[Music] folks all ready. >> Ready. >> We'll call the Shaki City Council meeting to order for October 7th, 2025. If the clerk could please take the role. Council member Delaney >> here. >> Council member Whiting >> here. >> Council member Contreras >> here. >> Council member Laura >> here. >> Mayor Layman >> here. Item number three. If you want to join us for the pledge of allegiance, please >> 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. Item number four, we have two uh special presentations. 4A is a presentation by Southern Valley Alliance. Officer Davis, welcome. And >> good evening. >> You can go ahead and pull that mic closer if need be. >> Okay. Uh, good evening, mayor and city council members. Uh, thank you for having me here tonight. Uh, my name is Josh Davis. I am the investigation sergeant for the Shock Police Department and I also serve on the board of directors for Southern Valley Alliance. Uh, as you're aware, October is domestic violence awareness month. And now more than ever, it is imperative that the city of Shakipi recognizes and works to combat domestic abuse. Southern Valley Alliance is the only organization to provide services to victims of domestic abuse in both Scott and Carver counties. In our last fiscal year, SVA served 225 victims in Shakapi alone. In addition, uh we answered over 2,000 calls to our crisis line and assisted victims and survivors in their greatest time of need by providing crisis intervention, emotional support, resources, housing, and safety planning. Uh SVA is a prevention and solutions focused organization that partners with law enforcement, health care, social services, and community members in Scott and Carver County. Southern Valley Alliance was founded in the early 1980s uh in Bell Plane by by local women who had experienced domestic abuse. Uh in January of 2024, SVA moved to Shakapei. Uh, as I'm sure many of you are aware, once we moved to Shakipi, we had a 20% increase in the demand for our services because victims had a better uh, opportunity to reach our advocacy center and our staff that was there. As a community-based and community funded organization, Southern Valley Alliance is facing significant federal, state, and local funding cuts. Amidst these cuts, it is important that the city of Shakapei recognizes domestic violence awareness month and does all it can to support victims and survivors today and throughout the year. We encourage community members to follow us online and to learn more about what SVA does. So again, thank you for having me tonight. >> Questions? >> Mr. Lara, >> I have a question. Um there's statistics out there that showed um during COVID uh that the incre there was an intake of um domestic violence reports. Have you guys noticed this that number falling as time goes on or it staying about the same or >> uh I would say the numbers I don't have the historical numbers with me tonight but I would say they have not gone down. Uh I would say be partially because of our location change and just our ability to get in front of victims. Our numbers therefore have gone up. Um so I wouldn't necessarily say that the postcoid numbers have shown a decrease at all. >> Correct. >> So I don't know what the nationwide numbers are. >> Sure. >> Councelor Contrarus, >> here's a quick question. anything we can do um as just anyone who's watching or is interested with all these cuts, something that we can do to help um alleviate a little bit of these cuts, like how can we help SDA? >> Uh I would say one of the most important things for community members is to call their legislator to let them know that uh funding is being cut at a variety of levels. Um, and it's happening to a lot of nonprofits, not just SVA, but it certainly impacts our organization a lot. >> Uh, in addition to some of the things I mentioned here, uh, SVA does a lot of, uh, temporary housing for victims of domestic violence. And that housing is expensive, um, to provide apartments and places for people to live who are, uh, perhaps fleeing domestic violence. And without that funding, we can't provide that housing. And so I would encourage citizens to call their legislature, make them aware of the importance of the continued funding for these nonprofits. I think it's been very evident in the news the uh the fraud uh that's been happening with so many nonprofits and I think that puts the good ones under a bigger microscope and makes it harder for us to get the funding we need because of >> uh the people that have abused the system unfortunately. So SVA is doing it the right way. Uh they're going um you know working with the state to get the right funding the right way and then in turn using the funding for the right things. >> And so it's a great organization. That's why I am passionate about it and serve um on the board and they just need to make sure the funding continues. [Music] >> Mr. Laura, if >> there's uh no other questions or comments I'd like to >> I have some comments. >> My my comments are a couple. First, can you share the uh contact information for the public website or >> Yeah, it's uh svamn.org. >> Thank you. Second, it's not only for uh domestic violence for women, it's also for men. And it is a great program. They're in a good location. They've got good footing underneath them. They they've been in in service for a long time. So, they they know exactly what they're doing. And, you know, the call load is sometimes rises because of various things, but it's also sometimes when economics are not as rosy as people would like it to be. Um, so there's a lot of that plays into that. But the bottom line is is violence of any type is never acceptable toward anyone. So kudos to all you you and your folks do. Uh it's a great program and and uh you help a lot of people. >> So >> thank you. >> We appreciate that in the community. And we also, you know, as as a city in our police department, we're we make referrals to this to this type of program and others for people in need. which drives up drives up those numbers. But at the same time, uh long term as awareness and education gets out there, the goal is to eventually educate and lower these numbers and give outlets for other ways of dealing with some of these things. So appreciate all you guys do. Mr. Reynolds, >> thank you, Mr. Mayor. Uh Josh, can you share uh I believe you have a fundraiser coming up Thursday morning. Uh yes, we have uh it's flaps and flapjacks in Chanhasson. Uh it's another fundraiser that SVA does. Um it's a great opportunity. There's a silent auction, uh breakfast, uh a short program and I believe that's in in Chanhassen on this coming Thursday. >> Would that be on the website? Maybe. >> It's on the website. Yes. Excellent. The American Legion which is located at 290 Lake Drive East >> from Thursday, October 9th from 8 to 9:30. And that awesome SER comes with the flapjack, so I might have to hit him up. Mr. Lara, did you have something? >> Um, I'll just uh make a motion to adopt proclamation recognizing October as domestic violence awareness month. >> And I'll second that. >> We have a Mr. We have a motion and a second. Second by councelor Contrarus. Mr. Whiting. >> I think we need to read that proclamation. Mr. Lar, are you ready to read that one or >> I'll let you do it. >> All right. Yeah. Unless uh Josh you want to do that but uh this is an official proclamation a proclamation of the city of Shakape declaring October as domestic violence awareness month. The city of Shakabe recognizes the critical work being done by domestic violence advocates in service of of survivors and victims of domestic abuse. We encourage all citizens to actively engage in the work and events sponsored by the Southern Valley Alliance and other organizations working toward the elimination of domestic violence. Whereas one in four women and one in seven men in the US have been the victim of severe physical violence by an intimate partner in their lifetime. And whereas more than 23,000 calls are placed to domestic violence hotlines nationwide every day. And whereas the impact of domestic violence is felt not only by individuals and families, but communities and the nation as a whole. Whereas Shakabe joins with others across the state of Minnesota and nationwide in supporting domestic violence victims and survivors, the advocates and organizations who serve them and holding offenders accountable. Now therefore, be it resolved that the members of the city council in the city of Shakabe hereby proclaim October 2025 as domestic violence awareness month and it will be adopted in regular session. We assume uh the city of Shaki uh city count by the city council of the city of Shockby, Minnesota held on this day the 7th of October 2025. >> Very good. Any other discussion on the motion and second? Seeing none, all in favor say I. >> I. Opposed. Motion passes. >> Thank you, sir. >> Thank you. >> Moving to 4B. Shockby school intended superintendent Mike Shockby Independent School District 720 Superintendent Dr. Redmond to discuss discuss upcoming referendums uh for the city of Shakpi school district. Welcome, Mr. Redmond. >> Welcome. >> Thank you, Mayor Layman and city council members and members of the city of Shakapei team. Um, privileged to be here this evening to share information about the upcoming operating levy in Shakape schools. Before I jump into that, I I just I want to also say thank you. Later on, you've got uh an agenda item about safe routes to schools over by Sweeney Elementary. uh and I haven't been, you know, closely involved in that, but I get updates, you know, all the time, regularly. Uh, and I think I'm on the two hands a number of times now that people have commented on how how much they've appreciated working with members of the city team in the planning and going through that process. So, and so it's great to see it on your agenda this evening, and I know it's coming up uh it'll be coming up on our agenda too soon. But uh thank you uh to the city of Shakp for the partnership on that to help keep kids safe. Uh seeking community direction. That title is very purposeful. Uh and it uh really I think recognizes that in a public school district uh in order to increase operating revenue, we need to go before the voters. And we certainly uh understand that we work on behalf of you know our school district and the the people who live in that district. And so uh that is meant to be a very purposeful title. Um and main reason or the cause behind this is our school district our budgets are balanced and you'll see it on a later slide. They're balanced this year. They were balanced last year. Next school year we're facing a budget shortfall. the year after that, another budget shortfall. Uh, I put the box in the bottom corner of this slide, that bottom left corner, and maybe it's uh has something to do with the social studies teacher in me that uh was my profession for a long time. Uh just an interesting note, I think in the state of Minnesota, public school districts are the really the only form of local government that when they want to increase operating revenue, they need to put it before the voters in an operating levy. Um you know, and you're well aware, city government doesn't do that, counties don't do that, townships don't do that. And then being a little slow on the uptake, uh I was at uh a community event, uh one of the grand opening things and happened to be chatting with uh county commissioner Beer and it was the first time that it really dawned on me that in addition to this, another oddity um cities run elections, counties run elections. Um public school districts typically do not except for this this uh form of operating levy. And so I think it's probably the most egregious other duties ever assigned in my career as an educator, but our director of communications and strategic development, Tiffany Olsen, she is now also running an election on top of her other job. So um sorry to get on my social studies soap box. I'll get back to the levy. Uh the why, if we boil it all down to one thing, uh it's really over the past four years, state funding, our