[Music] we'll call the Shak city council meeting for December 17th 2024 to order if the clerk could please take the role yes Mr mayor council member Delaney here council member Whiting council member conteras here council member Lara here mayor Layman here item number three if you join us in Pledge of Allegiance flag the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation indivisible withy and jice item number four approval of the agenda any changes to the agenda from councelor staff nothing from staff sir Council councelor contus make a motion to approve the agenda second seconding any discussion on the motion discussion seeing none all in favor say I I opposed motion passes item number five consent business any changes to the consent agenda not from staff Sir Mr Delaney I'd like to pull 5 a Mr Lara like to pull five e e yep anything else from Council Mr whing make a motion to adopt the consent agenda as modified is there a second before voting we'll have uh Mr Reynolds or administrator read the consent items thank you Mr Mayor and members of council these are the consent items for Tuesday December 17th of 2024 5B is the purchase of four utility police interceptors for the police department a purchase of a plow truck for the street department and a purchase of a 2025 Silverado pickup truck for the fire department 5c sets a public hearing date for the street reconstruction plan 5D are the 2024 budget amendments 5S are 5f are 2024 miscellaneous gifts and donations 5G approves a contract for the 2025 ashtree removal project 5H approves taxi cab business license renewals for for 2025 5A is the mark grish field 1 and two scoreboard maintenance agreement with shaky Youth Football Association 5j approves the city council meeting minutes 5K is the pre preliminary plat of Palomino Trail 5l is the agreement with mmpa and shock Public Utilities 5m is Surplus equipment 5n approves tobacco license renewals for 2025 5 O approves Pawn breaker business license renewals for 2025 5p is a Scott County Public Health Statewide Health Improvement partnership Grant application 5 q is resolution 2024 Tac 160 with Scott County CDA for Homeowner rehabilitation program using the l ha funding stream is over here and 5 R approves the th business license renewals for 2025 thank you Mr rynolds um I've got two different five e but I think the 15E is really 5j and that is the scoreboard agreement it's just a second half it's yeah it's five right but it says 5e and this is 5e over here so Mr Mayor that's an attachment showing the previous action accepting the scoreboards um so it was just referencing a previous meeting where you had accepted that got it yep all right let's see here give me a second here so we've read to consent agenda uh and the modified consent agenda we do have a motion in a second any discussion on the motion this is I just discussion seeing none all in favor I say I I opposed motion passes get through my junk here all right that takes us to item number six public comment if you're here for an item that is not on the council's agenda tonight would like to speak to the city council now would be the time to come up to the table here and we'd love to hear your comments so if you're here for an item not on the agenda now would be the time to come forward and speak to the Council I'm seeing none item number seven business removed from consent first item removed was 5A uh that was REM removed by Mr Delaney Mr Delany I have a couple of comments I mean I'm I'm not in favor of raising taxes on our residents this year I know last year we pursued a tax break and we're now pursuing a tax increase and in addition we're showing a funding Gap and increase in our Capital Improvement Levy by 500k and my one question is were we not aware of this deficiency last year or pursuing the tax break um this year's tax increase and last year's tax break clearly indicate that we're not we need to look for a sustainable way to maintain a reasonable stable property tax so instead of rehashing my previous argument I propos that we have a workshop early next year to develop a long-term viable strategy for achieving and maintaining a reasonable stable property tax I mean just having the lowest tax rate compared to surrounding cities is not it's a fantastic goal but it's not a strategy so just thank you for my viewpoint thank you Mr Lany Mr Whiting yeah thank you Mr Mayor um you mentioned it yourself the lowest tax rate and then with development uh this will have you know one of the lowest impacts on any Community uh we know about the bond we've talked about it for years we knew about the the road bubble it's not anything that hasn't been transparent so with that I'd make a motion to adopt resolution r224 tax 151 approving the property tax levy collectible in 2025 and 2025 annual budget second any discussion on the motion discussion I would uh I would say staff has done a great job minimizing the impacts of council actions I think uh Council actions we could have had a u a lower tax impact um um them decisions were made um I think it is critical that uh strengthening our households and our businesses also strengthens the consumers