Good evening. Welcome to the December 18th, 2025 meeting of the City of Minnotonka Planning Commission. The commission generally meets twice a month, always on a Thursday. The schedule and tentative meeting agendas can be obtained by calling the planning division or by checking the city website at minnotonkamn.gov. The commission holds public hearings on land use applications. For all land use applications, the city notifies property owners within at least 400 ft of the site and posts plans and information on the website. For some applications, the city also places signs on the properties and places notices in the Sun Sailor newspaper. From a specific process standpoint, the commission makes recommendations to the city council on resonings, subdivisions, conditional use permits, and amendments to the city's comprehensive guide plan, zoning ordinance, and subdivision regulations. We also make final decisions on site plans, signage requests, variance requests, and expansion permits, unless those requests are part of an application that must be heard by city council. In that case, the commission makes a recommendation and the council makes the final decision. Anyone dissatisfied with a final planning commission decision may appeal to the city council by submitting a written request to city staff within 10 days of this meeting. From a broader standpoint, the city's comprehensive guide plan, zoning ordinance, and subdivision regulations are the city's best efforts to codify a balance between individual rights and community responsibilities. Individual rights are easy to understand. Community responsibilities are more subtle, but the idea is that we as members of the community agree to limit our individual rights for the common good of the group. The planning division, the planning commission, and the city council are charged with managing this sometimes difficult balancing act. We ask you keep this broader perspective in mind as we review tonight's applications. Again, welcome. Uh staff, please call roll. Banks >> here. >> Brink >> here. >> Hansen is absent. Henry >> here. >> Minion >> here. >> Waterman is absent. Uh Chair Maxwell >> here. There are five of us seated tonight. Uh next um on the agenda is approval of the agenda. And Miss Thomas, I believe there's a change memo for tonight. Uh yes, uh chair, there's a change memo. Uh first is to your actual agenda and then to item 8A that indicates that uh this is a four vote item needing four affirmative votes to approve. Uh that is an air. uh five affirmative votes are required to approve a site plan review specifically because it's a a final decision uh by the planning commission subject to appeal. Then we also received some comments on item 7A. Those are the changes. >> Thank you, Miss Thomas. Uh may I have a motion to approve the agenda considering the change memo? >> I'll make the motion. >> Motion, Henry. >> I'll second. >> Second, Banks. All those in favor say I. >> I >> I. >> Any opposed. Motion carries. Uh, next is approval of the minutes of the I believe it's the November 20th, 2025 meeting. Any changes to those minutes? All right. May I have a motion to approve? >> I'll make the motion. >> Motion. Minion. >> I'll second. >> Second. Brink. All those in favor say I. >> I. I. >> Any opposed? All right. Motion carries. Uh next is report from staff. >> Uh thank you chair and commissioners. Uh just two items to report on. The council met on December 8th. There was only one item on that agenda though the meeting went uh was quite long. Uh the last item on the agenda was the seven brew uh conditional use permanent site and building plan review for that drive-thru use. Um that was approved by the council as a a project. Out of that came some conversation about wanting to look at drive-throughs as uh uses in our community as part of the zoning update. Um also the council may consider uh having conversation about that at one of their study sessions um next year. So that again is a general topic coming out of that um specific project discussion. Then my only other item is your next scheduled meeting is January 8th, but we do not have any items that are ready to go for that meeting. So that meeting will be cancelled and your next meeting then will be January the 22nd. And that is all. >> Thank you, Miss Thomas, for that January 22nd meeting. I know some commissioners uh terms are ending in January. Will they end before that meeting or after? uh terms end uh chair on January the last day in January. So that meeting uh all of our current uh members will be at at that meeting and we will um do some planning for that meeting ahead of time. >> Thank you. All right. Next on the agenda is report from commissioners. Does anybody have anything to report this week? No. All right. This is going to be a quick meeting. All right. Next is item seven, the consent agenda. We have one item here. Uh city staff places items on the consent agenda that are considered routine. So, no staff or applicant presentations will be made and the commission will hold one public hearing. We'll approve all the items for which there's one uh with one motion. Uh before voting, I'll open a public hearing. If anyone on the commission or in the public would like to remove that from the consent agenda and have a discussion on it, we will remove it uh and discuss it. Um so I will open the public hearing for item 7A. I don't have a gamble, but I'm opening the public hearing. Um so this first item is 7A, preliminary and final plat of