main source of funding, something called the general education formula allowance, also referred to as per pupil aid, state aid, a lot of other names. Uh that has fallen well short of inflation over the last four years. Uh I point out that is not a new phenomena. It's fallen short of the rate of inflation as this graph shows for longer than that. But if you I want to point out the the different colored arrows on this diagram. The the blue arrow to the left uh that's four years ago. That gap shows the difference between what public school districts in Minnesota actually get. That's the orange dotted line. And then that blue line is what school districts in Minnesota would get if the state was providing this funding at the rate of inflation. four years ago, the distance between those two lines or the gap was the the length of that blue arrow. In just the past four years, uh you'll notice that gap has widened. If it had stayed the same, it wouldn't be here. We wouldn't be holding an operating levy. That gap has widened by the distance of that reddish or orang-ish arrow. And that arrow might look small on paper, but what it represents, that difference now is an annual difference of $6.3 million in what the school district is actually receiving, just Shakabe public schools versus what they would be receiving had the state funding kept pace uh with the rate of inflation over just the past four years. So, it's the growth in the gap just in that last four-year time period. um the school districts in that black box. Not going to read them all off, but they're the districts that we compare ourselves to. They're in the neighborhood. They're similar in size. We compete in all kinds of things, athletics, activities. Those school districts over this school year and last school year combined have made $98 million in budget cuts. So, this is not a Shakape only challenge. these financial challenges. Uh many many school districts across the state. The green check mark shows what I'd said earlier. You know, our budget has been balanced this school year. It was balanced last school year. Next school year 2627, we're facing a 7 to9 million budget deficit. The year after 1 to4 million. If you total that, that would be 8 to13 million. Later in this presentation, we're going to focus on 11 million a as kind of a target that we've been using in our financial, you know, kind of setting our financial expectations. Um, part of the proposed solution, uh, and really I don't think it's proposed, this is the plan. It's going to happen, uh, is we are going to cut $3 million from our operating budget for the 2627 school year, irrespective of any of the results of the operating levy questions. Um, and then prior to the 2728 school year, cut another half million dollars. same same thing irrespective of levy results and then we you know the another part or possible part of the solution is the two question operating levy. Question one you'll notice a kind of a bright red banner that says tax neutral. Uh in question one is asking the voters to approve an increase in per pupil funding of $620 per pupil. That's a hair over $5 million per year. We have a a unique situation in which this year we're paying off our construction debt for the building of Eagle Creek, Jackson, and the West Pool. Uh and that annual payment, which is paid by the taxpayers of our school district, is 5.16 million. That goes away uh at the end of calendar year 25. So, our taxpayers would no longer be paying that in 2026. If question one were approved by the voters, five million in taxes would would come on. So, in essence, a wash. And you might go, are they not good at math at the school district? Those numbers didn't quite equal out. U 5.16 coming off 5 million going on. That's because construction debt is calculated through net tax capacity, operating levy, through referendum market value. So, the tax calculations aren't identical. Question two, uh, the school board took a look at that, you know, 8 to13 million, really focused on 11 million. Question two would be asking the taxpayers to approve a question that would provide an additional $2.5 million per year in operating revenue. And you'll see the 871 above a house. the uh taxpayer, the owner of a $400,000 home would see an increase in their taxes, school district taxes of $8.71 a month uh to pay for the cost of that operating levy. And then this, you know, kind of getting to the point, uh, kind of answering the questions that get asked all the time or sometimes people are hesitant to ask what happens if, uh, if the levy is approved by the voters, we're going to continue to offer a similar level of services. uh if the levy is not approved by the voters, you know, in addition to that $ three and a half million dollars in budget cuts, we will need to make even more budget cuts across, you know, the entire school district to our programming, our services, and our staff. Um, and that will result in larger class sizes and obviously will limit our ability in some ways to provide programming. This is kind of the summary. You know, you've got the three million no matter what. The eitheror nature of question one, five million in new revenue or five million in additional taxes, the half million no matter what. And then question two, the 2 and a.5 million either or. And if you add those up, the fi the three and the five and the 0.5 and the 2.5, that equals 11 million. Not going to go into the tax table. Um it's on our website. It's in the handout that we've shared with you. Uh what that shows is question one that owner of that $400,000 home it's a penny a month. There was a little rounding error in the calculation. Um and then question two it shows $871 a month. And so that owner of a $400,000 home when we add question one and question two together is $8.72 per month uh to pay for both of those operating levies. real life example shared uh by one of our board members. I shared this then at Rotary. This will be the second time that I've shared it. Not going to go into great detail on this, but you can see that uh this board member the value of their home went up uh by over byund tough for me to read. It's $101,900. Uh and you'll notice the taxes going back to 2018 and carried out to 2025. The school district taxes on this home, even though it went up by over $100,000 in value at the same time, actually lower in 2025 than they were in 2018. And even if both operating levy questions are approved, this homeowner's taxes would be lower in 2026 than in 2018. And I think there's some parallels between Shakape Public Schools uh and how we take take that responsibility of managing the uh the tax revenues that we collect very similar to the city of Shakapei. Uh I know that uh the mayor, the city council, and the city team understand the importance of that responsibility and work very hard to be prudent, thoughtful, and to make sure we're providing great value for that money. Uh and so wanted to share that with you. Lots of information out there. Won't read this slide. The shakip levy.org website may not sound like it takes you to the school district website, but it does. Lots and lots of levy information there. Um early voting, absentee voting has already started. That is at the uh school district office, 1200 Shakabe Town Square. Um and then election day voting is November 4th. The main precinct will be just at West Middle School. However, for residents of the school district who live in the Prior Lake precincts, they will vote at Prior Lake City Hall because the city of Prior Lake has an init excuse me, has an initiative also on their ballot. Uh we've done one fall forum. We've got another one uh Thursday, October 23rd, thrust stage at the high school. And then I have time to answer questions if you have any, but uh thank you very much for your time. I've been talking about this lovey a lot these days. My water's out in the truck. Great place for it. So, >> very good. Any questions for Dr. Redmond? >> Well, then I'll ask mine. I like to go last. So, there's a couple of things I'd like to point out. First, let me just say that I read this and I thought this is very well laid out. It's very understandable for a lay person's perspective. Um, and it's very transparent. So, I really appreciate that from the school district. But when I look at uh I was looking at the difference on your chart between the rise of inflation over the years, I'm kind of looking at your marks, the blue marks, right? And then I I compared that to question one and question two. Question one adds 620 per pupil. I think it was 6 and the second question adds 310. 620 and 310 for a combined total of uh 9 930. But then if I go back to that chart with your blue um this one with your blue thing, >> that still doesn't get you up to that top mark. Um so it still lags where it should be in a perfect world. So you're not asking for the the sky, the moon, and the sun. >> He's going to cut three, >> right? Right. Um but still, so that's reassuring, too. that tells us that you're doing your fiscal homework and trying to be respons responsible with with the spending. Um, and just my last comment to get on my soap box, the the state increased their government spending by 40%, spent their surplus, 18 billion, and still have a 16 or $6 billion deficit. And apparently none of that went toward per pupil funding. And if it did, >> some of it went towards that, not enough went towards >> it was inadequate. And you know, knowing the situation they put themselves in, you know, we're seeing that across the board. So appreciate the I appreciate the format of this and the the transparency. Share that with the board for me, please. >> Certainly. Thank you very much, Mayor. >> Any other questions for Dr. Redmond? >> Thanks for coming. >> Thank you, sir. >> Thank you. I appreciate your time and have a good evening. You too. >> Item number five, approval of agenda. Any changes to the agenda from staff? >> Nothing, sir. >> From councel. >> Wishes a councel. >> Motion to approve the agenda. >> Is there a second? >> Mr. Delaney. >> Discussion on the motion. >> Discussion. All in favor say I. I. Opposed. Motion passes. Item number six is our consent to business. Any changes to the consent agenda? >> Nothing from staff, sir. >> Councel, >> wishes a council. Mr. Lara, >> I'll make a motion to approve the consent agenda. >> Seconded by councelor Contrarius. Questions on the Mr. Reynolds, would you like to read the consent agenda, please? >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of council. These are the consent agenda items for Tuesday, October 7th of 2025. 6A sets a public hearing for the issuance of revenue obligations, otherwise known as conduit debt, for St. Francis Regional Medical Center. 6B accepts proposals for design services with CNH Architects and for construction manager service with Terra Construction for the remodel of fire station 2. 6C purchases purchases a 2026 Chevrolet Silverado EV truck for the building department. 6D awards a contract for the Arbor Bluff stream stabilization project. 6E approves a developer agreement developer agreement amendments for the county highway 16 extension improvements. 6F approves an agreement with the Shockby public schools for safe route to school improvements at Sweeney Elementary School. 6G approves a gambling premise premises permit for the Shockby Trap Club. 6H is the Firehouse Subs Public Safety Foundation's quarterly grant application. 6I is the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industries Building Officials Training Program Grant application. 6J approves the September 16th city council minutes. 6K is the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industries MOSHA workplace safety consultation consultation program grant application. 