any questions on this council? Okay. Not seeing any. I'm going to open the public hearing. And I'm not sure the applicant is the applicant here. Did Did you have anything you want to share? Okay. >> All right. Well, great. We're happy to have you. Um my husband got a little ahead of himself. He was like, "It's open." But I said, "I don't think so." Um okay. So, we will our action tonight is to continue the public hearing until October 5th for final consideration. So, I would take that motion. Council member Kelbert, can you get it off the top of your head here? Thank you, Mayor. I'd like to make I'd like to make the motion to continue the public hearing until October 5th for final consideration for Shake Shack Minnesota LLC at 1809 Plymouth Road Sweet One. >> Thank you. And a second, Council Member Maxwell. >> I'll second the motion. >> Thank you. I have a motion by Council Member Calbert, a second by Council Member Maxwell. Miss Kuzzman, please call roll. >> Wilburn, >> yes. Calbert, >> yes. >> Rome, >> yes. Kley, >> yes. >> Foster Bolton, >> yes. >> Maxwell, >> yes. >> Shaq, >> yes. Motion carries. Thank you. And we'll see you in October. All right. On to item 14, which is other business. And we have one item 14A, Purgatory Park off leash dog area. I'm just going to before we get started with Mr. Kuma, I'm just briefly going to indicate we will, as you know, be taking public comment on this. It's just really important. You know, I this is the first meeting on the dog issue that I've run, but I've observed many and participated in them and they've some have gone well and some have not gone so well. And we're going to this one's going to go well. Everybody's just going to comment when it's their time to comment, but we're not going to have any cheers or jeers from the audience just because we're trying to keep decorum. people have p feel passionately about this issue and it's just really important if people are brave enough to come up and speak to us that they be given the opportunity to do so without um feedback from the c from the crowd. So with that uh and we'll get to the public comments in a little while. First we'll turn it over to Mr. Kama um for the staff report. >> Thank you mayor. Thank you councel. The staff recommendation tonight is uh is to have a motion to approve the designated off leash dog areas in the north, formerly known as area 5, and the south, formerly known as area 2, of Purgatory Park, and a motion amending the 2026 and 2023 CIP to reallocate available funding from projects S13209 and S23309 for the installation of type 2A wood post fencing per the off leash dog area feasibility study. The relatability to the strategic plan is sustainability, resilience in the natural environment. Specifically, desired outcome 5.3 to enhance safety, walkability, and connectivity to the larger trail system in the city. The financial considerations um proposed improvements to Purgatory Park would be funded through existing park operations and maintenance funds and primarily through previous CIP park and trail improvement funds to be reallocated. Um those would include previous projects related to the red barn site that's that 2013 project referenced and the park habitat stewardship fund um for Purgatory Park from 2023. So the the legacy of the background. So way back in November um 18th 2024 council adopted revised off leash dog ordinances. In April 2025, the staff presented the Minnitanka off leash dog strategy and guidance plans to the park board. May of that year, council directed staff to examine areas two and three in the south end of Purgatory Park and to consider soft and hard barriers, natural area protections, uh considerations of the existing topography, and traffic impacts. August 2025, council directed staff to implement areas two and three, plus an unleashed corridor between the two areas in the main parking lot to evaluate the effectiveness and enforcability of this plan. And then back on July 15th, 2026, staff presented off leash area evaluation and council directed the study of fencing options and the implementations of area five in the north northwest and area two uh south southwest. So the previous signage that was implemented in the park can be seen on the right here. The the key guidance was no overlap with a highquality habitat as described in the natural resources master plan. no overlap of these off leash areas with wetlands. And we did have this evaluation period, as I mentioned, through the winter of 2025 through June 2026. And it included 18.8 acres, areas two and three, and 0.55 acres of the corridor running down the center of the park. For the fencing analysis, we looked at the north area, which is four acres in total, heavily wooded, brush filled, a lot of buckthornne in that area. It is relatively near to the main parking area off of Excelsier Boulevard and the southsouthwest, formerly area 2, is nine total acres. It's a mix of woodland and former home sites. There's a lot of topography down in that area and it is about a half mile walk from the northern parking area by by um Excelsier Boulevard. For area five, the north area, as I mentioned, four acres in total. It's about a 100 yards west of the parking lot. Um to fence this in entirely would be 2,000 linear feet of fencing and it would require significant removals of lowquality habitat. There's a lot of buckthorn, a lot of Siberian elms in that area. not only for the implementation of the fencing corridor to actually get the fence in, but to open it up substantially so there could be sort of a a meadow type vibe in there for for dogs to run around and folks to throw their balls for their dogs in in that area. So, there would be some removals necessary on the interior of that fenced area. An area south uh the south area 2, it's nine total acres. There would be two primary entrances. one walk-in from the west neighborhood. No parking on the street there and a about a half mile from the parking the only official parking area in the park up off of Excelsier Boulevard. To fence this area in, we would require approximately 3,000 linear feet. There are some substantial topographic changes through this area, so it would take some um finessing to get it through that area, but is is quite possible. So through this study, we worked with Bolton and M to um communicate with a variety of local fencing contractors. They developed um five different types of fencing. Type one would be an earth driven steel Tpost with a plastic mesh. That's the least expensive but sort of least durable of the options. Type 1B would be earth driven steel Tpost and a welded wire mesh. That's a heavyduty wire gauge fencing that I've shown in previous presentations. Type 2A would be wood post with this wire welded wire mesh. Um somewhat sturdy, somewhat durable, relatively light in terms of its impact while while installing. Um type 2B would be a version of that with composite, a recycled plastic um post installed with that welded wire mesh. And the most expensive option would be a blackcoated chain link. So, we've included in the report um a variety of costs for these different types. Um as mentioned, staff is recommending type 2A. This is the wood post with the welded wire mesh. Um the the summary cost from the variety of of contractors that we were in touch with was about 25 a linear foot. The expected lifespan for 2A would be 15 to 30 years depending on tree branches falling on it and soil conditions. The total fencing cost would be about $50,000 to then this is just for the north area. Sorry, need to clarify. Just for the north area would be $50,000 to um prepare the site in terms of brush and tree removal to get the fence in. And then to open up the interior of that area would be approximately $32,000. And then we would need some additional amenities um to get it up and running. some new signage would be necessary, trash cans, which we have on site at our public works. So, for type 2A, as recommended by staff, that the grand total would be um almost $84,000. For the south area, um this would require 3,000 linear feet. Um there are um again approximately $25 per linear foot of the of the type 2A. Um the fencing cost here would be $75,000. There is some more sight prep and seeding required. We would select a seed mix appropriately for the for the ecology in that area and then frankly a tough seed mix that would be able to infill but still allow us to visually um inspect the fence along that corridor. So we would choose wisely of a seed mix. So the grand total of the south area would be about $131,000 to fence that in