which our businesses rely on and I think that's pretty critical especially right now um at least until and if inflation ever goes down my 10 cents any other comments all in favor say I I opposed I motion passes 3 to2 um just a housekeeping thing here I have a 5S that's not on the agenda um did you hit on that Mr Reynolds under the consent agenda a do part yeah it's not listed on our agenda but it's in our packet 5S is a purchase of equipment for a Marytown dog park no sir I did not no on my list it is it's on oh yeah I have it mine does have it so's that I had the item it's doesn't look like it's on the uh mine is not on this one agenda I got for some reason I got the white sheets and they all got the yellow sheets oh I got both I got both the yellow sheet is is not correct the white sheet is the white but I never got a yellow sheet I just don't know that we we read that one yeah in the it would still be yeah it would still be part of the consent agenda and therefore would have been passed yep as we've talked about before we're one of the only communities in the metro area that actually reads consent into agenda it has no real effect other than telling people what we're doing okay all right the other item removed from the consent agenda was 5e and that was removed by Mr Lara Mr Lara um so last meeting we discussed um we were talking about pawn shops and I was just wondering if um in it's is it in the fee schedule here that we're um that our pawn shop fees are incorporated or is that on a separate is that separate I thought I saw them in here well my question is is do we have since they haven't been raised for ages do we have any interest increasing that it looks like we did an across the board increase based on inflation of 3% I believe it said yeah here it is on page 72 and I was always if Council sees a fee that they want to adjust you certainly can so they have their license fee they have their investigation fee um it's the the do 51 that hasn't been increased in a while is that one seeing a increase this year or not since it's not red lined it's not scheduled to be increased no sir is is that one dictated by uh any other statute that we are aware of not that I'm aware of um that does not mean that that's the case though is that that might be something we want to have Chief come back can we can bring this that one back to a ler we can amend that at any time we can we can take look at it and then um my recommendation is to pass this and then if let us take a look at the specific fee and then we can tell you uh if that's the case and if not uh we can bring that and have a bigger discussion on it Mr all right so um in that case I make a motion to adopt ordinance uh 0224 D21 establishing fees for 2025 with the um with us coming back to looking at the that pawn shop fee in a later date is there second discussion on the motion discussion no see none all in favor say I I I opposed motion passes item 8A ordinance amendment to title 15 chapter 151 cannabis and hemp business es is that Mr kki yes sir whenever you're ready sir good evening mayor and councel this is ordinance 2024 u 11 amendment to title chapter 151 section 1517 K table of uses and 151002 definitions related to cannabis and lower potency hemp Edibles Minnesota State Statute Che chapter 342 approved August 1st 2023 established regulatory framework for adult use cannabis and lower potency hemp Edibles the law created the Office of cannabis management who will oversee the implementation in the medical cannabis market and consumer hemp industry so effect the highlights of chapter 3 um 342 is effective January of 2025 for those 21 and older there's a minimum of One retail license per 12,500 population and these are the 13 business license es that will be issued um micro businesses meso businesses a cultivator manufacturer retailer with no on-site use or consumption allowed a wholesaler transporter testing facility event organizer which is a temporary event lasting less than 4 days delivery service medical cannabis combination businesses lower potency hemp edible manufacturer and a lower potency hemp edible retailer Mr whing can I stop before question jump um on the event organizer that is a consumption event isn't it mayor and Council that's correct that's where you would be consuming some kind of hemp product or U cannabis product right thank you I have a question Mr kerski testing facility is that going to be the facilities that the state would operate to do their testing May and Council that could be a if you were a manufacturer you could contract with that state approved facility that would test the product okay but nonetheless the state's going to be involved in the testing side of things mayor and councel yes I mean all of these are licenses so you have to get a if you're going to be a tester you have to get a license from the state similar if you're a transporter of the product you'd have to get a license so it's a very heavy regulated industry we all want to know what the delivery service part of it will be so that'll be an interesting okay so cities uh can enact buffer distances have we discussed 1,000 ft and then 500 ft for Parks