Oakland Woods Estates, a two lot subdivision at 2203 Oakland Road. Would anybody like to remove this from the consent agenda and have a bigger discussion on it? All right, I don't see anybody moving. So, I will close the public hearing. Um, and commissioners, may I have a motion to approve the items on the consent agenda, please? I'll >> make the motion. >> Motion, Minion. >> Second. Second. Brick. Uh staff, please pull the commissioner. >> Banks, >> yes. >> Brink, >> yes. >> Henry, >> yes. >> Minion, >> yes. >> Chair Maxwell, >> yes. Uh motion carries. That item is approved. If you would like to appeal that decision, it must be done uh by written request to the city staff within 10 days of this meeting. Good luck with your project. All right. Uh next item is item eight. Uh this is the non-consent agenda. Uh so before we begin consideration of these, I'd like to review the steps in the process uh that will be followed. So first I'll announce the item. Staff will give a report on it. Then the commission can ask questions of staff. Uh second, the applicant will be invited forward. They can make a presentation at that time and then commissioners can ask questions of that applicant. uh third then the public hearing will be open to anyone present can come ask questions give comments address your questions to me and then I will make sure at the end of all the public hearing that all those questions get answered uh if you wish to speak please come to the podium state your name and your address for the record please keep your comments brief try not to repeat things that have already been said um I think that's it so the first item on tonight's non-consent agenda is item 8A, a site plan review for a parking lot expansion at 11501 KTEL Drive. And Miss Ottoman, I believe this is your item. Thank you, chair. This project is for Big River Encore Park. Staff is recommending that the planning commission approve the resolution rescending and replacing resolution 202411 regarding a site plan review for the property 11501 KTEL Drive. As Miss Thomas mentioned, uh, five votes are needed to pass this motion. This project may look familiar to most commissioners. Uh, we did review it last year in September 2024. At that time it was for a site expansion for parking. Uh the current owner has brought forth a new site and building plan proposal with Rainbow Tree Care, the tenant that would be utilizing the expanded area. At the time that the previous site and building plan was brought forth to the staff, um it was for a violation on the property, which had to do with un approved expanded parking areas north of the excuse me, north of the building used for Rainbow Tree Care and Northeast. In September 2024, the planning commission approved the project. At this time, there's been no improvements to the site. Since the original approval in 2024, there's been a request for revision. Uh this was due to after the plan was approved, the tenant believed that uh some of those modifications would not meet their operational needs, meaning they needed further modifications for the um to stay at the site. In red you can see the expansion that was approved in 2024 which was for the parking and then there's some surface a surface basin for the improved imperous area. In blue is the current proposal addition which has parking in the current green space between the buildings on the easterly half of the build property. Again, this northern building, which is kind of hard to see, uh is occupied by Rainbow Tree Care. And there would be an underground storm chamber underneath this northern row of parking, as well as a surface basin in the southeast corner. Here's another uh illustration of just the proposal shown over a satellite view of the property. This proposal has been um a collaboration between the tenant and the property owner for the proposed site plan. Uh the current site has impervious parking, excuse me, the say inservous per surface coverage of 3,00 322,35 square ft. By code, they're allowed 36900 or 369,000 and they're proposing uh 362,000 square ft. From the current site standards, that's about an acre increase in imperous surface coverage. However, it does meet city code. By city code, they're allowed up to 65% in service impervious surface coverage and this proposal is just under 24%. Uh staff does want to mention that there for the site for the future to make sure that it still meets the current standard, they're only allowed about 7,000 square ft of further expansion. meaning that this would not be considered a long-term solution for the site. For the parking ordinance, staff reviews the number of tenants as well as their tenants space individually and their uses. Currently, the site has 238 stalls. Per the city code, 254 stalls are required and this proposal would increase the site to 303 stalls. As a side note, the parking ordinance does not include a ve fleet vehicles in the calculation, just the tenants square footage. Uh based off the numbers provided by Rainbow Tree Care, they would need more likely 330 stalls. However, that would be a management um issue to discuss between the property owner and the tenant about how many vehicles and managing vehicles coming in and out. For trees, the property has 255 protected trees. That's high priority and significant. They're proposing to remove seven overall. That would be 5% high priority um of the high priority trees and less than 1% of the significant trees so they meet the parking and the tree protection