Mhm. >> Okay, I'm calling the city council meeting of August 12th, 2026 to order. Clerk, please do a roll call. >> Council member Walsh. >> Here. >> Council member Gerola. >> Here. >> Council member West. >> Here. >> Council member Edberg. >> Here. >> Council member Engstrand. >> Here. >> And Mayor Nicklausky. >> Here. >> Please join me in the pledge of allegiance. >> I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America. And to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> All right, welcome everybody in house and on TV um or online. Uh we're going to get started. Uh we're going to do 2A, approval of the minutes. Approval of the minutes of the regular city council meeting on July 28th, 2026. Do I have a motion to approve? >> So moved. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I. >> Any opposed? Okay. >> I abstain. >> Uh and Kevin abst- um Mr. Edberg abstains. Um item three, adopt the agenda. Approval to adopt agenda. >> So moved. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> Aye. >> Any opposed? Right, we have an agenda. Item four, the consent agenda. Does anyone have any changes to the consent agenda? No. Seeing none, I'd entertain a motion to approve the agenda. >> So moved. >> Second. >> Okay, all in favor? >> Aye. >> Any opposed? All right, we have a consent agenda is approved. All right, item five A, visitors and presentations. Miss Kinswater. >> Good evening, Madam Mayor, members of the council. I'm here to give you an update on the finance department, so we'll be talking about the finance department operations and the license bureau operations tonight. Uh so, to start off, in general, the revenues and expenditures are on track with the 2026 budget at this point of the year. >> [laughter] >> There are some accounts that have actual activity that is either higher or lower than the original adopted amount, but those variations can happen. Payments might come in a little bit later than expected, or the timing that we receive an invoice for payment. So, we I did make notes on the uh schedule that if there are anything that have a bigger variation from budget at this point, that there's an explanation for you um when you review the report. Um as we look down, um the you'll see that the first line of the property taxes on that schedule in the intergovernmental report um have lower uh receipts to this year. That's because we get our first payments in July for those. So, on our next report when you get it, you'll see that our taxes, um, and our local government aid arrived in July. They came in the amount that we expected them to. So, um, that's looking good. Um, when we else we look at it, the general fund, um, in the miscellaneous revenues, those are always higher at this point of the year. And a lot of that is because of receipts, uh, for rentals in our park rentals, um, the mooring skid, kayak, and canoe rentals, um, that we have. So, the park rental fees that we collect support park maintenance activities associated with the park, uh, rentals. Uh, the park rental fees are reviewed each year as part of the general fund budget process. So, the fees, how they're set up, we have a resident and a non-resident rate, and those were last increased on January 1st, 2025. So, we will be reviewing that as part of the budget process this year to make sure that those are at a level that we need them to be. And you'll see any recommendations if there's a change. Uh, one other thing I'd like to note when we look at the finance report is over the past few years, manufacturers of PFAS chemicals, um, those are otherwise known as forever chemicals, have reached, um, large national sediment settlements with public water systems due to contamination from the PFAS chemicals. The settlements are intended to help cities and utilities pay for testing, treatment, and long-term remediation. So, the city qualified to receive settlements and anticipates receiving a total of 566,000 um between 2026 and 2033. As of June, the city has received 339,343. Um a majority of that, so DuPont and 3M were a couple of the bigger companies um that had to issue settlements. So, a lot of the money that we received was from the 3M settlement. There will be more information coming to council um that will detail like the requirements for the use of funds, examples of allowable expenditures, and any requirements if there are dates that we need to use the funds by. That that will be coming to council, but I just wanted to let you know that if when you looked at that line and it looked like the revenues were higher, that that money had started to come in. Um interest revenues are always a popular topic. Um it's the policy of the city to invest public funds in low-risk manner to preserve our principal while meeting the daily cash flows and demands of the city's operations and to conform with federal, state, and local regulations governing the um investment of the public funds. So, as a reminder, there's no interest revenues that are recorded in any of the funds as you look at the um activity through June 30th. Interest revenues, we allocate them to each fund. At the end of the year, we do an annualized cash balance for each fund, and then that's how we assign the interest. Um another fund that we frequently talk about is the refuse fund. That comes up typically in our conversations because um as part of the refuse fund, we have the sale of recycling materials. Um the recycling markets, they ebb and flow. Um part of the contract that the city has for the processing of our recyclables is the city, if the sales of the recyclables cover are more than the cost to process the recycling amounts, then we receive um funds. If the cost to process is more than what the sale is, then the city needs to pay um for the processing of the recyclables. So, the city council has taken kind of a reactive approach to this that when we're preparing the budget and if the cost to process the recycling is higher then in the next budget cycle, we'll add a minimal uh fee to to cover the processing of those recyclables. Typically, by that time next year the market has changed and the city will be receiving funds. And um so then we take off that fee so that the it's not a constant fee that residents are always paying. Um it as I look at what we've been paying, uh it appears that the markets are improving. Uh the amount we're paying for processing uh has been less the last 3 months. And so I'm thinking right now we do have that small fee on our utility bill. I anticipate that if the markets continue as they are that fee will come off in 2027. And then we'll just monitor where the um markets are as we continue to proceed. Um that is the part that I have and just looking at the financial report, kind of our revenues and expenditures, the highlights for the finance operations. Um now I'd like to talk about the license bureau. Um as described in the memo, we review the license operations through two different sources of information. There's a line item on the revenues and expenditures of the finance report that shows where we are in total operations in looking at our revenues and expenditures when they are the money is coming into the city and then when we're paying our expenditures. In looking at that finance report, the license bureau revenues are lower in 2026 than they were in 2025. And the expenditures have remained relatively steady between those two years. So then in looking at that, the second analysis we look at is the license bureau performance indicator report. That report