with type 2A. So again, total expenses, um, we do have about $90,000 in total of tree and brush removal. The fencing type, if you were to select type 2A, would be at about $125,000. We would need several thousand for signage and additional amenities. Um, the total proposed funding is 22 $218,000 and we have available budget from those two two CIP items that I mentioned at about $237,000. we would have to update signage in the area. We did implement signage last fall. This signage would be um updated park rules related to the off leash areas. We would continue to have the concern form with the QR code available for folks. We would have um we learned some lessons from the signage in the past. So updating legibility in terms of wayfinding in the park system and some additional graffiti proofing that would be necessary. Um and this off this off leash area and trail mapping would be in the main parking areas very clear and and obvious for folks and then at u major trail intersections and at um walking entrances into the park surrounding the park. The implementation timeline um as proposed would be the existing signage and off leash areas to remain until the full fence installation is complete. Fall 2026, we would contract with the fence installers. We'd find a low bid on the on the type of fence as as directed. Fall winter 2026, we would define the infield final fencing layout. We would look to avoid significant trees. We wouldn't want to um disrupt large legacy oak trees. We would look to remove only invasive species where possible. We' we'd also look to remove as little trees and brush as necessary. So there would be some wiggle room depending on that fence type to sort of work our way um through the open spaces and do our best to avoid um legacy and important trees and just keeping the overall cost down. Um we would then design and fabricate the final park signage and wayfinding during the winter. In the winter we would accommodate all those brush and tree removals. Ideally this would be on frozen soil. We were able to protect the soils in the winter when they're frozen. um and be able to perform those tree and brush removals. In the spring, the the soil would need to thaw if you if we were to install any post, frankly. Um so we would need to wait for the ground to thaw in the spring 2027 to install the fencing, the entry features, and the final signage. And then once the fences were all in place, the signage was up, we would eval evaluate enforcement and adjust as needed and assess for vandalism and fencing inspections and maintenance. We come standard public works maintenance. additional assessment and considerations. So, um we know there's concerns about vehicle traffic in the area. We would very closely monitor vehicle traffic at all the park entrances, both formal and informal. Um we could establish as necessary no parking zones and enforce those as necessary depending on parking conditions. Um a couple additional notes. Um, these park amenities are not intended to be a regional draw despite their decades of use. Um, Three Rivers Park District performs this role in the West Metro with their very popular off leash dog areas um in relatively close drive to the city of Minnetonka. We would we could um we could do no additional promotion of these areas and just make it as a sort of a community amenity without additional broadcasting that these would be open. Um and we would continue assessment of the effectiveness and the park use and other impacts would be monitored closely both in terms of the impacts to the ecology, the use of these spaces, traffic impacts. um just overall keeping a close eye on how it would be working. So overall enforcement working with our public safety and police um we do know that some dog owners may actively resist or ignore these new rules. Um we would work very closely to educate the public we and have a visible presence um for building voluntary compliance with these new fenced areas. Overall, the enforcement strategy would be continued outreach with education, signage, flyers, maps, and impark engagement from the public safety folks. Information could be disseminated um regarding enforcement citywide with these new ordinances. As necessary, the the police could deploy extra patrols and specifically um patrols on ebikes. And then there would be long-term enforcement um would transition to a complaintbased response model for sustained and targeted enforcement in terms of our our police um time and effort in the field. So, the staff recommendation is the motion to approve the designated off leash dog areas north area 5 and south area 2 of Purgatory Park and a motion amending the 2026 through 2031 CIP to reallocate available funding from projects S13209 and S23309 for the installation of a type 2A wood post fencing per the off leash dog area feasibility study. And with that, I thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Kuma. All right, council. Let's um limit our engagement to questions. Any questions for Mr. Kum Kuma or staff? Uh, Council Member Maxwell. >> Yeah, I have u one. Could you talk about the the recommendation from staff to use 2A fencing compared to the 1B? Is it purely aesthetics or are there other longevity reasons? Uh since 2A is more expensive, >> it's a longevity reason. Thank you, council. Thank you, Council Member Maxwell. Um the steel driven posts are less intense to install. They can be driven with a post hole driver and there's less potential damage to roots depending on placement. It's just the the the report um looked at those posts having about a half of a lifespan. So up to 15 years depending on tree branches whereas wood posts in in substantial footings would just have a longer lifespan and require less replacement over the over the time period. So really I was looking at our public staff and parks maintenance folks and their general availability of potential replacement in terms of the recommendation with the 2A being just having a longer lifespan. >> Thank you. >> Council member Foster Bolton. you know, um, you talked about the background and I don't know if you know the answer to this, but this has been a problem for or an issue for can we can we talk about like how long approximately because it's been before 2024. >> Mr. Ka, >> um, thank you, Mayor Shack. Um, Council Member Foster Bolton, in my time at the city, which is five years, we've talked about dogs generally the whole period of my career at the city, but I understand that there's been proposals for off leash areas in other parks going back 20 years or so now. Um, that it's been in the the conversation in the city for quite quite some time at this point. >> Thank you, Council Member Calvert. Thank you, Mayor. Um, so, uh, Council Member Maxwell's question did get me thinking about it and so I have two more questions about fencing. One has to do with, you know, we do have we have adopted some control burns and I would say that um wood fencing is not amendable to fire and so um can you talk about that and I I'll just go ahead and ask my other question because I had brought it up and perhaps it was just cost prohibitive but my thought on fencing was metal posts with eyebolts or maybe maybe wooden posts with eyebolts that you could string wire across as needed depending on the condition of uh foliage and natural barriers at different seasons and so on and and just you know depending on needs depending on behavior modification desires and so on and so forth. So could you talk a little bit about why not something with eyebolts that that's a little more flexible and why would if we're kind of becoming friendly to control burns which really are good for the environment. >> Yes. uh council. Um I am all about the fire in our woodlands and um I would expect that these fence corridors would need to be um cleared of vegetation more regularly than we would with a fire or prescribed burn through this area. So we would have to perform some manual mowing through these areas. We do weed whip style um removals of brush at times. Um, so we would certainly need to be regularly inspecting these far more often than we would be burning, but it would potentially if these were areas where the restoration was at a point where we would be doing prescribed burns, it would add some cost to the to the um preparation in in of the of the burn to make sure that the fences weren't impacted. We are often doing that with our benches and our trails and our trash cans and our property lines. we mow burn brakes as part of the prescribed burn process. So there it would potentially add