6L is surplus property and 6M is the MetLife Minnesota paid family and medical leave private insurance agreement which will be effective January 1st of 2026. >> Thank you, Mr. Reynolds. We do have a motion and a second. All in favor say I. I. Opposed. Motion passes. Item number seven would be public comment. If you're here for an item that is not on our agenda and would like to address the city council, now would be that time. you please step up to the table and give us your name and address in the microphone. If you're here for an item that's not on the agenda, come up to the table and have a seat and uh give us your name and address in the microphone. Your time is limited, so please get to the crux of the matter. Welcome. Love to have your comments. And >> hi, my name is Andrea and I preemptively called the city council in advance. Um, I'm on a safe at home program, so um, I've been told that it's okay for me not to announce my physical address. >> Safe at home program. >> She's in. >> Thank you so much, city council members, for allowing me to speak tonight. Oh, say can you see I fear for smart meter safety. Singing consists of sounds, sound waves that resonate against our physical bodies which include electron, proton, and neutrons. Like a person singing or being sung to, everything in the world we interact with impacts our energy state. This also includes the electromagnetic fields from our cell phones to smart meters. Dear city council members, earlier this year, I approached SPU committee with the intent to advocate on behalf of my family members home to protect her health against the harmful effects of electromagnetic fields with respect to the forced implementation of smart meters. Since that time, we collectively dealt with what I would perceive as negligence on behalf of the council to review in depth the research links that I provided to literally thousands of studies showing the impact of EMF on health. This was represented by a letter addressed to my family member just a couple days after I spoke to the council. It would be quite a feat to say the least in perusing thousands of studies in such a short time frame. In addition, my family member has experienced exponentially increased non-compliance, monthly penalties, as well as a shut off of utilities, which I had to mitigate while on business travel, causing unnecessary harm to my family members health. I see this behavior as quasi bullying on behalf of our utilities company, and actions like these are not going to help solve the problem at hand. Today, I'm addressing this council to give more information that I hope will serve helpful and how you address and mitigate the harmful effects of EMF in her home and the members of the community at large who wish to opt out. And there are certainly others who have expressed their concerns to me. Let me be clear that I'm defining opting out as keeping the analog meter. Let me review some key points from before that I gave at the last meeting. Smart meters may have potential security risks such as load oscillation attacks as mentioned by Oregon State University research. Smart meter radiation is neither low nor safe. There are potential fire risks. Smart meters generate pulses of bursts that are very brief but very intense RF. They emit these millisecond long RF bursts on average 9600 times a day with a maximum of 190,000 daily transmissions and a peak level emission two and a half times higher than the stated safety signal. There's accumulating evidence that human exposure to these brief high-intensity pulses are particularly provocative in promoting electrohypersensitivity syndrome which can include headaches, excessive fatigue, brain fog, insomnia, heart palpitations, high blood pressure, endocrine and thyroid problems, body pain, leg cramps, dizziness, tonitis, and a general feeling of ill health in addition to other symptoms. RF radiation penetrates deeper in children who are at particular severe risk. It also poses risk to pollinators and wildlife. Smart meters can increase the dirty electricity. 24 states have opt out programs for smart meters. The manufacturer of smart meters that has been engaged for Shockby homes here has warned shareholders that quote we may face adverse publicity, consumer or political opposition or liability associated with our products. We may be subject to claims that there are adverse health effects from the radio frequencies utilized in connection with our products. If these claims prevail, our customers could suspend implementation or purchase substitute products which could cause a loss of sales and you can find that in the SEC filings which I'd be happy to submit a link to all of you. Now, new to the information here is number one, a World Health Organizationbacked study has found strong evidence linking cell phone radiation to cancer in laboratory animals. Number two, the competitors like Excel Energy and Minnesota Valley Electric Cooperative offer a complete opt- out plan in which people can keep their analog meters. SPU does not. In 2019, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled in the historic case of the Environmental Health Trust and others versus the FCC that the December 2019 decision by the Federal Communications Commission to retain its 1996 safety limits for human exposure to wireless radiation was quote arbitrary and capriccious. I read to you directly from the EH Trust website. Quote, "The court held that the FCC failed to respond to quote record evidence that exposure to RF radiation at levels below the commission's current limits may cause negative health effects unrelated to cancer." Further, the agency demonstrated quote a complete failure to respond to comments concerning environmental harm caused by RF radiation. >> Ma'am, >> yes, >> you've got about a minute left. if you could sum it up, please. >> Okay. The court found the FCC ignored numerous organizations, scientists, and medical doctors who called on them to update limits, and the court found the FCC failed to address these issues. The FCC now must provide a reasoned record of review for the thousands of pages of scientific evidence submitted by Environmental Health Trust and many other expert authorities in this precedent setting case. In other words, the FCC has not updated its EMF regulatory guidelines. And we have products being developed in the world today that are being put out into the marketplace, such as these smart meters that may not represent present- day scientific findings. And it is with a great sense of urgency that I'm asking your council to dig deeper into these health implications. I believe that this is crucial, especially given the roll out of 5G products. And as an example, you can look at your own cell phone in which you can switch the settings of LTE 5G or 5G auto. These are the types of conscientious questions that need to be explored from council members to smart meter companies in the sense of asking is it possible that these options are here as a preemptive approach to health implications as with the cell phone example where there's risk there must be choice since you've been made aware of the harmful effects of EMF in addition to links I gave months ago that direct you to thousands of studies that were made available to you I'm given no other choice but to serve a notice of liability should you continue in policy of a forced implementation of environmental pollution in my family member's home. I implore you to create a waiver with no financial burden upon my family member's home who wishes to keep her analog meter as is. Let's not entertain the legacy in the history of lead asbestous tobacco. EMF is an issue that deserves immediate attention of our local and federal government in order to protect our children and adults. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Time has expired. Let's hang on. There might be questions for you. Anybody have a questions? >> Were you allowed to ask questions? Um, have you started the appeal process with the Shaki public utilities? There is >> I'm sorry. Have I started the appeal process? >> Yes. >> Yes. Okay. >> And I have um stated in the last council meeting which I think I think you're president um that >> the opt out plan that has been suggested by the council is really not an opt out plan according to the scientists whom I've been in contact with. Um and I'd be happy to put you in touch with those scientists in New York. Let me let me clarify something here. There's a difference between the SPU commission and the Shakby city council. When you say council, it sounds like you're referring to this body, which does not have authority over the SPU commission. >> Okay. >> Okay. Two separate entities. and the controlling um governing body over the SPU commission would be the state uh public utilities commission. >> Well, I have contacted the um >> so it's it's great that you're here to help put this information out to the public. We do appreciate that. I certainly appreciate your view because I don't disagree with some of what you're saying. Um however, we are not the controlling entity. So we couldn't change it if if we as a body wanted to. That is the Shakby public utility commission, not council commission and the state public utilities commission which oversees them. >> Right. Okay. >> And I >> I just wanted to clarify that there's a difference of authority there. I appreciate that because I think um even when I was speaking at that council meeting, I saw familiar faces and so or the commission meeting um and so >> I am at a loss as to what I can do in our own city to advocate on behalf of people who uh do not want these in their home. >> You're doing what you should be doing is you're coming to us and utilizing the ability to put this out publicly to the rest of the residents and businesses in Shockby that may have interest. >> Yeah. Okay. >> I'm just concerned that the commission to where we're trying to advocate is um is not taking seriously our concerns. And I did actually make a call to uh the state commission and got sort of the same >> red tape bureaucracy. Welcome to my world. >> Yeah. >> Deal with it every day. State, Fed, you name it. It's not You're not alone in that one. Everybody has seen it. We appreciate your time. Thanks for coming down and educating the population on the subject. >> Appreciate it. Thank you so much. >> Is there anybody else that would like to address the city council on a matter that is not on our agenda? Seeing none, item number eight, business removed from the consent agenda. There is none. Item number nine, a motion to uh recess for economic development authority meeting would be in order. Councelor Contrarus. >> I'll make a motion to recess to the um EDA. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> Mr. Delaney. Discussion on the motion. Seeing none, all in favor say I. I. Opposed. >> We'll call to order the Tuesday, October 7th meeting of the Shaki Economic Development Authority. Uh please make note of the role first, but I would also like to point out on our agenda that was sent out that it noted our next meeting is November 4th, but due to election day, that's going to be moved to November 5th. So, some of you might have updated agendas, but that should be noted. Um, all right. Item two, >> Mr. Layman. >> Mr. Chair, I'll make a motion to approve the agenda. >> Second. We have a motion and a second to approve the agenda. All in favor say I. >> I. >> Any opposed? Uh we'll move on to item number three. That is our consent business. Mr. Layman, >> I'd like to remove 3A. >> 3A. All right. What are the wishes? Mr. Lara. >> I'll make a motion to approve the consent agenda as modified. >> Second. We have a motion and a second to approve as modified. Uh any discussion? Discussion. Discussion. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Opposed. Passed unanimously. All right. We'll move on to that item, it looks like. So, let's pull that item 3B. >> 3A. >> Three. Oh, sorry. 