is prepared by our license bureau staff and this really represents the information of the transactions that are being processed in our license bureau. They're all in office transactions. So that's when I looked and saw that our revenues were less on the finance report then I dug deeper into the information and looked at what was happening in our offices. So the license bureau um performance report highlights that the decrease in revenues is coming from two primary sources. That's the EVTR. So those are electronic um title transactions that are done through the dealerships and then the driver's license transactions. I wasn't surprised to see that the driver's license transactions were done last or going down. In 2025, there was the deadline for residents to apply for their real ID. There was a big push to have people come in and meet that deadline last May. So, we are staying busy with driver's license, but it is less than last year. Um the EVTR change, uh looking at that, I think that's um as we look at it, probably more so um maybe based on the economy. So, because the number that we processed of EVTR transactions, that's when we're working with the dealerships, is considerably lower than what was processed in the high-volume years of 2024 and 2025. The cause for the shift is unknown, but given the fact that only the dealerships utilize this EVTR process with us, then it can be deduced that fewer consumers are choosing to purchase their vehicles through a dealership, maybe looking more um to keeping their vehicles longer or going through private party sales because we do see a number of customers coming in that are just buying a used vehicle from another party. Um the department, you know, as I look back and was kind of evaluating the EVTR transactions, um the department started using this technology in 2021. Um there was kind of a soft launch. We worked with one dealership to kind of get us off the ground, and then there's a large spike into the 2022 volume of transactions, and that is really when all the other dealerships came on. So, we saw that rise, and it's just been in this last year that we've seen that those dip down. [clears throat] Um so, that's something that we'll be watching. Um though the volume of tab transactions, so that's when people come in to renew their driver's license tabs for their vehicles. Um that transaction count dropped in 2025. I think that's in correlation to when we had the long lines for the driver's license renewals and people changing to Real ID. The quick uh tab renewal transactions, people chose not to wait in line it's uh to process those. So I think that they might have done them online or visited a local kiosk at a Cub or a Hy-Vee um where they could do them online. Uh I'm encouraged to see that the tab renewals um in 2026, when we're looking at them, those are going back up from the low in 2025. Um processing the tab renewals in our office is really helpful. It's a quick transaction where we can help um customers and the money that we received for for processing those quick transactions um significantly adds up when we have a lot of those transactions. So we're continually um promoting having customers come in, visit our office, and let us process those tab transactions for them. Um so as I think about uh in the future, kind of in the next couple months, what we need to look at. Uh though there are some customers that appear to be opting to renew their tabs online, seeing that more customers are coming into the office um that we have shorter customer lines, it's really how can we entice customers to come in to visit our offices so that we can process more of those transactions even though um the state continues to promote those services for online renewal. Um the number of customers using kiosks to renew their vehicle tabs as we see those counts, they do they are inching up. Um but then uh since our numbers of in-office customers are also going up, I wonder if the kiosk users are they necessarily customers that would normally come into our office or are they from another community happen to be shopping at the Cub and use the kiosk that if they were going to go in office, they would would have gone to a different in-office um DMV. Uh so the state continues as they try and push to have those transactions online, they are developing other online solutions for routine transactions um so that they can capture revenue for their operations and offer ease to customers. Recently the state implemented a new DNR system uh for fishing licenses. And I don't imagine that the impact will be significant on our offices um operations. When we look back to how many uh fishing licenses we do, most people don't stop by our license bureau to do a to get their fishing license cuz it's easier to go to like a Fleet Farm or to a gas station. They're usually add-on services. Someone stops in to get their driver's license and as long as they're here, then they get their fishing license. Um the state is working to move more DNR um transactions, kind of the title transactions to be online. Um it'll be interesting to see the impact of that because currently customers can do the work online and we're still seeing we don't have a significant portion of those transactions, but we still do a number of them. So, if people can currently do it now and are choosing not to, with the new system, will they choose to do that or will they choose to stop into our offices? Um So, I think that is kind of the summary that I have on our license bureau. We'll be watching closely just to watch those customer counts, the transaction counts, and to see how the online systems are impacting our operations in the months to come. So, I'm willing to take any questions that you have tonight. >> Okay, thank you, Mr. Kinsfater. Does anybody have any questions? Council member Walsh. >> Thank you, Madam Mayor. The on the EVTR process, what is what Can you just describe that? I don't remember this I don't remember what this exactly is. Is that Is that being done at the dealership at like back end stuff? So, is it relieving time and work from from our team? They're not in the back room like they used to be doing trying to keep up with those? >> Madam Mayor, Council member Walsh, yes. With the EVTR, uh the dealership starts the title work and then it comes through our system. The staff review it to make sure that it was the proper amounts were included and that it's all correct. And then once they approve it, then it gets sent to the state. So, it's not us manually entering the data. >> Are we still charging the same? I mean, we're still getting the the revenue out of that or they reduce our revenue on that? So, it's >> No, it's the same. >> And because our value add is obviously the check, but also just the stamp like saying this is official. >> Correct. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Does anybody else have any questions? Councilmember West. >> So, this isn't necessarily budget-related. It's more about the um license bureau and kind of the lines. And I know you're not the expert on this, but you did mention, you know, when we had long lines. Um it's been my experience um that you still have to wait in a line, but it really goes fairly quickly at this point. So, I'm just wondering um for those who are wondering if you or or anyone else might have some information about like are there slower times or better times to go if you're interested in like going to our license bureau, but kind of don't want to face like as many lines? >> Yes, uh Madam Mayor, Councilmember West, that's a great question. Um there are good times to come. Mid-week is usually better than on a Monday or Friday. And mid-month is usually better. At the end of a month, the state will send out the tab renewals um to everyone. So, there people are getting them right as the month is starting. So, our lines are longer if you come the last few days of a month or the first few days of a next month. Um so, they come in the mail. Just wait a couple of days um and then come and see the line will go uh much faster. We also are open until 6:00 on Tuesdays. So, I whenever anybody asks me, I always say the sweet spot is between 4:00 and 6:00 on a Tuesday. You can get in and out. Um our lines have not been as long. Um what was taking a long time is processing of so many driver's license. So, we're able to get people through the lines. We've also had a temporary position. Um we had a college student working with us this summer and she can do the basic transactions. So, she'll go through the line and she'll have line duty. She'll talk to each person in line, find out what they have for their paperwork and what transaction they are hoping to do. So, she's reviewing to make sure that they have all their necessary data, so they're not walking up to the front of the line and then finding out that they have to go get additional data. And she's also pulling people out of line and as she's going through and saying, "I can help you and you and you. Will you please step forward?" She'll quick help them, then she'll go back to the line, walk through, help people, and pull out people. So, that really keeps um the line moving fast to help those people and then the people who have more complex transactions, then they'll have a little bit shorter line as they wait for one of our full-time staff to help. >> I want to add to that. We So, we usually tell people midweek, midmonth, midday. All those things I didn't expect you in addition [snorts] to um Tuesday evenings. I learned from our staff that having uh when I bought my car a year and a half ago, it's optional to have the dealer do that title work. So, I I said, "I don't want you to do my dealer work. I want to do it somewhere else." And I wanted a play a blackout plate and and a bunch of other things and they kind of put up a stink about it at the dealership and eventually they let me go. But knowing that that was optional for me to say I don't want you to do it. I do want to leave here with just the you know, the white plate or whatever and I want to come here and do it because I wanted them to help me. And the first year that the kiosk was up and running, um, I upset our license bureau supervisor and Director Kinsfather and I used it >> [laughter] >> because, um, we were I I did yell at Councilmember Walsh as well after I used it. Um, but we were part of it, so I wanted to learn I wanted to see what it was about and and I actually wouldn't use it again because I had to type in a lot of information and I had to go back out to my car to get insurance and I had I had to do several steps whereas coming here they will do all of that for me. And so, yeah, maybe it's convenient when you're picking up your groceries or you're you just remember it on a Sunday, uh, cough Director Coffee or something, >> [clears throat] >> but he's not listening. >> [laughter] >> But it's much easier to come here and have someone do it and our staff are incredibly friendly and they want want to help our customers. Just wanted to add those things. >> Can I add a mayor members of the council? The other thing there are additional fees that happen if you use the kiosk. So, you have to pay an additional $5 on top of the fees so that the system can be there. That's kind of your service fee on top of the credit card fee that you would pay. So, we can save you fees and, um, we do have a drop box outside that's, um, by the flagpole in front of City Hall and you can put all your documents in there, drop it in the drop box. Our staff empties the drop box multiple times during the day, will process them and then mail them out the same day. So, it can, um, there can be convenient times if you think about it on a Sunday and you can't get in but want to handle it, you can just leave them in the drop box. >> Thank you so much. Councilmember Edberg. >> Thank you, Madam Mayor. Um, so just an eyeballing Ms. Kinsfather, it looks like we're through June 30th, uh, $20,000 ballpark, um, expenses over revenues, that doesn't particularly, uh, surprise or scare me. It's like that there's still plenty of, uh, um, months in the year. So, I'm not terribly worried and I think we're we're in a reasonable spot. Um, I Unlike some others, I've only ever done my transactions in person in our license bureau. And, uh, I've always been completely satisfied with the competence and and, uh, courtesy of our staff. So, our our and the folks who do the work really know their stuff and they do it well and I appreciate that. Um, couple of que- So, I think your assessment of the marketing issues involved in the license bureau is pretty spot-on. I rolled it around a couple of times. At what point So, we're seeing some different patterns emerge. We're not sure why. Um, at what point do you think you it might be the appropriate time for us to either, um, do some other informal, uh, information gathering, market research, if you will, uh, on why people are choosing what the what's not, um, and creating a communications plan that says, "Here's why we are better and please come and, you know, please dot dot dot." Um, my fear at some point, and it's not a huge fear, but, um, we offer this as a service to our residents and we do it for the purpose of making their lives easier, faster, less stressful. Um, mostly we succeed most days. Um, if we started consistently having expenses over revenues, that becomes a challenge and we just have to have a hard conversation. I'd prefer not to have that, so it's like letting folks know that if you value the service, use it. Um and that that's that's kind of where it comes down. So, from your perspective, um how do you think about that that need and the timing for when we begin to gather other information that gives us insights as to what kind of messaging, what what um channels for messaging we might use, etc., etc. Any thoughts? >> Uh Madam Mayor, Council Member Edberg, um we haven't done a customer uh survey uh since before COVID. I think we had done one, and then it it was busy after COVID, and um we haven't done one. So, I think that's a great opportunity to uh think through the best way to do that and really get good feedback on the services people are using, and um make sure that we're capturing um all of the transactions that we can, and what we could do to help entice somebody to come in. >> Council Member Edberg, I wanted to add to that that we do regular um paid marketing ads in the newspaper or various guides to inform the public of and just remind them um about our service and the hours. So, we do regularly um have paid marketing. Um you know, we haven't had a need [clears throat] to do social media um much in recent past, but it's a good reminder that uh it's a good reminder to put another reminder out. >> Thank you. >> Okay, Council Member Carola. >> Yeah, I'll just kind of add to what others have kind of said. I had to renew my license this spring. I came in at one of probably the busier times and it was still really smooth. Our staff are very wonderful. Um you know, obviously I've done this quite a few times