allows businesses to operate from 8 to two cities can prohibit retail sales on 8 to 10 Monday through Saturday that will be addressed um in the administrative rules that will be adopted in January by the council it allows initial registration of renewal fees and requires uh local government units compliance checks for retail registrations one per calendar year so the proposed ordinance here is um there's no restriction on the number of retail locations um I think that was the direction staff was given at one of the council workshops there's no buffer requirements and the hours will be addressed again in the administrative procedures which will be seen by Council in January so this is the table of uses that would be adopted tonight so this amends our table in the zoning code so you can see here all the different types of uh licenses would be regulated by these zones so for instance the can cannabis cultivator would be permitted in i1 and I2 delivery services and i1 and I2 manufacturers and i1 and I2 the meso businesses and i1 and I2 so the micro businesses are um small businesses similar to a micro Brewery and those would be permitted in our B1 which is our major commercial District B3 which is downtown um major wreck and uh community commerci commercial industrial one and industrial 2 cannabis retailers would be limited to B1 major wreck and Community commercial testing facilities would be in i1 I2 and also business park because that's uh fits to that category Transporters would be in i1 and I2 wholesalers i1 and I2 medical cannabis combination businesses in i1 and I2 low potency manufacturers and i1 and I2 and the lower potency hemp Edibles matches pretty much what we have today which is B1 B3 neighborhood commercial major wreck and Community commercial so as these licenses come forward this will provide guidance to where they can be located Mr KY what's the difference between a micro business and a retailer so a micro business um you'll see they all have Little Numbers next to them so micr businesses is a place where You' be making for instance a gummy and you could actually make it on site and consume it on site so it's like a micro Brewery so small quantities um where it's like a tasting kind of where you have a Tasting Room could be beverages or something that's well okay and and how about the flower side of it may I couldn't hear you I'm sorry the flower side can they smoke it can they smoke it so that's something I'll have to rely on the City attorney I don't believe smoking is allowed because it violates the Clean Air ordinance Mr may I believe that's correct I can double check though with the attorney that in our office that work primarily on this but I can double check that so you can purchase it in a micro business but maybe not consume it so in a micro business it true um micro business really designed for from what we can tell from the state um for Edibles so it could be Bakery products it could be gummies could be anything that you could probably eat you would not be smoking it most likely in a micro business cuz it would violate the Clean Air ordinance okay but where would you per would you purchase it in a micro business yes the flower not the edible if you make the flower there which you can't in that zoning yeah so you the micro businesses is is really designed to be very small it was designed for small kind of retail operations that make something kind of in the back room on a very small scale and serve it or you buy it and take it with you okay like a Wier year y yeah okay they they compared it in the state guiding to you know the early micro briers that we had all right so these are the um this keys back to the table so every one of these categories has um conditions so on 61 is a kind of a good example so that's a micro business on-site consumption is accessory use to cannabis business licensed by the ocm as a micro business um minimum 500 foot separation for residential uses is measured from the property line um because they're actually making things there and there's potential for um odors um and if you look at any industrial so cannabis cultivator delivery they have again the separation requirement because the state there is some concern if you're manufacturing something there's going to be the potential for odors so they would have a 500 foot separation from residential uh uses so the Planning Commission approved uh the inclusion their recommendation is to include the maximum buffers Allowed by state law so that was different than what council recommended they were pretty strong at pass 5 to zero to include the, feet from schools and the 500 uh foot distance from daycares residential treatment facilities and amend in a public park where miners frequent remember let's back up let's back up a slide or two one more okay so so the the 500 foot separation is that us doing that or is that a state requirement that is Us in the industrial area similar to where we have other conditional type uses that are odorous or whatever we have separation requirements okay just want to make sure what is State and what is local all right so this really pertained basically to the retail