3A. Yep. >> Mr. Layman. >> Mr. Chair, I I just I just have a hard time having the city pay taxpayers paying for environmental studies on a private property. Um, and I have to ask, how much is the property owner actually paying for this when they have an interest on making sure their property is sellable and at what level it's sellable at? >> Mr. Kursky, you want to address that? First off, you want to give a little pre premise of what we're talking about here? >> Certainly, Mr. Chair and board members. So, Shakabe Public Utilities and um we've been working with them and they are in the process of acquiring the adjacent property to this as part of the due diligence of the proposed buyer. Um the letter of intent has been shared with both the city attorney and our redevelopment attorney. They're in the process of doing a purchase contract. Um, one of the issues raised by Spuck and one of the issues raised actually by our consultants is soil that'll be reused on the property today, um, per the agreement we have is coming off the property. So there's, for instance, on the northwest corner, there's 50 ft of organic materials which currently is gassing off methane. So Brian Eritex had a lot of history with this site and their suggestion was to move forward with this study, identify any soils that could remain on site and be used by the city in the park areas and how they would necessarily have to be treated since it will be used in city property. So that's one of the main goals in this is to identify those areas for instance that are ging methane right now, take them, figure out a way to reuse them on the property so they don't have to be hauled off. We do have um a letter of intent that has been signed by a developer and they're in the process of finishing their purchase agreement. One of their concerns is they are not going to borrow money from a bank to do this. They're putting up about $40 million of their own money. This is the last piece necessary for them to move forward. >> So, just a little bit more. This is about our shaky gravel pit uh redevelopment and our tiff district that we have out there trying to replace the soils. Mr. Layman, did you get your question answered? Well, it seems to me that the permits that were required for the gravel pit to operate required them to make sure that the they were doing no environmental damage. And now here we are spending $300,000 on making sure they didn't do any >> environmental. >> Mr. Chair, it's up to $100,000. I think bronze estimate was 7475,000. And the original permits that we had had related to groundwater, not the materials going into the site that was adjudicated and the city was not able to enforce that. This is to look at what's been currently brought onto the site that's sitting there today to ensure that there is no environmental contamination to also ensure the site that Chak Public Utilities is acquiring has not impacted the gravel pit site and vice versa. So that's why Spuck is willing to fund this out of their uh funds that they provide to the city and we will then get reimbursed back those funds as part of the uh tax increment financing district through the administration um portion which over the life of the project is I think about $6 million. So where in the resolution does it say the utility is going to pay their share of this cost and >> that mayor they're paying a 100% of the cost out of the funding they give us currently the $350,000 a year they provide to us. >> So then why would we need a need a resolution to approve the 300,000? >> We're we're not approving 300,000. >> The memo says that. So I'm sorry. I'm just using your memo. So, so what before there's two items on the agenda tonight. One is spending up to $100,000 for the new mental environmental review. If you remember on tiff districts, we get reimbursed for not only staff time, but legal time, etc. What the um city's financial officer has done is giving us latitude going forward to be able to charge back that time. So when those administrative revenues come in down the road, we have time charged against them. So all you're spending tonight is up to $100,000. >> Mr. Chair, >> correct. >> This says right here, the proposed resolution amends this amount to 300,000, which would be sufficient to cover the cost of a proposed environmental study. The EDA has typically adopted interfund loan resolutions to cover any costs associated with developing and administering a tax increment financing district. If the EDA decides to establish a tax increment district related to the gravel pit, this would allow us for a cost incurred related to that district to be reimbursed from tax increment f revenue. So, this is telling me we can spend up to 300,000 on this. And uh it doesn't tell me that Spuck is a part of this. It doesn't tell me that the property owners got a piece in in this. And you know, they just don't have a stake in a game. So, Um, >> Mr. Reinard. >> Yeah. Uh, President and and commissioners. Um, so regarding the interfund loan, so there we did establish one in in 2022 when we originally were setting up the district. So that that interfund loan um per state statute in order to be reimbursed with future increment, you have to set up the interfund loan in advance before you spend the money. So that would cover things like the TIFF plan, the developers agreement, and then staff time related to setting that up in addition to this environmental study. So, it's all-encompassing of environmental study and everything else that would go into setting up this distance district that we have spent or that we may may spend in the near future. >> It's not just for the the cost dealing with the study. It's dealing with the other costs that the city will have that we can then get reimbursed for. That's why we're doing this. >> Correct. >> So, the amount is up to 300,000 then. That's >> I couldn't hear hear you. >> Well, the amount is up to 300,000 per the >> No. So again, the study is currently 74,000. Brun asked to keep a cushion in there in case they do find something that requires further testing. They actually have done a lot of work on this site over the past three or four years. And told me that we're lucky to have a younger gravel pit versus some of the other ones they've worked on. The additional funds um as Mr. Reinhardt explain we'll be paying you're going to be seeing a lot more materials as we move forward in this project to reimburse the city because you're only allowed to get reimbursed if you pass this resolution otherwise it's out of pocket. And so state law requires us. We don't know what those funds will be but I think Mr. Reinhardt's setting it at a number that he thinks based on other districts that we will spend that we can get reimbursed both for staff time and legal counsel. >> Any other questions? So to me, this is doing our diligence on that property for to to move this. We understand that this is not something that is a property that sells the next day to a developer because it requires so much work. And unfortunately, we didn't test the stuff that was going in to fill the the pit. So, uh that one caught us by surprise. And I hope it we use that to uh train other people when they get gravel pits. Um to me this is uh something that needs to be done to get this project going. Mr. Layman, >> Mr. Chair, it's Santech was hired during the mining out operation to make sure that what they were putting in was clean fill. And if if the the people that the business hired to do that for them didn't do their job, that's not our obligation. >> As I recall, it was water well testing. It wasn't sand. >> It was It was both. And it was Santech that specifically did the uh gravel or the sand part back in or the gravel the sand actually. Um because we're selling the gravel and it's not our property to have a vested interest. The vested vested interest is in the property owner to make sure that they have a viable sellable piece of property. if they want to spend $300,000 to make sure that the property is clean for a purchaser, um, then they should be able to get the dollar amount the market would bear for a clean piece of property. If they do a a study and find out it's not a clean piece of property, then they should be lowering the price to the end user, knowing that the end user is going to have to pay that cleanup cost. >> And we've had that argument when we established this tiff district, but we did the tiff district was established. We understand that uh it's going to take some work to get this property moved. So, Mr. Lara, you had a >> Mr. Kriskkey, how much did we spend on the environmental study for Somerville? >> Uh for the building on Somerville, >> $25,000. >> And was that paid for from EDA funds? >> From the EDA, correct? >> And do I I don't know if my memory serves me well. Was that a unanimous yes vote? >> I don't think you saw that because it was only it was under 25,000. It was unanimous to have us put it on a private market or see if we could put it on a private private market. My last comment, Mr. President, is that the sec second to the last paragraph on page four to councelor Delane's comment says it's it's amending in in addition to so it' be 200,000 in addition to what was passed in uh 22 January 4th 2022 of 100,000. So it's a total of 300,000. It's it's it is 300,000 but it's 300,000 for expenses that we will incur and not be reimbursed for because we have set up the test district. So if we don't do this it's going to cost taxpayers $300,000 or $200,000. >> Thus the the why you shouldn't be willy-nilly handing out tiff districts. >> Well the tip district is behind us. So now we want to get paid. Uh that's why we set up the tip to to have these opportunities and to be reimbursed for our our expenses. Uh so what is the wishes of the body? >> Mr. are. >> I'll make a motion to adopt resolution uh E2025-004, resolution amending resolution E uh 2022-003 regarding an advance of certain costs in connection with the tax incremental financing district within the Minnesota River Valley Housing and Redevelopment Project number one. >> I'll second it. We >> have a motion and a second. Any more discussion? Discussion discussion. All those in favor say I. >> I opposed. I >> m motion passed 4 to one. Uh all right, we have next on our agenda 4A. >> And that is Oh, that is 4 A. >> Is that 4 A? >> No, because amend that was 3A. So now we're on to 4A, which is Mr. Kursky, planning and development for uh uh LeBron. I think why do we have this twice? >> It's It's on here twice, Chair. I think because >> Oh, okay. Ready to go. Okay. Mr. Kurski, >> again, uh we did solicit I believe six or seven firms responded to an RFP um to do the environmental work. Bronn was chosen because of their history with the site and their geotechnic current geotechnical awareness of what's going on on the site. Um and again this is to protect not only the city but also Shakabe public utilities. And the way this is set up is it will be paid for out of the Shakabe public utility funds then reimbursed per the last resolution that you passed out of the um tax increment revenues that come back to the city. >> Any questions? Uh you mentioned methane. I assume that's from farmyard or something type components >> probably. Um it's 50 ft deep they said on the corner based on their um preliminary testing >> and that would come out with the VOCC's correct to be able to find that through the VOCC's. >> Yes. Thank you. And their plan is um that's really good top soil but not when it's compacted at 50 ft deep. >> Not down there. Yeah. So they got to flip that. Mr. Layman, >> Mr. president. When uh originally during their permitting process and the monitoring wells, there was a early on prior to their activity, there was a small um diesel organic um registering in in the very low. So, it wasn't a a concern prior that came in the underground water flow from I believe it was the west uh through the property and that was monitored throughout the time. Um so >> yeah that was a well watering you're talking about. Yeah. So they're going into quite a bit of looking at what uh all the metals and heavy metals and things like that and POAS which is a hot topic these days and other things. So um it does look like they're doing their diligence >> and chair. The reason why it's fairly extensive is most of the site if you remember is either going to be public park or residential. they have a much higher quality of standard and having a water treatment facility next to it raises that standard even higher. So we want to make sure there's nothing that could impede residential development, water quality development, etc. >> And we don't want to poison our water from our soils. Um what's the wishes of the body, Miss Contrarus? >> Um thank you. I'll make a motion to approve the contract with Brun for the for a cost not to exceed 100,000 for environmental soil and water analysis considering a phase two for the gravel shakup gravel. >> Second a motion and a second. Uh any discussion? Discussion discussion. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Opposed. >> I passes 4 to one. >> Thank you. >> All right. And we are on to any questions on the EDA bill list. Item 5A. >> None for me. >> Hearing none, uh, we will ask for a motion to adjurnn. >> I'll make >> Yep. I'll make a motion to adjourn to November 5th, 2025 at 7 p.m. >> Is there a second? >> I'll second. >> All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Any opposed? We stand adjourned. >> Very nice. All right. We'll reconvene the city council meeting. to item 11A, Lower Minnesota River Watershed District City Priorities. >> While uh while the city engineer is getting that ready, Mr. Mayor and members of council, I just wanted to let you know that uh when it comes to the lower Minnesota River wershed district, there's been some concern with many of the current members uh over the last couple years. uh even last year they had a 60% increase in their budget that they originally had proposed which was generally for education and administration uh issues and not for actual projects. Uh that has a lot of the members have been discussing uh you know really if they want to continue to be a part of this. I would suspect that you will see something in the in the future from uh some other governmental units that will ask us our opinion on this. So, I just wanted to make that uh clear to you. If uh we did withdraw, uh Scott County Watershed District would then uh be the organization that we would uh work with on these projects. So, just an FYI. Uh with that said, Mr. Engineer, >> before you start, Mr. Reynolds, there was another watershed that uh went through the south side out by Valley View um went through our drainage system out through South Bridge. And that one, we had that conversation year or two ago where they weren't putting aside dollars for expansion, maintenance, and stuff on on the uh watershed assets. And I think that was resolved. I think that was a different watershed. Yeah, that's the uh Prior Lake Spring Lake wershed district which and we have a very small portion of that, but the channel cuts through us to the to the Minnesota >> and most of other people's water was coming through us. >> Correct. Yes. >> And in this case, this is the one that's predominantly downtown Old Shock area to where our water quality going to the river is better than what they're bringing us. And >> that is correct. >> That's a that's a fact. So, sorry. Go ahead, sir. >> Uh, no worries. Uh, thank you, uh, Mr. Mayor and council members. Uh, in the meantime, while those discussions are being had, I wanted to provide you an update on the lower Minnesota River wershed district's watershed management plan update that they are beginning that process and how the city's priorities fit into that plan update. I'm here before you tonight to get your feedback on staff's recommendations for our priorities in Chakabe to include as the wershed begins their plan update. A little bit of background and history on the lower Minnesota River wershed district. Uh Mr. Mayor, you were just talking about this. Uh what's the wershed's purpose? Uh their purpose is to protect, preserve, and use natural water storage and retention within their wershed. Uh they uh their purpose is to plan and protect uh and improve water quality improvements within the district. They uh they want to establish uniform policies. So when you have multiple cities, multiple agencies and counties within the wershed, uh there's a clear distinction on what those policies are throughout the entire watershed and to prevent pro promote and to protect water systems, wildlife, and water recreational facilities. Um I think we can all agree that those are all great goals um and great purposes for the wershed and a lot of our priorities in the city align with those same goals. Um the watershed district did hire a new district administrator this year. Uh that's Will Little. He uh PhD. He comes with a a vast experience working within watersheds and a history of living and and working outdoors. Um he's a big picture thinker and uh the wershed's very excited to bring him on board. Linda Lumis was the previous watershed administrator and she held that role since 2013. So she's been there for 12 years. So this is the first time we're experiencing change on the administration side and we don't necessarily know how that's going to impact the city of Shakabi. However, um his goal and vision is to uh update this management plan um with his goals in mind. Um the water the lower Minnesota River wershed district's boundaries span the Minnesota River essentially from Carver to the Mississippi River confluence with the Minnesota River. Uh that includes the counties of Carver, Dakota, Henipin, and Scott counties. Again, just portions of those counties are located within the district boundaries. Um the northern portion, uh Mr. Mary, you alluded to this. Uh within downtown Shakabe is located within the district and within the lower Minnesota River wershed district, the city is the LGU, which is essentially means we're in charge of permitting within the district. We have established our own rules and design standards that um we ensure that others adhere to. The wershed has allowed us to do that within the district. outside of two specific areas within the wershed. Um those are areas that are located within the FEMA 100-year flood plane which is essentially only along the Minnesota River which we don't have a lot of new development or activities that take place in those areas or areas that they call high value resource areas and essentially there's only a very small portion of Shakabe which is on the very east end by the boiling springs that drains to the Eagle um Eagle Creek River or Eagle Creek sorry. This is a map of the city of Shakabe. The black dash lines are the city's border. Uh the lower Minnesota River wershed district area is shown in yellow. So the majority of the city of Shakabe is within the lower min. The blue area is the Scott water management organization and the very southeast portion of the city of Shakabe is within the prior lake spring lake wershed district. So, the watershed management plan update. Currently, the um the previous plan, which is the current plan for the wershed, was adopted October 24th, 2018. That's a 10-year plan, which includes uh the wershed's goals, policies, and management strategies. It also includes uh funding priorities for future projects over those 10 years. And this is really similar to what the city's comprehensive plan is. It establishes their goals and things that they want to achieve over that 10-year period. That plan expires in 2028 and they are beginning the update process similar to what the city of Shakabe will be doing as we update our comprehensive plan. Um as part of that plan update uh Minnesota rules requires the wershed districts to engage with their partners within the wershed. So they are reaching out to all the agencies the counties and cities and asking for those agencies to provide summaries of relevant wershed management goals and our input on local water related issues. our water management goals and the officials controls and programs. Essentially, what they're looking for is what's important to the city of Shakabe as they update their plan. And when we look at things that we think are important or believe are important, we want to make sure the wershed also aligns with those and understands where we're coming from. Um, I'm going to be walking through uh the city or city staff's recommendations that we would like to submit to the wershed. Um, but through this presentation, I'll be looking for feedback from the council. um whether it's uh on these specific issues or beyond this, we have a month still to provide these recommendations. So, I'm going to give you what my ideas are and our thoughts and a lot of these are based on uh the city's adopted storm water management plan and um you can provide feedback as we go. Uh but essentially, this first slide is shows um what we believe are water related issues that also exper that the that the lower Minnesota River wershed district also experiences um in the city of Shakabe. Those issues really are erosion issues uh at gullies and steep slopes along the river uh riverbank and bluffs. We've seen that in our Minnesota River uh riverbank stabilization project that that is an issue that stems directly from the wershed. Um we agree that there's flooding and rate control issues with new developments and standards that need to be adhered to uh wershed wide so we don't experience uh flooding downstream within the wershed. Uh we agree that improving water quality and maintaining those water quality standards is an important goal for the wershed to have. Um and we also would like the wershed to continue different funding partnerships within the district. Um a couple of the priorities that are specific to Shakavei would be chloride reduction because chloride and salt are a pollutant to water and also water quality and nutrient removal. We want to make sure that the water we send downstream is cleaner than when it comes into our city. >> Questions? I I have one the erosion issue. Is that because we don't want uh sand, gravel, and dirt getting into the river or is it we don't want banks to wash out and cause flooding issues? >> Yeah, it's a little bit of both. So, the erosion issues that we experience are mainly due to the high volume and flow rate of water that's coming through the Minnesota River. Um but also we have sediment laden water that's coming upstream um in the wershed as well. So I would focus mainly on the erosion issues that you're seeing in the banks from the river flows as some of the as the higher priority in the city of Shaku >> and we're recognizing that the historical floods have increased and gone up and if we're going to try to fight mother nature with the dollar we're going to we're going to be broke. >> That's true. And I'll get into some of the other priorities that could potentially address that later on. >> Okay. The next is a little bit of a highlighting of what the city's current water management goals are. Now, these are specific to the city of Shakabe citywide, not necessarily within the wershed, and these are directly taken from the city's adopted storm water management plan. So, this was part of our comprehensive plan update where we established these goals. Um, I will walk through these and and I can get into detail if you'd like. Uh but the goals that we set out as a city are to limit public capital expenditures to control excess runoff volume rates. And essentially we do that by with new developments, making sure that developments put in storm water management basins and systems to uh manage the new runoff that's generated from those new development areas. Uh we strive to improve water quality. That's through development, but also retrofitting different projects. We put in our downtown water quality improvement project last year in the Lewis Street parking lot. That was one project that came straight out of those goals. Um that project also addressed preventing flooding and erosion. Um by putting the chamber system in in the parking lot, we're able to store water upstream before sending it down to the Minnesota River. Um and addressing erosion is straight out of the Minnesota Riverbank uh improvement project. Uh we promote groundwater recharge, essentially recharging the groundwater aquifer. We do that luckily in the city of Shakabe. We have really good soils in the majority of the city so we can infiltrate that storm water as it