in my life and sometimes it's confusing even though I've done it and I thought everything the way it's set up and explained is makes it very easy to do it at our location. I was just going to also speak to the the tabs what customer Brooke was saying too. I didn't know that doing them online meant that then that's taking money from the city. And then once I got on council I learned that and then I told my spouse and everybody I'm like I can't do this. Go in person and people were very willing because I think people have had such positive experiences coming here. But I guess I would just speak to also what more ways we can share that and let others know because once I tell people because they've had a good customer service experience here, they're willing. They just didn't realize. >> Thank you. Okay, any other questions, comments? I too have scolded my part my husband for doing tabs online and just last week he came in here to do his tabs. >> [laughter] >> So. It's a great experience. All right, so thank you so much Ms. Kinsfather for coming in and for all your hard work and thank everybody in the license department for us as well. >> We'll do. >> Okay. >> Tell hubby to write us a check for 10 or 20 bucks. >> Exactly. >> [laughter] >> All right, moving on. Item six A public hearings. The first reading of an ordinance amending chapter 406 of the municipal code regarding illicit discharge detection and elimination. Ms. Tallon. >> Thank you Madam Mayor and members of the council. I'll provide a little background information on this update. The city of Waite Park Lake owns and operates a municipal separate storm sewer system, or MS4 for short. This MS4 is a public stormwater infrastructure, such as curbs, ditches, and storm sewer pipe that discharge stormwater runoff into our public water bodies. So, as an owner and operator of an MS4, they must apply for an MS4 general permit from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. The MS4 general permit is mandated by federal regulations under the Clean Water Act and in is administered in this state by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, or MPCA. The purpose of the MS4 general permit is to reduce pollution from stormwater runoff into our public waters. The city first applied for an MS4 permit back in 2003, and every 5 years the this permit is renewed. As part of this renewal, the MPCA incorporates updated environmental standards, clear guidelines, or new mandates if necessary. As part of this renewal process, the MPCA does allow for or provide review and comment by the public. So, our current MS4 permit requires the city's regulatory mechanism, which is our ordinances, to include language for proper salt storage at commercial, institutional, and non-state permitted industrial facilities. So, this is brand new with the new permit cycle. So, this is why I'm bringing this to you now. The purpose of this new regulatory mechanism is to reduce the unnecessary salt runoff to public waters and groundwater from exposure of these salt piles to rain and snow. Chloride pollution in public waters and groundwater is a growing concern. Chloride is toxic to wildlife and is very difficult to remove and very costly to remove once it's in our water bodies. So, I have a snippet of the MPCA chloride conditions data map and you can just go to the MPCA website and just search for the chloride data map and that is a GIS map showing the different water bodies that have elevated chloride. So, because of this the current permit, we are recommending to amend city code 406, which is our stormwater code, and subsection 406.020, which within the stormwater code is our illicit discharge detection and elimination by adding this following language that I have in your memo and also on the screen. So, proper storage is required at commercial, institutional, and non-NPDES permitted industrial facilities. So, what non-NPDES permitted means is those are industrial facilities not already under a industrial permit through the MPCA. So, this prevents negative environmental impacts. The following best management practices are required. One, designated salt storage areas must be covered or indoors. Two, designated salt storage areas must be located on an impervious surface. And three, implementation of practices to reduce exposure when transferring material in designated salt storage areas such as sweeping diversions and or containment. This is the language that we are proposing to add to city code 406 and this is almost identical to the language the minimum language requirements that is in the current MS4 permit. So in a previous permit renewal the MS4 permittees were required to do the same thing and so this picture shows our public works storage building where we put our salt piles. We have very large salt piles because we do salt a lot of roads. Um so that's you know under an enclosure and also on an impermeable surface. So local businesses that would fall within this new code could use if they have outdoor salt piles, they could use smaller containment systems that are readily available online or store them in the in their building. Um but we have not seen a lot of issues with outdoor salt storage with our businesses so we don't think that this would be maybe a huge burden for those businesses. Uh we think maybe a lot of the small businesses just hire out snow removal in the winter and don't have their own salt piles. So with that uh I will entertain any questions that you may have. >> Okay, does anyone have any questions for Ms. Tallon? Councilmember Edberg. >> Thank you, Ms. Tallon. Um so do we know the locations of the folks who would be who have salt storage and are they on a database somewhere? Are they identified? Um, I hear that there is I'm not quite sure how to interpret the non-NPD whatever that acronym is. Um, permittees. Do we know where they are and how many we have in the city? >> Mayor Councilmember Edberg, we don't have a database for that. Uh, we would I suppose if there's an issue or we see if we see something, um, we would have the authority through this code update to, um, discuss options with that business. Okay. >> Paul, I don't know if you have anything to add, but we don't have a database. >> Yeah, Mayor members of the council, one thing I will add as we move forward with this, we would do education, um, so that businesses who may have those kind of stored piles, um, could react to it. Um, we really don't see many, um, businesses or institutions that have, uh, stockpiles of, you know, piles of salt in their, um, you know, parking lots and things like that. Most of them do use contractual services where they have it in their truck. You'll see a lot more, um, uh, snow removal services that have their own salters in the back of their trucks. They're moving around. They're, um, um, they really don't anticipate, um, or smaller businesses use the bags or the, uh, smaller containers of salt. Um, um, we would really do it more as a visual basis. If we saw it, we we would react to it. >> So, we don't have the ability to, for example, when we if this gets adopted, we don't have the capacity to send it out to a body of potential businesses that are affected. Um, they're going to have to learn learn about it through other normal means or communication strategies, Um, um but since we don't know them, Okay, got it. And then presumably the folks who are carrying around salt in the back of their trucks, they would be uh regulated if they are maintaining those, but they may not be in our community. >> Um Mayor, members of the council, that is correct. >> Okay, thanks. >> Okay, any other questions? I'm now going to open a public hearing. We have a public hearing on this. I'm going to open the public hearing. If anybody wishes to speak on this resolution. Going once. Going twice. Okay, I am now going to close the public hearing. Um thank you. Okay, anything else for staff? Does anybody else have any discussion? Or anything from staff? >> Oh, yes. Um Madam Mayor, members of council, uh we we just ask if if you have anything else to provide um for our direction for any changes to the language before the second reading, which will be held on August 25th. >> Okay. Thank you so much. All right. Uh moving on. Item seven, unfinished business. We have nothing scheduled. Item eight, new business. 