ordinance. Staff is recommending that the planning commission adopt the resolution rescending and replacing resolution 202411 regarding a site plan review for parking expansion at 1151 KTEL Drive. We've received no comments for this project. Staff is available for questions as well as the property owner and app uh tenant, excuse me, are available. Thank you. >> Uh thanks Missman. What questions do we have for staff? >> Commissioner Minion, >> kind of easy because my questions are going to be the same as they were before. Is how we're going to protect the uh storm water? Um we've got a lot of things in place. I saw curbs and gutters. I see uh more surface covered. I like the idea of having the um capture basin, but can you guys talk about either the city or the applicant a little bit about how they intend to take care of that surface water? I saw a retention tank. Will that eventually dump into something else or will it be a slow leak type of a thing? And um basically the uh surface pond, how that's going to be maintained and taken care of kind of the water flow in general. Uh, Chair and Commissioner Minion, I'm I'm going to jump in here and help a little bit with the the storm water treatment. So, as it's designed here, there would be um underground chambers to help meet the city's storm water um management rules. And so, those chambers aren't intended to just hold water indefinitely. they um water is directed or runoff is directed to those areas into the chambers and ultimately to infiltrate uh into the ground. Um so those products again are intended to treat for um volume of water leaving the site, the rate at which it's leaving the site and sometimes the quality of things leading leaving the site. though for the city engineering staff to say, "Yep, this project meets our storm water rules." It it means that the um the protections are in place under their um their engineering standards. Does that help? >> Effectively, it's a leech tank, a capture and leech tank, and not a weer. It's not going to dump somewhere else is what I'm hearing. >> Yeah, Chair Maxwell and Commissioner Minion, we can bring up the plans to see if it ultimately outlets. There has to be some type of outlet to these systems. Um, and I am not an engineer, so I can't speak to leeching or weird. Um, but we can look at the plans for you. I can I can confidently say that our engineering staff and natural resources staff have reviewed this and if they felt that there was uh concern about natural resource protection, we wouldn't be allowed to um make a recommendation for approval. >> Okay. And is the new work in any way going to flow into that surface pond or will it all be captured in that capture tank? Let me bring up the plans and I'll I'll take a look. >> We could ask the applicant, too. I I don't mean to stick you with the question. Sorry. >> Maybe if there are other questions. >> I was just going to say any other questions while while Miss Thomas looks that up. Commissioner Brink. >> Uh yes. Um, in your staff report, you mentioned that this is not considered a long long-term solution for the site. Could you just expand on that a little further? I mean, does it have to do with potential future tenant uses or maybe just expand on that a little further if you could. >> Thank you, >> chair. Oh, yes, chair. Commissioner. Uh that is meant that in this case of expanding for the purpose of one specific tenant for their operational needs, that's not a long-term uh solution to do with other tenants. Whereas they're they're coming up on their 7,000 ft of impervious surface coverage left. So it's not something that they can continue to do. Whereas they do have available tenant space. Some of them are vacant. So, the alternative the staff is proposing is maybe looking at some expanding physically into those other spaces that exist. >> Thank you. >> Other questions? Uh, Commissioner Henry. >> Thanks, Chair. To build on Commissioner Brink's question, in the packet, it showed that with his proposal that the applicant would have I think it's roughly 63.4 four something percent impervious surface coverage and the maximum impervious surface coverage is 65%. So if I'm doing the math right, does that mean that that 1.5 something% additional equates to 7,000 more square feet? >> That is correct. >> Okay, thanks. And then second question, this is can you go to the next slide in the presentation, please? Yeah, this is a good one. So on the right side picture, it shows what the current proposal is in red to develop that as a parking lot below on the far right below the red spot where there's so that's where I'm looking at. So that's the unofficial parking lot when this is developed. Is that a condition of approval that has to revert back to a natural state? >> Chair, commissioner, there is actually a wetland that you can see over here. So this area shouldn't not have anything in it. So yes, it would need to it could be used for the basin. Otherwise, it needs to revert to what was naturally there. >> And when we say revert, does that mean they're just going to abandon it or do they have to actually build it up and and enhance it some way to revert it back to a more natural state? >> So that area over here will be the basin. So, they will be changing it to that basin area and then leaving this area as is. Um, our natural resources staff has been working with the DNR, so I'm sure they have a plan of specifically what needs to be done. Uh, they did come up with the conclusion that it was incidental, meaning