enters our storm water system to recharge that aquafer. Uh we strive to protect and enhance fish and w wild wildlife habitat and recreational facilities. Um that's when we develop new areas. We are protecting trees. Our tree preservation ordinance is really a good example of that to protect fish and wildlife habitat. Uh we protect wetlands in conformance with the wetland conservation act. So as we review development applications, we ensure that we're not impacting wetlands and if they are impacted that developers are mitigating those either through purchasing of credits that new wetlands can be constructed or on-site wetland construction. And then we maintain an active storm sewer maintenance program and inspection program and that's driven by our public works department. Um whether it's through televising our storm sewer system, inspecting our storm water outfalls or inspecting erosion issues that happen through new construction projects. >> Not to mention sweeping the street every other day. Right. That's exactly right. >> Oh, a week. >> And lastly, uh these are the priorities that we hope that the watershed focuses on as they develop their management plan. These aren't specific to the city of Shakabe, but these are the big picture items that we'd like the wershed to focus on. Uh the first is maintaining good relationships with local partners. We want to be a good partner with the wershed district. We expect the same back from them. So, if there's ways that we can work together to make improvements, uh, to partner on projects, we want to make sure that that communication, uh, line is open and we can continue to work together in a positive way. Uh, we'd like the wershed to fix legacy issues. Um, which essentially is we know there's issues out there that there's flooding, erosion issues. Please focus on addressing those issues rather than thinking about new new issues. Um, there's already things that are happening within the city and other areas. Please address those before we move on to other ones. Um the next is not overre overregulating new issues that the city is already managing. We have development standards. We have ordinances, city code design criteria that are already in place. We do a really good job of managing development and storm water management within the city of Shakabe. We don't need the wershed to be overregulating those same things that we're already do doing. So we're hoping that um they don't step in and start to to do some of those things that we're already doing. I would also point out that we have fact-based evidence that the water that is coming off of our watershed into the river is cleaner than what the wershed is sending to us. >> There's some examples of what some of those extremes might be. >> Yeah. Um so a lot of them are and and this is the the next issue which is regional issues. We know that less than 1% of the water that flows um in the Minnesota River comes from the city of Shakabe. So we'd love for the wershed to be focusing on the areas upstream, the agricultural runoff areas that are even outside the wershed in the state of Minnesota to see if there's ways that we can improve the water quality, provide flood storage upstream to reduce those rates that are coming through the city of Shakabe. Um so I mean those are a lot of the regional issues. the the overregulating some of the issues would be um are there different design standards that they want developers or construction projects to adhere to in the city of Shakabe that are over and above what we're already requiring. So, do ponds need to be larger? Do they need to infiltrate um more water with new development areas? Do they need to decrease the rates that are sending downstream below what our standards already are, thereby increasing pipe sizes and other things like that? Um we are already focusing on a lot of those issues in the city of Shakabian initiatives. Uh we don't want another hand to be overreaching above that. >> No, we know we have some work to do. >> Yes. Um and lastly is maintaining funding opportunities. Uh over the last five or six years, the city has done a really good job working with the wershed district to obtain grant funding and cost partnerships uh to deliver a lot of really cool projects. Um one of the funding sources is the watershed based implementation fund. that's known as the WBIF. Essentially, that's money that comes from the state of Minnesota through the Board of Water and Soil Resources, which is Bowser for short. Uh that gets handed down to watershed districts, and they hand that money out to different projects. The city has received 52% of the lower Minnesota River's share of that WBI funding over the last 5 years. So again, we've partnered with Lowermen to deliver a lot of really cool projects and they focused a lot of that funding to the city of Shakabe. We hope that continues because we we do a really good work in in Shakabe and driving that funding in um reduces the amount of tax funding that goes to fixing a lot of those improvements that we know a lot of them stem from outside of the city of Shaki. Uh we've uh achieve we've received about $260,000 over the last six year six years based on that WBIF fund. And secondly is we've um received I've got the amount here, sorry, over $425,000 just in cost share participation that's outside of this grant funding from Lowerman that they've worked with us on our projects that they've um just given their own money towards those projects. Um some of them are the Ridge Creek project on the south end of town. Um we reestablished the channel, the Prior Lake Outlet channel through that project. They've committed funding to the Minnesota River Bank stabilization project and also partnered with us with on the Lewis Street parking lot improvements. We hope that funding stays if we stay within the watershed district and they continue to focus on um delivering really good projects that address all of their initiatives and issues um within the wershed district. So with that, I'm happy to stand for questions and collect input from council. Otherwise, my goal would be to take this feedback and and deliver it back to the wershed as they develop their plan. questions. Start over here. >> No questions, >> Mr. Whiting. >> Yeah, thank you. Um, you'd mentioned Scott County wershed district. Now, they tax more than the lower min, right? >> Um, I need to look up those that the amounts that they do. There's state statute requirement or there's state statute provisions for how much a watershed can actually levy um for their for their operating funds. Um I can't compare exact off the top of my head but I can get that information how they >> My concern would be that if we would if Scott County took over this territory that Shakipi would just be a drop you know we they already got all their stuff and lower them in that Scott County has a lot more riverfront and watershed district area. Uh so that and you hit on a lot of the points that I did too with the grants. uh you know if they taxed a little bit more the grants uh want to claw some of that back in grants. Uh but you hit on the uh the different chemicals and trying to reduce some of that and the chloride issues. Uh sediment uh I think is covered in our riverbank stabilization project and in a lot of the projects uh we have in our in downtown project with the uh the old uh rodeo grounds and that being a pond as well. So, I I I like to see the the lower men stick around because I think we can uh partner with them a lot easier than we could with Scott County, and I do like to see uh I like your priorities you put together, and I assume that uh they couldn't argue with with those. So, that's all I have. >> Thank you. >> Same here. Sorry, Mr. Mr. Delaney. >> Oh, same here. I think you got a great list of priorities, especially the groundwater recharge. I mean, we get our water from aquifer, so that is pretty critical important. Councelor Contrarus, >> thank you. Um I I too um agree with a lot of this, especially the big picture items, which is fix the legacy issues, you know. Um you were talking about the erosion that to me on the riverbank is we're out there all the time and you see it and it's like there's like how far, you know? So, I I really appreciate it and and I do also would like to keep this um this watershed and and I do feel that if we do let Scott County, they might consider like um our counselor was saying, there's other issues in you know, Scott County, let's go over here. You know, Shakupi's already got their stuff. So, I think I too would like to continue working with the low lower Minnesota River. Just to add to that a little bit, that's not that the Lurman doesn't have other communities it's working with, but I think that we've made a good partnership. >> Mr. Laura, >> um yes, I would agree with your priorities um and find that that would be uh sufficient. >> So, my comments would be um I'm not necessarily fixated on Lur Min or Scott County. It depends on what kind of changes Laura Min comes out with. uh that would have play a role in that my decision making. The other thing I would point out is Scott County is limited just to to the county of Scott where a lot of the dollars coming in from large part of Shockby um going into the lower Minnesota watershed is distributed throughout a much larger area than just Scott County. Matter of fact, it's three or four different counties. Correct. Uh so then you have to ask your the question is are our funds being utilized here or somewhere else where like the transportation tax in Scott County has them transportation dollars can only be used in Scott County. There's a benefit to that. Okay. Um, as for the recommendations, I think it would be prudent on the lower watershed to recognize the actions that the city is taking and the fact that our water going into the river is cleaner than what they are giving us. That uh uh that should be models they should be using upstream um to send us cleaner water quite frankly. Um, and we have done more than our share already. And we certainly don't need to be paying more when we are paying for riverbank stabilization in key areas where it comes around a corner by RA mounting down near the river turns and once it comes around that corner, it comes back and it washes out right before the old bridge. Um, so we've learned that over the years. That same knowledge that we spent hundreds of thousands of of dollars in engineering and consulting fees to to learn, you now have that for free. So, we have given you a quarter of a million dollars of information you can use somewhere else uh to send us cleaner water. Um same with the you know we're going to spend 12 million is it on the uh bank stabilization in that area? >> 16.2 >> 16.2 and we also spent the dollars as you're aware of on the um underground parking lot to filter out some of them sediments. By all means, don't get me wrong. I think it's kind of crazy that people I hear tell say we don't want leaves and grass clippings and dirt in the river, but when you look at the river, it's lined with trees, lined with leaves, and it's made out of dirt. So, part of me says it's kind of crazy organics, >> right? >> Um, so I'm certainly not interested in us paying more when when we have made major investments in making sure we're being good stewards. Uh, and like I said, you could take a lot of that information and utilize it in other areas and everybody would benefit from it. Mr. Whiting, >> we have the chair and a shakabe representative here today. If you want to come up uh make a comment on uh >> Excuse me. First of all, I'll take that authority as the one that runs the meeting. >> I I just would like to ask a question of our I would like to ask a question of our new district administrator if >> I was going to do that. Um we we'll try to keep the decorum where it belongs. If if you want to step up here, you give me the floor. >> Give me the floor. That's Let's go back to Robert's rules because you offered me the floor. I run the meeting and I have a question for the new administrator if you don't mind. >> Let me