8A, a resolution denying a variance for an accessory building at 921 Wildwood Road. Mr. Lindahl. >> [clears throat] >> Thank you, Mayor, members of the council. As you mentioned, the item before you is an accessory building size variants. Um, for the property located at 921 Wildwood Road. Um, the applicant is the owner of this shopping center, Chung Dang Dang Properties LLC. Um, and um, the What you see here is the property in question is located um, in the northeast quadrant of County Road E and Century Avenue. Um, and is known I think generally as the Wildwood Shopping Center. Um, the again what the applicant is requesting here is an accessory building size variance. Um, and we'll get into the details of that in just a moment. Um, As part of the public hearing process, staff received no comments on it from the public. Um, the planning commission reviewed this at their uh, last meeting and um, agreed with staff's finding and recommendation for denial in this case. So, just by way of quick background, the property is zoned MXC, that's our mixed-use corridor category and guided neighborhood mixed-use in the comprehensive plan. It was originally platted back in 2000. Um, but the original grocery store on the site was built in 19 uh, 58 uh, or excuse me, was built uh, It originally contained a grocery store and in 1958 it was converted to the shopping center that you see here today. So, um, the the property in question has a history of a couple of different conditional use permits. Um, but one that's um, directly related to this application is one that was granted by the city back in 2021. Um, the applicant here tonight um, sought and did receive approval of a conditional use permit for a fenced outdoor storage area in the rear of the property that you see here in that lower image. Um and there were two important conditions as part of the approval of that conditional use permit that the space was limited to 1,690 sq ft. And that it must provide fire access. And what you can see in this in the picture above in the upper picture is the man door that you see in the right side of the image and then the fire department connection items that are on the building. Um if you look then back down into the lower image, you can also see that man door just above where the outdoor storage is angled. And so the angling of that outdoor fenced outdoor storage area was necessary to provide adequate fire access to the building into the site. Um what the applicant has has done is squared off that area because now in the image on the left we've switched our orientation here a little bit. So now you're looking at it from the west looking east. Um and so the the image the outdoor storage area is kind of in the image of the center of the left hand image. And it covers what was the approved outdoor fenced in storage area. And what's important to note there is that you'll you'll see that the image of the excuse me the outdoor excuse me the the building has now been squared off so that fire access no longer exists. Um and then on the right side here you see an image of the building that was constructed. Um and so it um basically includes adding siding above the original um fenced off area, adding a door, and adding a a metal roof over that area. Um, so this unlawful building was discovered through um just the random site inspection um from community development staff. Letters were sent to the owner informing them of the violation. Um, the owner applied then for an after-the-fact building permit which was deemed insufficient based on the violations that had occurred. And those again include the building size and the materials of the building. Um, a subsequent kind of initial inspection from our building official um finds that the the footings and the beams for the building are likely insufficient for uh and don't meet code. Um, and because of the proximity of the buildings, the out the the unlawful outdoor storage building and its location next to the um principal shopping center building, um the walls of both buildings need to be fire-rated. And so um that condition doesn't exist here. And then again because as we mentioned the squaring off of the building um has um violated the condition of that additional original conditional use permit and blocks uh fire access to those needed facilities. So the owner then uh chose uh to apply for an accessory building size variance. And with with the understanding in their stated application that they would address the other things if the accessory building size variance was granted. So, um there's some question in staff's mind both in the zoning side and the building side about whether that's practical given the condition of the building without taking it almost completely down anyway and starting over. Um but just I wanted to inform the council that again, what the applicant is asking for here is limited to just the size variance and says they'll address all of the other concerns. >> Are there other uh violations? >> Um So, again, just um to point out um to the council again, this item was discovered just by a happenstance um staff inspection of the property. Um it it was constructed without a building permit. Um just generally speaking again, if that process had been followed, I think we would have avoided um many of the violations that exist with the current building. Um we went staff went through a typical pro code enforcement process to um inform the property owner of the violation and try to work with them. Um and then again, the applicant has exercised their you know, their ability to come through on the zoning and the variance side of things. Um but again, um staff um made um made findings um based on the criteria set out for for for variances that there isn't a practical difficulty in this case. It really is the result of of conditions created by the applicant. So, uh the the staff report goes into a lot more detail about what those findings are and I can go through any of those details or answer any questions about that if the council has questions. Um but really again at this point staff is recommending along with the planning commission that the council adopt the attached resolution denying this variance again based on the findings outlined in your staff report. And with that I'd stand for questions. >> Mr. Lindahl, so I have a couple questions. So the owner the fence that was built the owner did ask for permit to build the fence. >> Mayor members of the council, that's correct. >> Okay. So they they know that there's a permit required to build things. >> Mayor members of the council, that's a fair presumption. >> Okay. Okay, and the size of the building cannot possibly stay the same because it blocks the fire access for the fire