some prep and limit our ability to perform prescribed burns as a restoration maintenance technique in the future. And in terms of using eyebolts or strings, um, these products shown were sort of the most available common fence products that really formed a barrier that a dog couldn't slip through and wouldn't necessarily require seasonal adjustments at times. You know, once these go in, um, they're sort of in ideally for 10, 15, 30 years plus. and um they're not needing to be assessed in terms of are we moving them or pulling those ropes in and out and they really do form sort of a impermeable barrier for the dogs was the logic. >> Thank you Mr. Ka. Uh other questions council council member Romey. >> Yes thank you mayor. Um I did have a couple of questions that I brought up with Mr. Funk regarding kind of the same thing, the earth driven steel Tpost and the wire welded wire mesh versus the wood posts. Um, so we consulted with an engineer firm. Did we consult with a landscape architect on this? >> Yes. Uh, council um council member Rome uh we did our key contact with Bolton and Mink was a former colleague of mine Eric Hol who's been helping their team. He's a landscape architect by training and he called around quite a bit from a variety of of fencing contractors to get these quotes and walked in the field and sort of got a sense of the layout. Um I'm a big advocate for landscape architecture whenever we can get it in our projects. So yes, these were these were considered by a landscape architect >> from an aesthetic point or just from an engineering point. >> We do have aesthetics. There's a a larger um um grid of evaluation criteria for the fences and aesthetics are considered in the overall report. Um sort of the the wood material blending in the the sort of invisibility of the wire welded mesh at a distance um were sort of factors but those are qualitative to some degree. Certainly. >> All right. Thank you. All right. Council, any other questions? Okay. Well, we're going to open it up for public comment. I have 12 cards. Um, we've got a clock that we're going to set for three minutes. I'd ask you to do your best to keep it to two minutes if you can. Um, I'm going to call names and I'm going to have the people on deck ready to go. So, we're just going to keep them rolling. So, if you're not up here when it's your turn, then we'll move on to the next one and you will have missed your opportunity. So, we're going to start with Paul Kenyon. We uh the second person we've got is Kimberly Gubby Hill and the third person is Nancy Helguson. So, I'd encourage the second two people to come up here and sit in the chair right there so that you're ready to go. Uh Mr. Kenyon, come on up and tell us what you'd like us to know. >> I was hoping by putting my card in last I wouldn't be first, but here we are. Um hello everybody. I'm Paul Kenyon. I live at 5849 Bell Circle. I've been a resident of Minnotonka for about a year. My wife and I bought that home last April. And we didn't really We were shopping in the Twin City areas, relocating. We didn't really pick Minnetonka. We picked the Bell Circle neighborhood in Purgatory Park and we got Minnetonka, which we've been very happy with. Um I live adjacent to the the informal entry pathway. I could give you a speech about not in my backyard, which would be very sincere, but I want to speak to the current use of the area that is the South Dog Park. Um, I became aware from the seller of our home that on Monday and Tuesday mornings, young parents, moms with toddlers to preschoolers arrive in their SUVs and minivans and park and head up the path adjacent to our property. and I don't follow them individually, but generally they gather at the hilltop that will be now inside this dog park. So, I'd really ask the council to consider the current usages of the park, not just the ebikes, uh, which frankly ebikes are sometimes more of a challenge to my wife and I walking than dogs. We've been in the park, I would estimate, 25 times in the last year. We've bicycled, we've biked, we've snowshoed, snowshoeed pathways that will now be blocked by this fence. Um, but really there's a lot of existing usage of this park that's going to be displaced. I understand dogs have been on the agenda for 20 years. I recognize the council needs to do something, but I really question what we're giving up for this solution. And I'll yield the rest of my time. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Kenyon. Uh, Kimberly Gubby Hill, come on up. Okay. All right. So, we have Nancy Helguson, Karen McGawan, and Craig Aliotti we have on the uh on deck. All right. Miss Helguson is >> Thank you. Um, I also live on Bell Circle, neighbor of Paul, and we've been here for um 34 years. And um my concern is or one of my concerns is that bell circle entry that's sort of an informal since that property was acquired used to be a residence back there. Um and that we do see there there really is no parking available on the side roads um with that west entrance from Bell Circle. And we do see people just for walking the park, whether it's the the moms and the strollers that can block the roads and we've got a private road right off of that entrance um that serves seven houses and we're only 14t wide. You can't park on our road and but you also can't block firet truck access or ambulance access or anything. So, I'm concerned that um [clears throat] if I I I'm not sure if I see if people have to park at the main entrance by Excelsure and walk their dogs on leashes down to area two. Um I don't see them doing that as much as wanting to try to park at our Bell Circle area where there really isn't any place to do it. So, that was the the main point. And then the other part was um I haven't heard what the hours of operation may be for this area. Will there be lighting required? Uh noise ordinances like for the neighboring neighborhoods, that sort of thing. And then fence height. I don't know what the fence height is. And um a lot of deer go through there. They're going to be displaced. Well, there's coyotes back there. Can they hop in over the fence? Will the deer hop over the fence? Just that whole wildlife disruption. >> Great. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> All right. I have Karen McGawan followed by Craig Alcotti and Karen Hansen. Miss McGawan, come on up. Good evening. My name is Karen McGawan. I live on Old Excelsier Boulevard about two to three blocks away from Purgatory Park. Um, I've been a property owner there for over 30 years. Uh, and I walk my dog almost daily there, at least for the last 15 years. Um, I've never seen any al altercations in the park. Uh, the dogs are all well behaved, as well as the owners. Um, I can tell you though that this park was barely used when we moved in 30 years ago. We used to walk around the perimeter and we would make bets on how many other people we would see and generally it was never over 10 people. So the dogs have brought in their owners and and use of the park. Um, uh, from what I understand, the complaints about the dog, uh, the dogs in the park comes from primarily three people out of, uh, the complaints that you've heard. Um, I come here tonight because you don't get to hear the positive parts of the park. Um, so my my position is that I really think you're uh putting up a fence is unnecessary for the park. Uh, it's an unnecessary expense. I see that the park is being used well as it is and that it should continue as it is. Thank you. >> Thank you, Miss McGawan. All right, I have uh Craig Aliotti, Karen Hansen, and after that is Corey Stones. Stunis, >> hello. Thank you for letting me speak. Um I could echo a lot of what she said. We've been going into the park for five years, I guess, since we've had our dog, and we've never had problems. We've never seen problems. I think uh you know, has there been an environmental study? because you know she brought up a concern for the animals and I think that's a big thing too. You know fox, deer, coyotes, how are they going to be treated? The families can't cut through. They got to go walking around. I think you're using a sledgehammer to attack a problem that doesn't even really exist, you know. Um problem people are with problem dogs are going to still be a problem. you know, you it's just like you can't say, "Okay, no more ebikes in Minnetonka because there's a few people that that misbehave on ebikes." You know, I think that ordinances that exist already if they're applied a little bit stronger could actually, you know, kind of discourage the very few problems we have with