ask him to come to the table and have some time to >> give me my time. >> Please step up to the table and introduce yourself from the lower watershed district. >> Thank you. >> You're you're the you're the new appointee, correct? >> Thank you very much. I am the new administrator. Okay. uh Will Lidle and I've been with the district for about five months. >> Okay. >> Well, welcome uh and that's uh wanted to first off welcome you to our our area and uh ask you if uh and our new representative. Thank you for being here today. >> And I've believe it or not uh been in my chair even a shorter period of time. My name is Carter Mcnu. I'm uh the uh Scott County uh district manager uh to the lower men. So my question is we had some things up on the slide here about some of our priorities and is there anything that you see that is a concern or anything that uh you would add to uh some of our priorities or that you think we should be adding? I >> I think the priorities are excellent and they're in keeping with our previous planning process. So we're in the sixth generation of watershed management plans. We've existed for 65 years and at the let me start it really quick. At the beginning, we were created essentially as a joint powers agreement between five counties. And what's unique about our watershed district is most other county uh WMOs or wershed districts, they come to the banks of the river. And we're one of the few watershed districts, it's not really a watershed. We don't cover a whole creek. We're essentially a hot dog bun around the river. And we have two missions. One is the standard watershed district that were listed. The second was and why we were the one of the major reasons we were created in the 1960s was to be able to handle federal dredging funds and dredge materials. And that's something that um would be difficult for Scott County to manage without uh this district because the other counties pay into that system. And so we were essentially created as a joint powers to be able to handle these administrative uh and inter agency and scales of government. >> And the river is dredged up to Savage. Correct. >> It's dredged up to Savage. Uh I believe it's authorized to be dredged a little bit further, but only a 4ft channel beyond. And I believe it's up to Shakape, but it has not been dredged. Uh >> it hasn't been maintained because Shakape is the uh what's the term for that? >> Um >> navigable waters up to the bridge. >> Yeah. So there's a 9 ft channel up to Savage and a 4ft uh authorized up to a 4ft channel to to Shakape. The other very unique thing is that this up you know coming up to the banks of the river is the standard upstream as well. So there is no other watershed district if you imagine you know the the river water that we're receiving dirty coming into our district. If we were to say charge for that, there is no one to bill upstream because everybody comes to the banks. And um I think these these priorities and points are excellent and we are at the stage where we're almost the canary in the coal mine um because we have the dual mission and the way that we're funded is uh taxing essentially of the flood plane which is not where a lot of tax revenue is. Um so we have a you know a synthetically low uh revenue stream and the stool mission. Um and we're receiving dirty river water that is not our own creation. It's going to require us to you know evolve or um you know design a different process to understand how we can pair our dollars with impacts. And right now we've been constrained by essentially Bowser who who reviews our our plans saying that, you know, if you're if you're taxing a homeowner in Shakape, you can't send that money upstream to pay a farmer for BMPPS outside of your district unless there's a really, you know, excellent way in place to do that. Um so what our district needs to figure out is instead of uh you know saying this project or that project we need to understand that where the dollars come from and tying the dollars to the impacts and in some ways that can be uh the carrot and in other ways it can be the stick. But essentially we we have this we have this this mandate to be able to enforce water quality um and quantity standards. We're really the only organization that that has the authority to do that and we need to start doing it. And so I I would recommend that you you don't give us funding. You don't support us unless we carry on that mission. We're new enough we're both new enough to this system that the bureaucratic overlays and the red tape is immense. Essentially, we want it to be easy to do the right thing and expensive to do the wrong thing. >> And right now neither of those are viable. It's um you know we need to evolve using the best data and monitoring to understand uh you know where where finances should be spent and and where where they shouldn't. >> Is is there is there any future plan that you're aware of through state legislation to create a watershed upstream from Shakipi? So there was a a basinwide authority I believe started in the 90s and it was dissolved in the in the 201s um >> April of 2014. >> Yep. And and essentially it it was created it had no power. It had no major power but it had like 60 members, 60 voting members. And essentially what it what ended up happening is there was this massive push pull between urban and rural. And so one of our goals in our plan is to be able to to understand and value cumulative impacts. So where water quality or water quantity is you know impacts are happening. Um and also to be able to apply that framework fairly whether it's coming from agricultural land, whether it's coming from storm water, whether it's from residential, commercial or industrial. And that it's not us choosing based off of where we live. uh you know how we measure or monitor those impacts is that here's the fair approach. Here's the fair approach and we're going to require that some groups internalize the cost of their pollution that they have externalized and and you know we could say um for the last 150 years we can understand why this river was sacrificed for industry and development. But now we have to make a choice. um are we going to continue to um you know subsidize uh certain certain practices or are we going to fairly assign the value to those? Um I think taxpayers are paying for it either way. It's but we're paying for it with bridge w you know bridge log jams uh wash outs you know a variety of uh emerging pollutants of concern there. There's some things we have great data on you know nitrates phosphates. There are things that are question marks, POS, pharmaceuticals and wastewater streams, microlastics. And right now the the state and the federal government, they don't have mechanisms in place that ensure that for the next 50 years or 100 years that we can adapt to those things. We're we're essentially entirely siloed and reactive >> and we understand how we got here. Um, but that's not the future. There's no there's no future in that uh methodology for for this watershed district. The point I want to make is that not only is Shockpy's storm water runoff cleaner than what's coming into our community, but we also have the benefit of having the the Met Council sewer treatment facility, Blue Lake. That's also putting water back into the river cleaner than what's prior to Shakipi. So here you've got a community that's doing everything right and you're telling us that you're going to substantially increase our cost because we're doing everything right and better than everybody else. That just doesn't make sense to me. So >> can I jump in here? So a lot of the stuff that you had brought up as major concerns are things that were already of me being on the job. And the truth is, uh, mayor, uh, the finances of the district, uh, are in tough shape. Um, I'm coming in to try and also clean things up. I've made it very clear that I don't support increasing prices uh or the levy across uh the district until things are actually running tip-top shape because we it is important for us to be good stewards of our residents money. Um a big part of that is making sure that um once we have justification so we have a a clean bill of health and making sure that as mayor said it's actually distri um moved across all the different districts or the different uh um counties fairly um because really we we aren't looking to radically uh move one funds from you know Scott county uh to Henipin County or vice versa. So, we're looking at how to do this fairly >> there. There really uh you're correct that our levy uh is our our um preliminary levy certification has substantially increased in the percentage rate for this year. Um we did a benchmarking study and not only this year but uh the last two decades we have been uh taxing at a unusually low rate. We are far cheaper than Scott County. Um and it's it's created an issue with deferred maintenance and administrative capacity. The district has no staff. We only have contractors. And the turnover, you know, essentially after the benchmarking study, we realized what had initially been proposed as a $2 million budget. If you're looking at our, you know, adjacent uh WMOs and wershed districts, it would be it would be $5 million based off of the same capacity. And so we just have this deficit. We've got the dual mission. And we, you know, our money in and the money out are not in balance. And we need to get those we need to we need to do both both. Ideally, we won't be doing property taxes as the major way that we generate funds. You should be taxed based off of your impact. And it and if you if you're doing the right thing, your tax should go down. And if you're doing the wrong thing, um you can continue that practice. It'd be voluntary to change the practice. But, you know, it's it's almost like cleaning your room. If you've been shoving, you know, the dirty laundry under the bed, um the house is not going to pay for a cleaning service to clean under your bed. You're going to have to clean it up. >> Let me give you one last thought that I have for you guys to think about as you move through this process. The water coming in is dirty. Shockp does a great job. It's nice and clean. It leaves Shockby. It gets to further downstream, eventually hits a Mississippi. Let's hypothetically say the water from in Shockp is perfect. The water coming in is terrible. We get charged a whole bunch to make it really nice, right, for our little area. It gets down out of Mississippi. It gets mixed in with all the other water and you're back to square one. You've achieved nothing. Okay. So somehow it's a bigger picture of a lot of different entities all striving for the same thing so that we're not harming each other in various areas. >> The goal >> how we get there I don't know >> the goal the goal in this approach would be to charge the polluters and to reward if you clean the water you get paid for for cleaning it. >> Um and so we might be able to you know right now we have this pushpull between environment and economic development. the big data center wants to come in, instead of using groundwater, maybe they can use river water. And if they clean that water for us, um we'll make it easier for them to cut through that red tape. And so we want to encourage the appropriate secure economic development, workforce expansion in our region. Essentially, we're failing at both missions right now. And so we need to realign the way that we finance our objectives to be fair and stable and resilient. and and that's the transformation that we need your input on. We need we need uh you know the city and the county to hold us accountable. The the alternative is that we have a normal plan that has the minimum standards or we get dissolved or absorbed. The water doesn't get cleaner. So whether it's us or Scott County or Henipin County or or Bowser administering this district, um we're open to those if the water gets cleaner and if it's >> we're back to the beginning where the water entering here is worse than what we're putting into it, but there's no controls to make the water