department. Is that correct? >> that's correct. >> Okay, cuz there's lots of other businesses in this building that could have a fire. So they the fire department needs to protect all the people in that building. Okay. >> [gasps] >> Does anybody else have any questions or comments? Council member Walsh. >> Thank you Mayor what's what's the right way to in your in your mind from a development perspective to proceed? I mean it seems like is the the if you were going to give advice to the applicant, you know, really start over is it really just it's really just start over with the building permit and the perhaps perhaps doesn't need any variances if you apply for a building permit might might fit might work. >> Mayor members of the council, that's a difficult question because we don't have full plans and information to review. And we haven't done a full assessment of the building because that's just hasn't been part of this process. Um at this point um you know, the staff's direction in the letters to um the property owner have been to remove the building and go back to the outdoor storage fenced-in outdoor storage area that was approved. Um as part of those conversations and sitting down with the the property owner and and phone conversations and the like they've made the pledge that I outlined before that if they could get the size variance that they would address all of the other issues. Uh in conversations between my uh the planning staff and the city's building official there's a legitimate questions about whether or not that's practical without just taking the whole building down. I mean, for example, the the the footings that are under this uh under this area, we can't see because they're covered up underground and there was no permit or information about what they were. And so then again, the general um you know, just kind of site inspection of the beams and that kind of thing you know, it's the building official's position that they likely don't adequately support the building or the roof from a snow load perspective. So >> So if I could just if it's if it was a clean slate, if there was nothing there, there would be an allowance for a building or a structure of much smaller than what they'd done. Um and then obviously done right uh with with the right footings and everything else. Really really a lot smaller than what's there now. >> Mayor members of the council, what we've discussed with the applicant is um the opportunity to be because they've >> [snorts] >> expressed um um that they will address all of the other things, the fire code, the fire separation, access to the fire all the building code items, the building materials, all the other things with the exception of the size since they've made that pledge. We've just suggested [snorts] and even offered that they just go down to the size of the building that's allowed and come and and go through the process that they've already agreed to do. Um, they chose to go through the this process which they have the right to do. Um, um but again s- staff has suggested really just staff's position has been to meet the ordinance and the building code and the fire code. >> I think you gave them good advice. I think that's the right course. >> Okay. Does anybody else have any questions or comments? Council member West. >> Um, I think my biggest concern, um, I mean, I guess I have several concerns which have been outlined very clearly, um, what the issues are. My biggest concern is, um, the lack of ability for fire to get where they need to get. Um, it's a it's a huge safety issue. Um, we would not want to be here, um, on the council after some tragedy that happened because they couldn't get in and and take care of the fire like they needed to. Um, so I don't I don't see how this can, uh, move forward as is and I would support the recommendation. Council member Egberg. >> Thank you, Madam Mayor. So, Mr. Lindahl, I'm just trying to piece together if the council supports the recommendation of staff that we deny the request. Um I'm looking for clarity on exactly where the ball sits in that next game that gets played. Here's what's in my head, but I'm not sure that it's that it's accurate. Once this is denied, if this is denied, then um we have a building that is in violation of of our codes. Uh the owner has to take some type of action. The owner has in my mind at least made some evidence of good faith um conversation about wanting to remedy the the issues. The question becomes how to come into compliance. At that point, the owner has at least some options for how they might proceed, and they could reenter into discussion with staff about which of those What are those options? Which one seem to fit the needs of the business, the affordability, the all of the other stuff to come into compliance with some type of new structure. Am I Am I right in thinking that that's the path that that this would follow if the council approves this, or what am I missing? >> Mayor, members of the council, I I would say that the applicant um has really two options that we've kind of outlined here tonight. The first one would be to take down the building and go back to the approved conditions under the fenced-in um um conditional use a fenced fenced-in outdoor storage area conditional use permit that was approved. The second option would be to make adjustments to the building that bring it into compliance. And again, staff's opinion is that that may not be practical Um and we just don't have enough information to really know at this point. >> But okay, to take that aspect one step further. Assuming good faith conversations on both sides, is there is that at least a reasonable path to attempt to pursue to say, "Okay, come in and let's let let's answer your question, check on the footings, check on the whatevers need to be done." And then if that can be done, fine, that's an option. If it can't be done and if for whatever reason it doesn't doesn't have enough load-bearing strength in the in the trusses, for example, then that's no longer an option, so it's go to plan C or plan D, but they still get to make some choices about what to put up next or how to ameliorate them. Yes, no? >> Well, yes. I I think some of Mayor members of the council I'm sorry to hear your answer. I I would agree with your premise, but I think some of this boils down to um timing and you know, and enforcement of this. So, the app you know, this was identified back in February, at the end of February. And so, we've gone through um you know, several months of process here um and the applicant has yet to submit plans that demonstrate fixing the building is possible. And so, assuming the um the council follows the recommendation that's before it tonight and the application is denied, the applicant would have the two choices that we've just outlined. Go back to just the approved outdoor storage area or you know, make changes to the building to come into code. Um and I think you know, we could have a conversation about what's an appropriate timeline for that. But staff is skeptical that that it's possible to do to fix the building. And again, the applicants had months of time to demonstrate that and hasn't yet. >> Okay. Is there a statutory or within our codes a timeline that that kicks in upon our decision one way or the other for enforcement? >> [sighs] >> Members of the council, I might ask the city attorney to chime in on that. >> Sure, Mayor and Council. There's not. I mean, the city has some discretion on how it enforces its code. What I would add