dogs and protect people and, you know, more uh focus on education, better signage. Honestly, this signage that was up was really confusing and and people couldn't understand it. There wasn't a just you're entering this zone, you're leaving this zone. It was maps with very small um you know, printing. I think you could make a bigger and better impact with better signage and better education. I also think it's a little bit foolish to think that um you're going to keep this from getting on social media as soon as this becomes um an official dog park. I think um you know you're going to have a lot of people making money on social media by by advertising this stuff and you're getting a lot of people from outside of the area coming to that and I don't think anybody wants that. I don't think it's going to be good for anybody. Uh, and finally, I guess I would encourage you to have, you know, research and produce more real off leash areas because a dog park is a little walk with other dogs. But the beautiful thing about purgatory now is you can take a twomile loop and actually I can walk, I can breathe, I can see the trees, and I can refresh too while the dog is there. But you can't really do that when you're on a leash and they're pulling them all around and you certainly can't do that in a fenced in dog park. So I would ask you to reconsider. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Alcotti. I have uh Karen Hansen, Corey Sunnis, and Stephen Connors. Hello, Miss Hansen. >> Hello there. Um my name is Karen Hansen. I live at 17001 Sedola Road. um have lived in the community for 30 years. Um I am a resident of Stadola and as we've discussed and as Craig had just said, people are going to Google and they'll say off leash dog park in Minnetonka and the the the part in the back is off our road and we are going to have a boatload of people parking on our street. We already have a problem. This is a safety issue. This is a quiet culde-sac and this can have have a lot of problems. We have a lot of young children, a lot of ebikes. Um, so I'd ask that you'd reconsider fencing in area too. Um, and also I question the costs because there's going to be a lot of maintenance that's going to go along with not only setting up this these two dog parks, but also maintaining them. And I also question why three people who made 81% of the complaints had such an influence on decision-making. That's not very rep very representative. And again, what Craig said, the your experiment or evaluation period with the different signs on and off leash, it was so confusing. You could it was bound to fail. So, I don't think it's fair to make a decision when it wasn't even implemented very fairly. So, I'd ask that you would reconsider things. Thank you. >> Thank you. Um Corey Stunis, Steve Connors, and um Jim Hamill. >> Thank you. Students. >> Students. Gotcha. Uh we live on Spring Lane and there's a walk-in entrance there and frankly the streets there are just not they're barely adequate for the traffic that we see locally. Uh a concern is that there will be as other voices have come out with social media or just word of mouth and just the extra traffic in the area and I just don't feel like we can support it. My wife and I walk the park daily. Um we've yet to have any bad experience with or without dogs. Um, I would just ask that you reconsider the fencing option. Uh, I think there are better options to be explored. The off leash area could be expanded to area five where it isn't currently and simply not fenced in. Um, I think the idea of possibly, you know, creating a zone if you're on the loop, for instance, and anything inside that loop could simply be a leashed area. So, if you're in that area with your family or your bicycle or your kids, you could expect to run across a leashed animals. anything out that outside of that area, for instance, five and two could be expanded to be completely off leash without the fencing. So, I would just ask you to consider no fencing. Thank you. >> All right, Mr. Connors. And then we have Jim Hamill and Cindy. >> Good evening. Thank you for letting me speak. Steve Connors. I live at 5400 Spring Lane right next to Corey. Uh, I don't know if any of you live in the area or have any experience walking in this park or know anything about it. I myself have a now 13-year-old German shorthair pointer. If you know anything about those, they're energetic. I have had hours and hours of experience in this park. Sometimes hours on a daily basis. I have yet to have a bad interaction in this park. And I think by having an off leash dog park, you're inviting problems. I have never heard anything good about an off leash fenced dog park. And like I said, I personally have had zero problems. That wildlife from where you're going to fence in walks across my yard right now. I've got turkeys. I've got deer. Most people around there are respectful. There's no I've yet to have a problem in that park at all. And one other thing about the fencing is I don't know engineers and landscape people what background they have with anything other than urban environments. But I can tell you as somebody that maintains farmland, which is more like what you're going to be doing. You're going in woodlands, you're going to deforest, you're going to cause erosion issues. It's just going to happen. Anytime you change, you know, geography of the area, you're going to have issues. And that is going to be a maintenance nightmare. And from a safety standpoint, I live at the corner and I've personally called the police on multiple occasions. People can't understand a yellow sign with an arrow on it that's literally this big that tells you that's not a road that goes down into that park. And I live right on the corner and I overlook this and I have called non-emergency police numbers so many times. People are not going to follow the rules. They're not going to look at the signs. They're not And I mean to me when you start talking about graffiti already, you know, there's going to be problems. It's not a mystery. And when you start inviting because there's like somebody else had brought up social media and networking that gets out all of a sudden if somebody sees oh I got a 5 acre 9 acre dog park where I can go off leash people are going to come in there and like Cory said our streets are too narrow now school buses traffic I mean right now people park there very infrequently but you know it's still blocks I've seen school buses have to you know back around to make the corner. turns when people park there. So, yeah, I would highly, highly, highly ask you to rethink this because I do not think it's something that's necessary. And if nothing else, go with the old adage, if it's not broke, don't fix it. Thank you. >> Thank you. All right. I have Mr. uh Jim Hamill, Cindy Iden, and Angela Morari. >> Council members, thank you. uh respectfully suggest urge you to move ahead with this plan the staff has presented to you. We have been uh arguing, debating, hoping and worrying about this issue for far far too long. This issue needs to be resolved. You now have a circumstance where your neighboring cities, all your neighboring cities have fenced dog parks and many of the residents of those areas are bypassing their own fenced dog parks to come with their dogs to purgatory to run them as an unleashed whole park. That's a circumstance that can't continue. You are crowding out other users of the park. As the uh circumstance of of charging for fenced parks in other communities becomes better known, you will have more volume of neighboring communities, people in neighboring communities bringing their dogs to purgatory. That is hardly fair to the other users of the park. Please continue with this plan that your staff has invested in to be fair to all users for the park. Please move ahead. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Hamill. Uh Cindy Iden and then Angela Moraria. >> Good evening, Cindy Iden, 16824 Excels Excelsier Boulevard. Um I would really implore you to make a decision tonight. I am not completely fond of this plan and yet it is a plan. We have been going over this for so many years and I think actually the process has developed uh more angst and more division and and polarization within the community than not. And honestly I'd like to see a decision made. I would like you to go ahead with this plan. There have been there's been lots of feedback. There has been lots of research. There's been more you might say there's only three people, but perhaps that's only three people that have reported it. I know I myself have had problems in the park. I haven't reported it. Um so please, I think you've come up with some solutions. I think um I think that it is certainly a uh a compromise on a number of issues and I implore you to go forward. >> Thank you, Miss Morer. Hi, thank you so much for the opportunity to express my support for this motion to approve the designated off leash areas as proposed by staff in areas two and areas five in Purgatory Park. It's time to move forward with this plan as it represents a reasonable compromise for all park users. Unfortunately, the pilot project showcased a number of issues with the current system, including significant non-compliance, vandalism of signs and posted rules, and disregard for other park users. This plan offers clearly defined areas with borders without ambiguity, and allows all park users to feel confident in knowing where off leash dogs will be located. Locating the off leash dog parks in the peripheral areas of the park is a smart design choice as it helps to prevent bottlenecks as users move in different directions from the main parking lot. As opposed to any other location, area five and two will keep scenic views of the park intact from the primary trail and allow all park users access to the central areas of the park. Please move forward with this plan as suggested by staff and avoid any changes which will delay implementation. This community needs to move ahead and this compromise will once again welcome all park users to Purgatory Park. Thank you. >> Thank you. All right, that's what I have for cards. And Mr. Kuma, I'm just going to I've collated a few questions that came up. So I'm going to list them off and then we can go through. So, um, if you could just speak a little bit about bell circle entrance and access if with or without dogs. Um, clarity regarding hours, noise and lights. Um, I guess those are those are the primary questions that I heard. Bell circle being kind of one of the issu bigger issues that came up. mic. Thank you, mayor. Thank you, council. Um, bell circles on the southwest corner of the park. There is, as described, a former driveway, really beautiful driveway that curves up into the park to a former homestead site. Um, it is a tight street there. I've only parked there temporarily to walk into the park on that side. Um, so we would need to look real carefully on traffic impacts if we were to implement this fenced area to make sure that we're not clogging that area um up with additional parking. Um, as a reminder um we did have a ordinance to approve a no parking zone at the end of Stadola in I believe last year. Um, so we could look at that as a potential option if we were to run into problems either on Bell Circle or Scenic Lane on the northeast side or northwest side of the park. Um, so studying those traffic impacts would be a way to really, you know, understand um, you know, what those folks in that area are seeing and whether or not these these off leash areas are um, increasing in popularity and would impact those residents in that area. We that's something we certainly want to avoid. Um, and in regards to lights, no lights. It's my understanding and my recommendation that the these off leash areas would be beholden to the other park regulations. They would, you know, open and close at at dawn and dusk as the other park rules are in place. Um, noise ordinance would be in place um in with these conditions. Um, there have been dogs in these areas over the last 20 years or so. Um, so those we wouldn't adjust our park rules for these specific areas. >> And one more question I I think I heard regarding Bell Circle and I I don't I'm not totally familiar where with where it is on the map, but does it have an entrance where neighbors could access? And and the other thing is if somebody wanted to be in the area without a dog, could they be? >> Yes. Yes. So, I don't know if you I believe you can see my cursor on here. That yellow dot >> trying to circle it. Southwest corner. That's the the former driveway from Bell Circle into the park. Um >> uh what was your other question? >> And does would that be an entrance that the neighbors could use? >> Yes, it would it would remain a a pedestrian entrance. We do have it highlighted as a maintenance entrance because we do need to keep some of these um larger entrances into the park. The one referenced in this northwest corner scenic lane is somewhat of a drive down into the park. Our park maintenance vehicles ride that trail. They pick up the trash. Our our snow removal vehicles come in those entrances. So, it would be maintained as a park um vehicle maintenance entrance, but it would be a pedestrian entry solely for the residents. >> So, somebody could come in that entrance, walk the trail without a dog, and get to other areas in the park by using a one of the different entrances. >> Correct. So, I've obviously thought about this issue a lot over the past few years. I see these areas more as areas in the park where a dog can be off leash rather than off leash areas. I live nearby. I live right north of Scenic Heights Elementary. We bought this house because of access to the park. I would imagine if we fence in some of these areas that I wouldn't see much of a change in use. I would, you know, still walk those areas with my dog or without. Um especially area two in the south is quite open and large vistas in that area. And um I couldn't imagine it changing all that much in the long run to be frank with you. Um, and I would still continue to see people walk through those areas if it was just, you know, considered as a part of the park where dogs were allowed to be off leash and not strictly an off leash area. >> Thank you. Okay, council. Thank you very much, Mr. Kuma. I think we addressed the questions that I heard from the audience. Um, council, any more questions for staff? Otherwise, we'll get on to comments. Uh, yeah, Council Member Romey, >> thank you. A couple questions, you know, kind of following up on some resident questions. Um, so we did a study last year about um the number of people coming into the park from outside of Minnetonka already. Could you just I can't remember what those numbers are. Could you remind us what they were? I would have to look back to get those numbers specifically, but I do remember there was a significant amount of people outside of the city of Minnotonka who came to this. If you look at Google reviews of this area, people acknowledge, oh, this is a beautiful off leash park. So, there is some misinformation there which I think brought people into the area. >> Yeah. Um I think I I mean couldn't pinpoint. I just was hoping to be accurate. I remember it was 40 to 50% of uh people coming to purgatory were coming from outside of Minnotonka already. Okay. So, I'm I'm in the area there. Thank you. >> Um and then just one other quick question. Um, to your knowledge, are there any other and and following up on on one of the audience uh resident questions, are there any other unfenced off leash dog areas, municipal, regional, state, or federal in Minnesota? >> The only one I would think is out way out in Woodbury if I remember correctly and it's partially fenced. I would have to look back on our on our numbers on that. And is that a singleuse park or a community park like Purgatory? >> It's a singleuse park. >> Okay. >> I believe. >> All right. Thank you. >> Okay. Council, any other questions? Otherwise, I'm going to turn it over to comments. All right. Um, not everybody raised your hand at once, but I'm prepared to take comments. Council member Calbertt. So, I really didn't want to go first because I I suspect I'm an outlier. And so, I am just going to plunge ahead. And I'm going to start by thanking everyone that came tonight, everyone that has participated in the process over the last several years, especially staff who has worked incredibly hard to sort of meet the priorities of the community and the pseudo direction of council as we tried to figure this very difficult problem out. um and the people that have done all kinds of you know good work in the park. Um, and I will just say that um, it took decades to form the habits and culture surrounding this park. And I personally, um, think it takes time to change habits and culture. And uh I we expressed it in at the June meeting some of us that I was kind of disappointed in some of the behavior from sort of all sides of the um issue. Um, and that's actually how we got here because, you know, people had an opportunity during a trial period to rise the to the occasion and abused