coming here cleaner first >> and that is the problem. >> And those conversations are being talked about is how do do you expand the district? Do you work with partners? Uh how do you uh actually get the people who are the problem who are contributing to a large amount of the either poll pollution or the sediment or any of the number issues that we're being uh you know held responsible for and how do you create those relationships in a way where we can actually solve the problem since you know as you said uh I think it's clear that shakip isn't the problem >> it might be legislative action that's needed upstream >> right So, uh, just know that we're taking all those things under consideration. We're kind of coming at this with a clean slate. >> Well, I wish you, uh, wish you the best because you got a monumental task in front of you. >> Do we need anything else, sir? >> Uh, no, sir. >> Thank you both for coming. >> Very much, mayor. >> If you could leave some business cards with us at some point, that would be awesome. >> Absolutely. >> The Mississippi actually is cleaner than where the Minnesota comes in. If you ever done that refinery down there, it's like because it's swirling because they're coming together. It's >> mud and >> Yeah. >> And it's natural, you know. >> Wow. >> All right. Um item number 12, leazison administrative reports. >> I start. >> You started last time? >> Nope. I start now. >> You do this time. Go ahead, sir. >> All right. um September or October the 27th, Jackson Commons ribbon cutting for our newest and greatest park. Um being heavily used right now. Fantastic. Um October 1st, we had our joint workshop meeting with Scott County Commissioners. Very informative. And then last night was the Shakpi schoolboard meeting. Um what I was going to cover was already Dr. Redmond had went over it very well. Um but one thing that he didn't cover uh and what was covered in the meeting was they're taking their initial preparation of what's going to be cut. So I do have that um proportional grid of what will be cut and unfortunately at the top is um instruction teachers but um >> can you share that with staff to share with council please? >> Okay. >> Um that's it. >> Thank you sir. >> Councelor Contrus. >> Thank you mayor. So the 27th I also attended the Jackson Common Park which was an awesome turnout. Um October 1st I also attended the joint uh meeting with the county. Um on the 3rd I attended the um grand opening of the launchpad over with the SMSC great facility. Awesome. Awesome. And my liaison is coming up this Friday. So that's all I got. >> Very good. Calls are writing. >> All right. Thank you again. I also was at the county uh joint workshop. And then uh last night uh the Minnesota Wisconsin public transportation uh group met and had their uh annual awards and uh at their annual meeting and MVTA won for the management innovation award for their zero emissions transit initiative. And I knew uh the electric buses were the only ones in the state, but I had hadn't realized that they were the only ones in the region that has electric buses. So, uh um they're from Turkey, so they again they're not going to be easily attained. Probably not going to be too many around anymore unless changes are made, but uh very efficient, uh working shifts in our uh MVTA connect. So, uh we won that award. That's great. And I also handed out uh and you should have had the MVTA coalition for businesses. It's uh uh the MVTA partnership committee is doing that and uh working with other uh partners to see where they can be of help and uh utilize transit. Uh so we've used these at Amazon. The partnerships have worked with Amazon and the Mystic Lake and they've been in good communication with Valley Fair along with the amphitheater too to make sure their transit needs are u covered. So, if you guys think of any businesses that might need some transit support, um, get them connected with the transit co. >> They're doing some with like the Renaissance and all these other big venues that need that that >> Yeah, Renaissance was again record. We mentioned that at our last meeting. >> Do you know what the upfront capital cost on the electric bus compared to regular bus is? >> I don't have that information off hand, but it was a lot cheaper. >> I'd be curious. It's cheaper. >> Well, they were from Turkey, but they didn't cover for any federal funds because they weren't made in America. So they were trying to get the batteries made in America to cover some of the federal cost. You'll never see them again because of Yeah, I can take a look at that. >> All right. You Is that it, Mr. >> Yeah, that's all I have. >> Okay. Councelor Delaney. >> Okay. So, uh, we had County Highway 17 meeting with the residents over there. U, of course, the county showed up and hope to get their questions answered from there and that led to our joint meeting with the county. Um, also Jackson Commons Park opening, which was again, that's a beautiful park. Having been there, I have not probably won't see me do the mic anytime soon. Um, also as far as shackle ladder happened this past weekend, beautiful weather. Uh, thank all the staff that was out there, all the vendors. Uh, was a really great event. Um, also found a new pastry person. Love pastries, of course. Uh, Shaki Public Utilities had their meeting yesterday. Looking at doing two grants for a solar on public buildings. I think city hall is one plus the SpU building is the other. AMI is mostly done except for 109 electric. So working through about eight water they're working through. Three households are asking for opt outside or going through that whole appeal process. And of course make sure you get out and vote for tower number three tank of the year. Everybody's got that email. Hopefully vote once, twice, three times. It's a beautiful tank. Um if you look at the overall scale, we spend about 2 million to paint the tank. Again, that's just maintenance. Every 20 years you have to go through and take care of business for that. The painting for that typically we have uh shaky on one side and the emblem on the other side is included. This is just in addition to that we decided to make that decision to beautify that tank and of course make it represent Shakipi as a whole since we are entertainment district. >> Is is that that wrap that we saw that seen >> okay >> so uh let's see um I think that might be it up for 169 coalition no meeting till next month. We'll have some next steps discussions then. And I think the council connect got an email from a young man at Red Oak Elementary School. They are having a fundraiser. It's called um the readathon. They used to knock on the door and ask for that. So take a look at the website. It is electronic giving out. I had one kid knock on my door last year was more than one, but now I guess they're going electronic. So they're putting STEM to use. Uh there you have it. >> Younger younger generation going electronic. Who would have thought, right? >> Yes. Uh my report September 27th, Jackson Commons Park. September 30th, Scott County Marshall Road neighborhood meeting. Well attended, a lot of uh a lot of comments, a lot of concerns, and I actually have some ideas that I came up with that I'm going to share with the county transportation people. If I get a chance, I'll share it with the city engineer. Um October 1st we had a joint council uh Scott County board meeting. I thought that went very well. A lot of uh topics that we work together on in partnership and that's always good. Communications is always the hard one and especially in the modern times that we're in where some do electronic, some don't and then there's people in the middle. Yesterday, October 6th was the uh Shock Fire Department open house fire prevention. Um, God, what a blast that was. I know I'm not a young kid, but it came out of me. I just enjoyed it and had a lot of fun. Uh, got a lot of pictures, got permission from parents to be able to use them, posted them on, uh, on social media. And, uh, there was actually a lot of good educational stuff that the fire department shared with both the the adult children like me and and the kids' kids about fire safety and stuff. Learn something important. Flour is not good for a fire. It's flammable. >> It's baking soda. And the key word is >> Oh, >> powder. Baking. Powder is flammable, >> but not baking soda because it's in a powder form apparently. I don't know. I didn't ask all the details, but >> learned a lot. They did a demonstration with putting water on a grease fire and it was like amazing just how rapidly it exploded. It was like wow. um showed a lot of different techniques of how to put that out with a pizza pan, another pan, um turn the heat off, all kinds of stuff. Very, very good event. It was outstanding. Kudos to the fire department for doing it. Ounce of prevention is always a pound of cure. So, Mr. Reynolds, you have anything to report, sir? >> Not tonight. >> All righty. Item 12B, news and announcements. Who wants Who started last time around? >> I did the proclamation. Oh, okay. Um, >> oh, did I miss 12A? City bill list. I'm sorry. >> Just before we >> No questions. >> No questions. >> I have no questions. >> All right. Um, let's let's start on this end and go down the uh news and announcements if you have them in front of you. >> All right. Fall cleanup day, Saturday, October 18th from 7:30 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. at public works facility. It's always a good time. Uh, I enjoy I'm sure residents enjoy coming out and it's a big hit for the city. So, definitely come out. Look at the website for what's accepted and not accepted. >> Exactly. >> All righty, Mr. Whiting. >> Oh, did I the proclamation? I'll pass. >> Okay, council contrarers. >> Okay. So, fall yard waste drop off. Dakota Prairie um composting is offering free yard waste um drop off from October 1st to the 31st. Drop off your yard waste at 12386 Chestnut Boulevard. Shakape residents must show ID Monday through uh Thursday 7 to 7. Friday 7 to 5, Saturday 8 to 2, and the Sunday is closed. >> Very good. And uh Chestnut Boulevard is 41 going into Chaza off of 169. Just over the railroad tracks. Hang a left just over the tracks. >> Yep. >> All right. Spooky family fun is on Saturday, October 25th from 4 to 7:00 at Hubert Park. Join us for our annual spooky family fun event. Games, booths, prizes, animals. animals this year, huh? Food trucks and candy. No registration is required for this free event. We will see you there. Also, a little hack on the uh on the cleanup day. The later you come, the easier it is to get in. So, there is no need to get in line at 6:00 a.m. if you come in, >> unless you got two truckloads or three >> or unless it's really busy and the line stays there until it's cut off time. You just got to roll the dice. >> Yeah. >> Anything from staff? >> No, sir. >> All right. Any other business? >> Okay, moving to we are going to move into a close session for the city administrator performance review. And to do that, whichever council member makes that motion, uh I would request that you uh link it pursu pursuant to the Minnesota State Statute that's listed on our paper 13D.05 subdivision 3. Mr. Lara, >> I'll make a motion to uh conduct an annual performance review of the city administer in close session in pursuant to Minnesota statutes 13D.05 subdivision 3. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> Anybody? >> Councelor Contrarus seconds the motion. Discussion on the motion. All in favor say I. I. I. Opposed. Motion passes. We're in close session. We'll have to clear the ch next meeting. >> There we go. We are >> Shaki City Council is back in order after a close session um under state statute 13D.05 section subdivision 3 for uh city administrator performance uh evaluation and there was no action taken. Mr. Whiting. >> Well, after that, I would make a motion to adjourn to uh October 21st at 7 PM. >> Is there a second to the motion? >> Second down here. >> Any discussion on the motion? Seeing none, all in favor say I. I. Opposed. Motion passes. We are joured.