to the discussion is and I know the applicant's here, so I think it's good for the applicant to hear this. Um right now we have an unlawful building that's creating public safety issues. It doesn't comply with the building code. It doesn't comply with the zoning code and the fire department's concerned about it for the reasons you've heard about. Um assuming the recommendations are followed tonight, I think staff would continue putting pressure on the property owner to remove the illegal building because of those issues. Um and I think if if that doesn't happen, we would have the ability to pursue further code enforcement, but there's no timing requirement about that. I think code enforcement happens, um you know, based on staff's prerogative and how quickly they can act and they work sometimes with property owners and I think staff has been very patient with this one because they wanted to allow the applicant the opportunity to at least take a run at this even though we were very clear from day one, um including myself with with the applicant's attorney, that there are probably no grounds legally to approve a variance here given the the statutory standard about that. But but I would add to that um one ability the city has to enforce, if we needed to, would be to uh revoke the conditional use permit that was previously granted allowing that outdoor outdoor storage area. Um because right now that storage area is being used in a way that is not in compliance with that CUP. So that's a a tool that the city would have, and I think an effective one that would leave the property owner without any storage options because they wouldn't be able to have their building, and they wouldn't be able to have their outdoor storage area, which they previously requested, and I think the city would have grounds to do that. So I I think that's an important factor for everybody in the room to to hear about tonight. >> Thank you, Dave. >> Sure. So just to finish my thoughts. >> Mhm. >> Um I think enforcement of the code is important and needs to be I'm I'm com- comfortable in in denying this variance request. If there is good faith participation on the other side, it takes some time to take down a building. It's not something you start at 9:00 tomorrow morning. So it's like there is a space for being for some level of reasonable um timing reasonable enforcement timing um so long as there's good faith involved. In the absence of that or in the in the presence of delay, even if it's not good faith, then other options become available. So it's like kindly use your judgment as to which of those conditions fit. But that's what's in my head. >> Thank you. Uh Council Member West. Um I I appreciate those comments, um Council Member Edberg. And uh what I heard was that the city has been working with the um person since February. So, that makes it nearly half a year um and how long the communication has gone and on and it sounds like there's been pretty clear com- communication about what the expectations are and there hasn't been any plans that have been provided to change kind of the situation. Um I would I wouldn't prolong. I guess yes, yes, it does take time. Um but this has already been 6 months. Again, I am very concerned about the safety issues, the fire safety issues. Thank you, Council Member West. Um anyone else? Okay, would the applicant like to address the council? >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> Yes. Please state your name and address for the record. >> Yes. Hi, my name is Chong Dang. I'm on the owner of the um 921 Whitewood Road. I come to United 1990 from Vietnam. So, a city a year ago, I purchased the building which is vacant about 55% vacant. I bought it. So, first year, we got um management by we hire by company. It's cost, you know, the management it cost so expensive. So, a year later, I decided to do my management myself. Which is I have to have uh equipment, lawn mower, um snow removal. So, I got permit to get the the fencing to keep my equipment. And a year later, I found out it's not very safe to do to do that because children monkey around on that. They will jump in the the fan because of it opening. So, the kid will jump in and steal and I mean steal can [snorts] steal or stop because all the equipment is expensive. So, I decide I didn't well I I I just put the the roof to cover all my equipment there. So, I about 2 years I found out um just able this year label and then find out with the ban even just just city um officer they say, "Come. Hey, you don't have to have the permit to do this to build it." So, that's why I say, "Hey, I'm willing to The city sent me a letter to tell me I have to take down thing like that. I say Hey, hey I I said I will willing pay the fire throughout without building permit. So, I will get a uh architect get the permit uh fire code everything I will come with the what the city require. I'm willing to do that. And city city planning liability planning say it it too big just 18 my side 40 by 45 with a almost it 1,800 square foot. So, city liability recommend and say, "Hey, why don't you put two two um they say the the zoning is not it cannot exceed 1,000 square foot. So, it recommend me to put two two 1,000." That don't make sense. It did it It two the same thing, 2,000 square foot. So, that's why I just get two variants to get the one instead of two, I can get one which is only 1,800 square foot for that. >> And and have you had the architect draw up the >> I haven't done that yet because the first step, if I pass the variant, so I will go next step, architectural, fire code, pass fire code, and and all kind I will come up to water permit requirement. I have to do that. >> Right. I see. Does anybody have any questions? Council member >> I appreciate you coming and sharing tonight. Um originally, I really thought the planning commission helped me a lot in their thoughts of, "Okay, knowing you need the permit for the fence." Cuz I understand sometimes people come, even I Google, "Do we need a permit for this?" when I do things, right? Um and so I understand that. But then knowing the permit for the fence, I I their logic under their I understood the logic the planning commission presented in saying, "Then, did you know needing one for the building?" Um because then if you know you needed one for the fence, you would know you needed one for the building. Did you know that? >> Uh yes and no because I got I got the fencing again the fencing. So, I say I just put the the wood. So, cover the whole thing, so I don't have so after that, I say so I just make mistake. I I willing pay a fine for that and get all the requirement to get the permit done. All those things change, I I'm willing to do that. >> And then I think for me the other thing, if you can go back to the slides, Mr. Lindahl, the one showing the original approved fence. I think that the Yeah, the corner there, mainly to make it fire safety because sometimes fire is not just fires, right? It's alarms, it's medical calls. It can be so many other things. They have to get in there. And so, that one and then going to the original is totally blocking that. I I guess I echo with I That That's a big concern for me and why I don't think I'd be able to say, "Okay." just because I don't want you also liable for somebody >> Right. >> happens in emergency and they can't get in there. >> So, I willing to get the fire connection more up to um 10 ft. So, I can get different way to get in without cutting corner. >> But, it's different, I guess, to my from