that any kind of alteration to the area uh was just natural and they did not require any remediation. So, we don't have any plans for uh regrading or anything like that in that area. >> Oh, good. So, there's no base of class 5 there that needs to be scooped out and >> not from my understanding. >> Mhm. Okay. Thanks. Now, >> chair, if I I could uh have some more information about um the storm water and I want to first say that I misspoke. This is not underground chambers here. This is a a a ponding and infiltration basin. So it should not be standing water but it is an area where water can go and in and the intent is to infiltrate into the ground. Not just intent that's how it's designed. Um there is an emergency overflow as there are on all similar um projects whether it's an underground chamber or uh above ground area. um that emergency overflow. Um there would be overflow uh land overflow to the east through um the wetland buffer um outletting um as would be allowed in this case to the east. >> Thank you, >> Commissioner Brink. >> Yeah, thank you, Chair. Um just want to confirm that both the tenant and the owner are in alignment with this plan. Oh, >> let's let's save that question for the applicants portion of the presentation. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Any other questions for staff? All right. I have one. It may require bouncing between this and the um slide where you have the square footage breakdown of the current and the code allowed on proposed. My question is that in that current calculation or current number does that include the areas that on the previous slide are now sort of a non-code allowed what would be like sort of a deviation from code non-compliant areas or not chair Maxwell uh the current would be as the site is today so not those expanded parking areas that >> so if could you go back to the map then and explain so say like on the bottom Right. The area that we were just talking about that's not in red that would in the future be part of the basic is that area counted in the square footage of the current state on that table. Does that make sense, Chair Maxwell? Yes, it does. The area out here and in red, >> yes, >> is not paved. So, it would not be counted as that impervious surface area. >> Okay. Right now the area for current would just be the area that is paved. So just ending right here before you get to the red. >> Okay. Thank you. Any other questions for staff? All right. So at this time now we will call the applicant forward. You can give any presentation you want. Um please state your name or your company name for and the address for the record and then uh commission will ask questions after that. Hi, my name is Ryan Mallerie. My address is 5353 Wise at a boulevard uh sweet 502 in St. Louis Park. And we are uh I represent Big River Encore Park, who is the applicant, I believe. Right. And Greg Croxstead, uh CEO of Rainbow Tree Companies, Rainbow Tree Care. Um our address is here, business address. My personal address is uh 9066 Greystone Avenue in Monteello, Minnesota. >> So, first question. >> Yeah, I think Mr. Brink asked if we were in alignment uh which and and we are uh >> we've established a long-term lease to be in the property. Um and we did that this summer and part of that lease includes portion of the building to the south. So, between the proposed new parking area. We would be occupying both the north and south building sections as well. >> Part of the reason we're back for the I guess the relication is because uh my fault I didn't bring Greg and his team into the conversations early enough. So, we got the the first plan approved and then we took it to Greg and said, "Here's what we have to do to comply." and he said, "Okay, that's fine, but that doesn't work for us. So, if we if if you got to do that, I understand, but then we have to move." And and then we wanted to keep them in Minnetonka. And so, we worked with the staff and we came up with a new and improved plan that works for everybody. >> All right. Anybody on the commission have questions for the applicant? >> Commissioner Henry. >> Thanks, Chair Greg. This is for you. In the the city's write up in the presentation, they mention explicitly about mentioning that there's only 7,000 additional square feet of impervious surface that they could expand to. So, in in your opinion, in this application, this is going to serve your company's needs for the the short and medium, hard to say long term, but the foreseeable future, you think that this expanded parking lot is going to accommodate what you need? >> Um, yes, Commissioner Henry. We've put a lot of consideration into will we be able to grow in this footprint. This is Rainbow's headquarters. So, a lot of our office and administrative staff offices out of this facility. Uh it's it's part of our operations, but we absolutely can fulfill our operations with this. We're we're losing a section and this brings back a section to make it work for us long term. So, we feel very confident in that. >> Good. Thank you. Yeah. Anybody else? All right. It looks like not at this time. We may call you back up if there are other questions after the public hearing or after we've considered. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> All right. At this point, I will open the public hearing. If you would like to speak, please come to the podium. State your name and your address for the record. All right. All right, I don't see anybody moving. So, I will close the public hearing and I will bring it back to the commission for any final Let's start with final questions for anybody and then move into comments. Looks like no questions. How about comments? Commissioner Henry. >> Sure. Thank you for the applicant, the landlord, business owner coming in explaining what the the need is for this and I'm looking forward to supporting this and keeping your company in Minnetonka. It provides a good service for those who like to take care of the tree canopy. And as you know, Minnetonka's got the highest percentage of tree canopy of all the the suburbs in the Twin Cities. So, I'm really grateful for the service that you provide as well as many other citizens of the city. And it seems well laid out, thoughtful. So, I'm looking forward to supporting it. >> Commissioner Banks. >> Thanks, Chair. Um, yeah, thank you guys for um bringing coming back with this this plan. Um, it's great to see the relationship um between the um the tenant as well as the owner of the building working together and coming up with a good plan. Um, and I look forward to, you know, you guys moving forward with this proposal, uh, and the site becoming in compliance. >> Commissioner Minion, >> I'd like to thank you for doing this. Uh I've spent some time watching your operation when we were doing this before and uh kind of seen the morning startup and I was a little concerned about some of the activities and things like that on the and just having this paved having the water captured having it be able to be treated I think is a a big improvement for uh for the environment and I think it's just a a great way to operate and I appreciate you guys coming through and realize it's not always easy to go through these hoops but I think you've done a great job and uh thank you very much. Commissioner Brink. >> Yeah, thank thank you uh staff and uh the applicant here for uh um you know putting this all together and going through the process and um being this has been before the commission before I think just last year it's the plan looks like it's been vetted and discussed and gone over pretty well pretty thoroughly and um I think it's a good plan. Look forward to uh seeing you completed and uh yeah it's looks good. Thank you. >> All right, I'll go last here. This one is not as easy for me, I think, as it sounds like for the rest of you. Um, I'm thinking about this sort of from a holistic city standpoint where we've just had we've had two proposals so far this year where we've had underutilized parking lot that we've now converted into a coffee shop. We've converted a I think we've got Taco Bell in a a a parking lot and there's other places. We've we've turned the Ridgale parking lot into a park for goodness sake. And here we are say let's take this green space. It's breaking up two buildings. Um and so the only trees in this on this site which I imagine your um people who work at your headquarters like to sit under those trees and have their lunch um and say let's pave this over um so that we can park some things here when we have so much underutilized parking in the city. So this is I think from a from an individual business perspective, from an individual site perspective, yes, code allows up to 65% imperous surface. Um but if I'm thinking from a broader city perspective, long-term, do we want to add more parking to um to this site? So that's where I'm struggling with it. Um so I just like to hear if any I wish I could have gone first so you guys could respond. you can still respond if anybody has a response to that. Um uh convince me one way or the other. Um that's sort of what I'm um struggling with uh right now on this one. >> Would would it be >> minion? >> Would it be appropriate to ask the applicant to come up and talk a little bit more about their use? I think calling it a parking lot might be a little bit of a misnomer. Um, and if we brought up that picture again, it might be helpful because my understanding from what I witnessed is it's it's yes, it's employee parking, but it's also kind of a storage area and staging area for the equipment. They have a lot of larger equipment, but maybe that would be a better Is that appropriate to ask that? >> I think let's have more conversation here and then we can bring them up if there's anything else we have questions for them. >> So, what I witnessed when I saw it is it wasn't just more parking for employees. I assume they're going to use it the same way. But um if you look at that wider band of the Lshape, the one that comes north south, there's uh quite a bit of a large equipment being stored there. And they've done they were doing some light maintenance and things like that fueling the smaller equipment. Um it's more than just a parking area. And that's why quite frankly, I'm really happy to see the the surface get treated in a way that can capture the water. if there was a a broken hydraulic line, if fuel happened to spill out of something. They've got a great big maintenance shop that they do their maintenance shop maintenance things in, but they're kind of doing little service stuff and then they had a whole bunch of equipment stored out there. So, it's more than just a parking lot from what what I witnessed if that helps at all. >> Anybody else? Are you Commissioner Henry? >> Yeah, thanks, Chair, and thanks for bringing up that other point of view. the purpose of the discussion between commissioners is is just that. So it's not that we have to follow an exact procedure, then once we speak, then