um, community service officers, vandalized signs, you know, didn't follow the rules. And even though there was a small group of people that was sort of surveilling and making complaints, which is not great, um I would say that there were also cameras that caught the same behavior. So it was corroborated on camera that people were not following the the rules. I however have walked the park many times. I took the occasion to do it again this weekend. Um, every single dog and owner that I saw in the park was following the rules and was leashed where they were supposed to be and was off leash where they were allowed to be. And um, I will say that in my mind there are no great solutions. And I suspect that no matter what we do, they're going to be a lot of really unhappy people. And um, so I'm just going to say how I feel about the issues in front of us and kind of what I would like to see. Um, in spite I I really understood what Mr. Kama was saying about the difficulty in orienting people, orienting the signs to orient the spaces for people. I will say that one of the things that didn't happen on many of the map signs was a you are here indication. And so it was very hard for me walking the park to orient myself to the spaces that you were allowed to be off leash or where you had to leash because I wasn't quite sure where I was in relation to the map. And as you walk down the trail and you you know you're here you have a you are here at one trail intersection and the next then you start orienting yourself to the space and I think that would have been incredibly helpful. I think that there are ways of having directional signs to orient north and south depending on how the the um signs are placed. So that would be a little harder, but just the you are here signs would be um really helpful including at the the main entrance to the park which still does not have a you don't even know where you are when you start walking into the park from the main parking lot. So, it's something that I mentioned before. I don't think it happened. Um, I personally I've expressed this before. I understand why people want fencing. Um, and I and I am just sort of philosophically opposed to fencing this park because it just dnaturalizes. it sort of takes away the whole feeling of of what this park is. And um and that's why I was kind of looking for a more flexible f fencing, you know, eyebolt fencing, which would um require some staff effort occasionally um but would just be more uh flexible. Um, I personally would like to see maybe trying a schedule where you have alternating days and if you know every anyone can go on the off leash days, but if you don't want to be there where dogs when dogs are off leash, don't go on that day or don't go on that afternoon. And that that to me would keep would preserve the park in its current state. we'd still have signs. So, dogs, you know, shouldn't go in the um sensitive areas. And, you know, one of the original studies um really showed that the um that it wasn't the dogs that were creating erosion or invasives. It it was really the people um that that were um creating problems in sensitive areas. So, um, just for me, I'm against the fencing. I don't want to vote for this proposal. I understand why people want it. I completely understand wanting to just do something and move on. But I get the feeling that once the the trees start coming down and the fences start going up and people really see what's going to happen, no one's going to like it. No one's going to like it. And um it'll be really hard to undo what we did and there will be more ecological effects on the park because we are because of all the infrastructure that we're putting in there. And I and um so I would just say that um I think fences are antithetical to the whole purpose of this park. Um, I would like to see us us try a schedule and have better signage and um a lot of education and see if that works um more than the fencing other than perhaps perimeter fencing to keep dogs out of people's private property. And that's what I've got. >> Thank you, Council Member Calvert. Council Member Kley. >> Thank you, Mayor. I guess for me um you know we have been discussing this for a while and I've listened to all sides and saw the emails um at some point I didn't respond to any emails at some point because it felt like I was just getting the same emails over and over again. And so, um, you know, I do understand why, um, folks feel like, you know, we need the fencing because of the dogs being off leash and people feeling like, you know, dogs are running up to them. I've had that experience. Um, I talked about that before where me and my friend was walking, dog ran up to my friend, she was really afraid. So, I we have experienced that. I have experienced that personally and saw it happen. Um, you know, as far as the signs that's been put up, um, we tried to solve that problem. Um, it wasn't solved. Um, you know, there was people not following the rules, but yet I'm still kind of torn because I am like, you know, I've, like I said, I walk the park and it kind of gives me um a feel of Powder Horn in South Minneapolis when I go to that park. And so I too from the beginning said, "Okay, the fences I wasn't for really fences, but um you know, if we're going to do fenc fencing, I think that we should make people pay. I think that would keep people from coming, you know, because they don't want to pay for the fencing. So, I said this in the beginning and I'll say it again. Like, if we're going to put fencing up and it's going to cost taxpayers and it's going to cost our city, maybe there should be a fee for folks and maybe there should be a more of a fee for folks that don't live in our city. So, to me, I mean, maybe people don't agree with that, but to me, that would kind of bring down the numbers of folks coming to the park. Um, and also, um, I I I guess I just when you put up fencing, it does take away the na natural space. I I think so. I don't use the park as much as I used to, and I haven't walked the whole entire park like some of you all have done, but um I know the part that I have walked um I've see dogs running, you know, freely. So, um I'm just kind of torn. I I I I don't really know where I land at. I know last time u we talked about this I felt like I was people wouldn't really are for charging fees and so I'm not for sure if we'll get what we need tonight but um we'll see. Thank you, Council Member Kley. Council, anybody? Council member Foster Bolton. >> Um, so I I think that I I like this plan. I really appreciate the work that's gone into it. I like that um that you know it's been mentioned let's move on. Let's let's make a decision. let's do the work because it's it's been 20 years and I feel like if we don't do something that that in you know we can't predict the future but we can see the past and this has been a problem for 20ome years and we need we need to help out the the the the not only the future council but the future residents I mean I think that we've built a culture around this off leash and people have been talking about coming to the park for 30 years and stuff like that, but I think that, you know, um it we don't know what's going to happen in five or 10 years, but once we have this decision, it's a it's a decision and people are going to start to get used to it. And I'm not saying it's it's um the the the people that have been using this park for 30 years and I and I'm sorry about that. Um, but I'm thinking about, you know, what's the the pain that that the rear that this has been to everyone and this is a decision. Um, and I I I really appreciate that that you figured out a way to pay for this. Um, I think that that that that has made this decision a lot easier for me. Um, and people talk about Purgatory Park being confusing and where you are and the maps being this is very clear. This is ex this is this is as clear as it gets. You can have your off leash dogs here or you know it's it looks very clear to me. And I I'm I won't go to Purgatory Park alone um because I'm afraid of dogs. And I have never complained. I've never put in a complaint. But I won't go there um because of that reason. So, and I and you know, I'll I I'll go when I feel like I won't be approached by an unleashed dog. Um so, I'm going to support this. >> Thank you, Council Member Foster Bolton. >> Council member Maxwell. >> Yeah. Thanks. Um I walked the park uh with with Matt. um and some other city staff members recently and I was particularly uh interested in that north area five that needs so much um tree removal