the fence you put up knowing that one was approved. And I don't know if it was, you know, the contractor or who you have build it that this one didn't have that. >> Yeah, right here. I have four plans for in in step right here. >> There, but that was built after. I think what I'm saying is going back to the original. It's hard for me to get past the what was approved and then what was built because it didn't even have that same structure model. >> Right. >> Okay. Anybody else? Okay, thank you so much for coming in. >> Thank you. >> Thank you for coming in. All right, is there any further discussion? Councilmember West. I guess I just A thing that um I guess I didn't realize at first is that the building is actually made from the original fencing on the bottom and then he somehow had like the metal or whatever put on top of it or on side of it. It also like that also concerns me as far as how safe and secure that is. Um so. >> Any further discussion? Okay, is there is there a motion to adopt a resolution denying the request for the accessory structures size variance at the property located at 921 Wildwood Road? >> Madam Mayor. >> Okay. >> I just had another question. >> Council member Lindahl. >> What's the uh what's the rationale or the the between two 1,000 square foot buildings versus one 2,000 square foot building? What are the nuances in inside of that option? >> Mayor, members of the council, um the the the the spirit and intent behind that language is to um twofold. To to prevent um larger accessory buildings from potentially becoming um more of a principal use um than than just accessory um because the storage use of a building in in this zone is not a permitted use. If you were going to do a storage use activity, that would be in our business park, our industrial, or our IX mixed-use commercial or industrial zone, okay? Um the second one is admittedly more aesthetic in that um the larger buildings two smaller buildings have less of an aesthetic impact than one larger one. Um so I would say it's really more related to the again the largeness of a use that isn't allowed within the zone and an aesthetic one um preventing larger buildings in this case. >> I'm not going to argue with that. I've walked behind and and impact privacy issues. I grew up two blocks away. Um it's on the back back side of a building that does not have direct public observation and access. So it's like I'm not quite sure how aesthetic, but I'm not going to argue the point. >> Okay. >> Go ahead on the other hand. >> Remember girl >> is and maybe I read this when I read through it, but can you remind me the time frame? Do we have any idea of when like from when it was approved to when this went up versus what was actually approved? >> Um Mayor members of the council, admittedly sitting here right now, I don't have a good time for you. >> came to me. >> Um it it the original permit was for the outdoor storage area fenced-in outdoor storage area was approved in 2021. Um I I don't recall if um in working on the staff report, if if if staff went through like an extensive look at aerial photos to narrow it down to maybe a particular year when it happened. Um I'm sorry, I just don't know that. >> No, that's okay. And it just came to me when again he was speaking going back to kind of the intent versus what was approved and then what was built and trying to understand that a bit more. But thank you. >> Council member Walsh. >> Thank you, Mayor. I would move approval of the resolution in front of us to deny the request. >> Okay. I'll second. Okay. Any further discussion? Seeing none. All in favor? >> Aye. >> Aye. >> Opposed? Okay. The resolution passes. Okay. Um item nine, discussion, nothing is scheduled. Item 10, communications from the city manager. >> Thank you, Mayor, members of the council. Um I wanted to highlight um Senator Heather Gustafson was selected as the League of Minnesota Cities 2026 Legislator of Distinction. I think we've shared this 3 years in a row that she's been um uh given this distinction. Um but this year I added to the slide um the kind of the qualifications um that legislators must achieve one or more of those following criteria. So um I won't read them to the group, but um just wanted to congratulate um Senator Gustafson. And I think this year were 23 legislators, um some from House and some from Senate. So that's all I have for tonight. Thank you. >> Thank you. Uh Council member Walsh, did you have something you wanted to share today? >> uh, Madam Mayor. I just attended today the, uh, quarterly meeting, we meet about quarterly, of the Ramsey County Dispatch Advisory Committee. Uh, we're on that committee as a city. Um, it's your it's your appointment. You're you're I'm serving for you, Madam Mayor, um, because we converted to the Ramsey County system in 2017, which is almost 10 years ago. Um, so we get kind of a special seat on that. There's there's there's a few of us that have our own, um, agreements with the Dispatch Group. And then otherwise there's a couple of at-large uh, city representatives from the rest of the Ramsey County suburban uh, cities. Uh, we the reason I bring it up is we we are we're heading into a period where we're they're reviewing all of the joint powers agreements with all of the cities, and it's kind of a mishmash. We have our own because we joined in 2017. Others have joined uh, through the years. Then then there's one with several cities, you know, so they're trying to get all of the cities into one big joint powers agreement for operations and for the radio system. So, um, a lot of work between uh, they're aggressive agenda uh, or schedule to try and get a draft done October, November. It's coming our way. You're going to get an update uh, at a at a meeting of um, city administrators soon. Um, anyways, part of the day I I invited them to come here. Uh, they they kind of offered, and so I said, "Yes, we would be interested in update from Ramsey County Dispatch." I don't know that we've had them here since we switched, and I think it's a good story, and I think they can there's a lot of um, probably half of the slide deck we saw today. I said that would be good for us. The the second half got really into the details of the joint powers agreement, which I think we can leave to you two, staff, uh, to figure out. Uh, but really interesting stuff uh, from the Ramsey County Dispatch that serves our residents. Uh, so I think it'd be worthwhile uh, visit presentation. So that I offered that today on our behalf. So >> [laughter] >> hope that's okay. >> Yeah, that's great. >> But >> Thank you. >> Link Becker was there, the county administrator, and she said she would communicate with city administrators on the you know, through that channel. So I don't know if I stepped on toes. >> Excellent. Does any anybody else have anything to share? Been going on the last week? All right. We will go on to item 11, the closed session. So we are now going to go into a closed session pursuant to Minnesota statute section 13D.05 [clears throat] sub division 3C3, which authorizes the council to develop or consider offers of counteroffers for a purchase of sale of real property. The address of the real property under discussion is 1890 Whitaker Street. Therefore, I request a motion to go into a closed session pursuant to the Minnesota statute 13D.5 sub 3C3 to discuss the above described matters. Do I have a motion? >> So moved. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> Aye. >> Any opposed? Okay, we are now in a closed session.