we can't speak again. So I'm I'm happy to speak some more. And you brought up points that I I hadn't considered, and it is rather ironic that a tree care company is is taking away some of these trees that um that contribute to the the tree cover of the city of Minnetonka. M so on one hand I I lament that there's trees being lost but and and I agree in my place of business where I work we had some big trees taken out and I was pretty sad that they were taken out too. They provided shade in the summertime and it was better for the cooling of the building in the summertime as well. So yeah, it's it's not ideal, but I agree with Commissioner Minion about with larger equipment if they have to do work on them, this is a better option than if they just had some haphazardly constructed or people pull on a dirt pad, which is what they used to do. So is it ideal? No, it's not. I'd rather have no trees being lost, but I think it's a better option than what is currently there. And if I balance out like the the commission um the commission's purpose is to codify the balance between individual rights and community responsibilities. As a citizen, I like to see as many trees as possible. As a business owner, as a landlord, I like to see functionality of the space for the tenants. And this is going to add considerably to the functionality for the space. And if it's going to keep the tree care company in this building, which I think is a good thing, then it's a sacrifice. Yes. And it's not great, but it's a it's better than the alternative. So, I'm not sure how much that would convince you, but it's a little bit trying anyway. >> Commissioner Banks. >> Yeah. And I'll just simply add to that, just the fact that um this plan brings um the space into compliance with our our um current codes is u is a big plus for me. >> Commissioner, you're talking about the the parking on the site because previously there was not enough parking spaces. >> Okay. >> Um All right. Did any commission you remind me your question that you had for the applicant? It was sort of um how how do they use the space? I think that's a yeah a question that I have. How if you could come up and speak to how do you use the space and if you did not have this parking space, would you be able to park this equipment say on a different site? I know you had some parking across the street for a while. Um how would you uh respond to that option? >> Yeah, keep thank you for the question. Um thank you for the question commissioner chair. Um so we would first off some of this some of the materials that we would park over here the small equipment is things that are more protected in that area than across the street adjacent kind of open where somebody can be driving by. The other use that we foresee with the site is staging trees for tree planting. Uh it's something that we're currently doing and the space that's being utilized is being taken away as an area that we're using to stage future trees for the urban forest that we're preparing to plant. So those things will be is what this area will also be used for. Um the loss of the trees is not lost on us. You know, it definitely was as we looked at it. Um you know, it was a concern. the prior plan, uh, the one that was approved before, actually, we think would remove more trees to the north, very tall trees that are, um, significant for wildlife, and we really want to keep those trees. Um, so that that middle section mainly contains uh, green ash, which we are treating. There are three lyndons and the rest are green ash. Um, so the ash >> we're willing to let go of the them. I mean, somebody stops treating them, they're going to die. >> Yeah. Part of the reason we moved to underground storage along that north uh was because we could save a significant amount of the trees uh between well the the asphalt and the I don't know if it's a retention or a detention basin but the basin to the north. >> Yeah. >> The other plan required us to do some excavation of that part north of it and that would remove a lot of trees. We want to keep those trees uh that are between the current pond and the site. >> So yeah, it's a little bit more costly to do the underground storage there, but I think we probably saved 50 trees, >> if not more. Yeah, >> that way. >> All right. Thank you. Appreciate your time. >> Does that answer your Does that answer your question? >> Yes, it does. Thank you. All right. It sounds like we might be ready for a motion here. Um would anybody like to um make a motion to Let's see if we can put that up on the screen to approve um the resolution rescending and replacing resolution 204-11 regarding a site plan review for a parking lot expansion at 11501 KTEL Drive. >> I'll make a motion. >> Motion Brink. >> I'll second the motion. Second. Henry. Uh, staff, please follow the commission. >> Banks, >> yes. >> Brink, >> yes. >> Henry, >> yes. >> Minion, >> yes. >> Cher Maxwell, >> yes. Motion carries. That is a final decision by the planning commission. Anyone agreved by this decision needs to provide writing uh to staff within 10 days of this meeting. Good luck with your project. consideration work. >> All right. Um, next item on our agenda is other business for which there is none, I believe. >> I believe yes. And then uh adjournment. Would anybody like to make a motion to adjurnn? >> Make the motion. >> Motion, Henry. >> I'll second. Uh, >> second. Banks. All those in favor say I. I. I. >> We are adjourned. Good night. >> Thank you. Thank you.