and looking at that space as it is right now it is not usable. It is a thicket of buckthornne so no dogs can go in there. We're not you're not getting deer running through there because it is so dense. So in that regard that particular space taking down that uh lowquality vegetation and turning it into something usable that is not currently used by anybody I think is value ad and having the clarity of fencing in that particular space makes sense and it is close to the parking area so you don't have issues with with parking on um quiet culde-sacs. So, that one I am fully supportive of. The south area too is a little bit harder with um the way that there's so many uh entrances in there. >> Interrupt you for a second. I'm going to ask the crowd to just keep your comments to yourself. This is our opportunity to take to to have the council members be heard and be able to make their decisions. Uh so I think that the the this further south one is the more challenging area uh to to put in fencing. Um I'm kind of I think I had similar comments to you uh uh commissioner um council member Calbertt at our um study session thinking is there a way we could say for clarity's sake fence just along the path to make it clear where you can and cannot um have off leash dogs. Um that doesn't solve the feeling issue of making it a fenced uh a fenced area. So, I don't know that that really solves the problem. So, I was also going to bring up the um another thing we haven't tried is scheduling. And so, an example would be Central Park in New York has the whole park is open to off leash dogs from 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. to 1:00 a.m. between 9 and 9. All dogs must be leashed at all times. And I think that could be very clear. It could be a second thing to try before we go to the um the point of fencing or particularly maybe the south area you could say that area is timed and then the north area we have fenced as sort of a a way to I I don't know the the best way a compromise um but I think there's nothing that will uh make make everybody happy here. Uh, I think that's most of my I guess the other the other common comment I'm hearing complaint or not complaints concerns from residents about is traffic parking in um in quiet neighborhoods. Um I don't know that fencing an area will increase the park. There's already demand. We've heard people minivans coming in with kids. That's already an issue. I don't think that fencing will exacerbate the issue beyond what it already is. So that to me is not really an argument um against fencing in particular. >> Thank you, Council Member Maxwell, Council Member Wilburn. Um, yeah. So, I don't want to spend a lot of time rehashing conversations that we've we've had, but I did just want to bring up like the whole reason that the council decided to take this on, aside from, you know, it being part of the Purgatory Park master plan. they recommended us looking at it, but was that there there were safety concerns and there were safety concerns that were brought to the council. We had a woman standing up here crying because of an experience she had had with her dog and they were they were attacked by someone's off leash dog. So I I I believe every one of you that you have been going to the park and have never had any problems. That doesn't erase the people that have had problems. And it was primarily safety that uh spurred us to start looking at this. So um I just you know I wish people would stop being dismissive of the safety issues that are real. Um beyond that. So yeah, I I am supportive of this issue. I think it's just the the because of the the problems that have occurred, I I don't see another way of of doing it. Um, so I would I mean I ke member Maxwell brings up an interesting idea for area two. I just I worry about things about it being too complex. Um, but I guess it it's something I would consider if if the rest of the council is so inclined. >> Thank you, Council Member Wilburn. All right, Council Member Rome, you're up. >> Thank you, Mayor. Um, I'm not going to reiterate what other has already been said. Largely agree with it except for um, you know, again would just bring up that we already have 40 to 50% of people coming to purgatory from outside of Minnotonka. Um, that there is no other unfest leash dog area at a municipal, regional, state, or national park in Minnesota. I don't want I've asked folks to please >> not make comments and I we've been respectful of of you folks and I'd ask you to return that. I don't want to ask people to have to leave. >> So there might be one. I could be wrong, but to my knowledge there is not and there are certainly none in the metro area. Um, so, you know, those are some of the reasons that I'm looking at in terms of environmental issues. Um, I was just speaking with a former Three Rivers uh staff member who recently retired. said this is the biggest issue that they faced in the regional parks and um that for these reasons they have fenced off leash dog areas in all of the regional parks. Um this is the reason because of environmental degradation um that off leash dogs areas cause. Uh so, you know, for those concerns, the safety concerns, including the two-year-old that was bitten by an off leash dog that came in from outside of Minnotonka, you know, those are concerns. Um I last year advocated for a single-use park. I brought up just like is being brought up now, I brought up the uh possibility of taking a dedicated park area, not one of our community parks. Um because Purgatory is one of our five community parks that's meant for all of our residents to use, not just one subset. Um to the exclusion of others and we do have a significant number of people in Minnetonka in a recent community survey who said they are no longer like council member Foster Bolton coming to purgatory because of the off leash dogs. There's too many people who are doing it. it's a significant minority or north of 20 25%. So those are the some of the reasons that um and just you know the pilot project has not worked. People have not um complied and you know have have told others not to comply. Um that's really unfortunate that was a missed opportunity. There wasn't, you know, as opposed to our mountain bike uh trail that went through Lone Lake where the group there Mor actually went out. They did uh trail cleanups. They do it every spring. They work with staff to educate. They educate and and basically police their own who are out there. I didn't see any of that and I've walked the park a number of times, including this morning. Um so I've not seen that and I think that's unfortunate. was a missed opportunity um to try to make this work. So now we've done the pilot pro project and it hasn't worked and I think you know we need to um kind of make good on what we said we were going to do last year is is to try this pilot and if it didn't work you know then we would you know be doing the fencing. I would advocate in terms of the fencing that we consider because of some of the issues that have been brought up about, you know, environmental degradation. I would um urge staff to consider the 1B uh the Tpost versus the wooden post for a couple of reasons. One is environmental degradation. Um we would not have to be doing footings. Those are no dig fencing. you would just, you know, need a a kind of a post pounder uh to get in there to use a a very technical term. And um so you would not have nearly the brush uh removal issues that's reflected in the costs uh that was that were provided. Also much easier to go around, you know, trees, easier to move post if it needs to be mended or, you know, kind of reconfigured in some way. You have the cost issue. And then for many of us for whom aesthetics is important uh black welded wire mesh and the black teapost is used by many landscape architects and I talked to one today because it recedes it disappears from view as opposed to the post that we saw in this post frame wood post frame a view black slimline teaost recede from view and because of uh a family's professional connections. I was able to talk to a landscape architect today with HGA. They confirm that. Um so for that reason, aesthetics, environment, and cost. Um I would urge uh that we consider before doing a final recommendation at 1B versus the wooden post. And so with that, I will be uh I would would be in favor of this. I didn't know we were relitigating the whole fencing versus non tonight. I thought that had been pretty much decided at our last study session. However, I will, you know, for the reasons I just cited, agree with that, but I would urge um a consideration of the 1B um fencing option. Thank you. >> Thank you, Council Member Romey. Um I'll just share a little bit of my thinking. I will I first want to thank all the residents who have been on engaged on this for a very long time, including many who are not here. I'm I'm sure of that. um and people who feel as burnt out on it as I'm sure some of you in the audience and perhaps some of some of our staff might feel about kind of the endless nature of this issue. I will tell you, you know, one of the first things that came up when I joined the council eight years ago was concerns about off leash dogs. This is something complaints that have been um coming to me as long as I've been here. And I think that issue came to a head during COVID when everybody was home more. And we did we were able to solve some of it. I think we were able to solve some of it in our other parks where the guidelines are very clear. Your dog must be on a leash in Big Willow Park in um Lone Lake Park. And that has made it clear and it has been enforcable by our police department. And of course, we don't get 100% compliance. We don't get 100% compliance on anything, but when the laws are clear, it is much easier for our police department to enforce it and it's much easier for people to understand. I really s stuck my neck out a year ago in pushing for the corridor or supporting the corridor. It was an idea that I thought would be a compromise, but I said at that time, I said, "This is this is the time when people need to be on their best behavior." And we had a commitment at that time from the pause from for parks people who said you have our help. You have our commitment. We are going to self-p police. We are going to educate and we are going to help. And that didn't happen. And we put a lot of signs up. We put over 50 sign somewhere near 80 signs. One thing I'm confident of is we're not going to sign our way out of this problem. And as many people who are concerned about fence posts, I would argue a sign is really is really no different. And the problem is if you go throughout these corridors that we have designated currently as off leash, there are so many informal entrances. People are coming and going from different spots. And a sign doesn't solve that because of course we're not going to put a sign at every spot where somebody may enter a or exit a certain area. You know, I was really bummed to hear this spring that the signs had been vandalized, that our our community service officers were disrespected. And as we tried to meet with groups and try to problem solve this, we were told council members and staff, "We don't care what you do. we're not going to follow it anyway. And that was the message that was given to me that finally led me to believe, well, now this is a compliance issue. It's not a compromise issue because it doesn't matter what we do. They're not going to follow it anyway. So, as a lawyer, I'm saying, okay, now we need to problem solve this so we can clearly enforce the the ordinance that we have, which is why I support the staff recommendation. I wish it wasn't so in that I wish what we did last year at this time would have worked great. We wouldn't be here. Our meeting would have ended an hour and a half ago and we wouldn't have this problem. But it didn't work. So we're here and we're going to try to fix it because that's our job. And so I'm supportive of staff's recommendation. I really appreciated Council Member Maxwell's comment about area 5 really being, you know, in all the time that I've spent in the park, which is hundreds of hours. Um, I've never seen anybody in area 5. Now, maybe there are people that go in there. I I believe there are, but I think we can certainly get four more acres of park that could be used in a much more effic effective way. And lastly, what I'll say is regarding environmental impacts, regarding fence selection, you know, I really really trust uh Mr. Kuma and Miss Yetka and the whole rest of the staff and helping us make these decisions. They've done a great job. I look at the work and the decisions they've made regarding environmental impacts in Big Willow Park. I look at what's happening in Cullen. Look at all the great things that have happened in Lone Lake Park. and I trust them and I think they're guiding us to make the best decisions and so I feel confident um uh voting in favor of their recommendation. So I'm sorry that this is how it's had to be. I really am. I wish that we could have worked out something that would have worked better, but unfortunately, you know, sometimes we have to govern to those who are least compliant and that sucks. That's not what I want to be as a policy maker, but that is my responsibility and my obligation to the city is to make sure people are safe, make sure our staff can enforce our ordinances and try to do that and not and uh not piss off as as few residents as possible to be quite frank. So, with that, um I I think if I'm counting heads, we have an open issue, I guess, question that council member Romey had about the type of fencing. Um is did anybody want to weigh in on that issue? Council member Foster Bull. Well, um, if we're going to, one thing I was concerned about with the with the tea is the vandalism that's that has been threatened to happen anyway. Like the wood um, posts because of the base seem seem more stable to me. I don't know if that's true or not, but in that in which case then it would to to me be a better choice. >> Mr. Kuma, do you have any thoughts on that? Um yes council um the it the poles would be stronger than the tosts. I mean there are options in terms of the metal tposts and the gauge of the steel and the galvanization or not galvanization. Um there there are some options there certainly but the wooden ones are readily available and are sturdy and stable. >> Thank you council member Calvert. So, I I agree with your um comments about trusting staff, but also, you know, part of my part of my opposition to the fencing is, you know, we're in a particular economic time and I personally don't want to spend the money on on the fencing. So, um you know, I think staff has done a costbenefit analysis. Um, I don't want any fencing, but I'm gonna I'm gonna leave it up to staff because if you're going to have fencing, you want fencing that's going to last um and be uh less susceptible to alteration and um so on and so forth. But again, like I I'm for flexible fencing to begin with. And so the more permanent you make it, the less flexible it is if we have to change our plan. So, um I'm just going to leave it up to staff because I don't want it to begin with. And that is not to say that I am not supportive of the incredible work that our staff has done. I just want to say I appreciate it. I'm just philosophically opposed to what we're we're about to do. Anybody else? Uh, Council Member Kley, >> I was just going to say, um, if we end up going with the fences, and it seems like we are maybe, but can we at least have the, um, the round ones at the bottom of of 2A because at least that's darker and it looks more blended in with trees or more natural to me. I'm seeing Mr. Kuma, not his head. All right. All right. Okay. Well, with that, if I'm not seeing anybody else, so we need a motion. Council member Foster Bolton. >> I I'm sorry. We We've already You can come up after the meeting and we can try to address whatever questions that you may have. Can you pull it up on the screen? So, I um make a motion to approve designated off leash dog areas in north area 5 and south area 2 of Purgatory Park and a motion amending the two 2026 2031 CIP to reallocate available funding from projects S13209 and S23309 for the installation of type 2A wood post fencing per the off leash dog area feasibility study. and a second. Council member Wilburn. >> Second. >> Thank you. I have a motion by Council Member Foster Bolton and a second by Council Member Wilburn. Miss Kuzzman, please call roll. >> Wilburn, >> yes. >> Calbert, >> no. >> Rome, >> yes. >> Kley, >> yes. >> Foster Bolton, >> yes. >> Maxwell, >> yes. >> Shaq, >> yes. Motion carries. Again, thank you to everyone. Thank you to staff. Appreciate all the work that's gone into this for many years. And we will move on to item uh 15, which is appointments and reappointments. And we have none. Item 16, which is an adjournment. Take a motion to adjurnn. Council member Wilburn. >> I move adjournment. >> And a second. Council member Maxwell. >> A second. >> Uh all in favor say I. I. opposed. Motion carries. We are adjourned.