that was the and if you remember this map these are the areas that those buffers would apply to and so basically the ordinance you have before you tonight does not include the buffers but their recommendation was to include the buffers okay Mr whing I thought our Council had a good discussion on buffers and uh some knowledge of of of some of these uh facilities and other uh areas of the country and with all respect to the Planning Commission I think uh we decided not to go with the buffers and I think to me that would stand Mr Lara I concur anybody else all right so what's the wishes of council Mr Mayor Mr Laro I will make a motion to adopt ordinance 020241 0 111 amending title uh what is that 15 15 uh chapter 151 section 1517 K table of uses and 151.2093 I would say that I suspect that uh as this Progressive at the state level there potentially could be some changes along the way that we may incorporate later on right all right any other discussion Mr W and I'll add you know as we go through this we may change this we may say we we should have thought of that or whatever whatever might be Um this can come back so we're open to it so yeah any other discussion discussion seeing none all in favor say I I I opposed motion passes unanimously 8B comprehensive plan text amendment to figure 4113 Mr kki Council this is the comprehensive plan text Amendment for the Mixed use commercial center residential density so the 2040 comprehensive plan includes future land use classifications and a broad pattern of land use figure 4.13 is the planned land use overview which lists each land use classification and detail the request tonight is to modify the mixed use commercial center residential density from minimum of 30 to maximum of 16w 60 dwelling units per acre to six to 60 dwelling units per acre city council can approve an amendment when it finds one or more of the criteria exists the original comp plan and zoning ordinance are an error sign ific changes in community goals and policies have taken place so we've received feedback on the sites you'll see in a second that the density is not feasible in our market and the developers would like to look at Town Homes and smaller groups projects the majority of our new apartments are in the 26 to 28 dwelling units range and basically you can't get the density uh in the one to five stories that is required in the plan significant changes in Citywide or neighborhood development patterns have concur occurred or the comprehensive plan requires another provision which is is basically to meet the Shaka Market realities so these areas circled are where that current 30 to 60 is required um and basically we've gotten some proposed projects in some of these areas in particular the site that's right next to um the emblem that's been vacant for as long as anyone on staff can remember um we've had several projects that have looked at doing kind of small scale commercial and town homes there they cannot come anywhere near meeting that density the other issue is that density has to be met in five stories and I don't think that that's probably feasible anywhere in the city so this is the table so mixed use commercial center currently is 30 to 60 dwelling units an acre and 1 to five stories sitb back varies it's um. 2 to 1.5 uh floor to area ratio it's commercial and office of primary uses multifam parking Transit facilities and Gathering spaces are they allowed um secondary uses so this is the page that we' be amending um so the mixed use commercial center right now again is 30 to 60 and we're recommending that that go down um 6 to 60 Planning Commission recommended approval 5 to zero questions of staff Mr waiting could could you put back the uh current zoning the map there this is the land use map not the zoning map okay so this is not the circled areas are not the ones you're talking about the the circled areas are where the current future landu shows that that density would be required and all yeah that mixed use commercial is just a strange it is yeah so Mr KY yes sir we also have mixed employment and we show mixed employment in the same area that you're calling uh mixed commercial mayor so mixed use Center is that kind of salmon color employment is a lighter kind of pink color that if you look for instance in the West End you'll be seeing a map in a minute that is the mixed employment center where it's kind of that pinkish color and then if you see Canterbury Park that's our industrial area so that's all that kind of pinkish color so if if we're if we're not a if we're not going to be using up to 60 why don't we just change it to 6 to 30 so mayor and councel I think if technology may change units we wanted to leave the upper number um because I think it someone comes in down the road when can figure out how to make 60 work but we know right now the minimum they can make work is six the Mr Delaney so what's the max they can work with at the present time says he said 30 so 30 is the max okay no today it's 30 is the minimum 60 is the maximum but you said 30 60 couldn't work today so so one of the things that chak can't support right now and very few cities can is um steel or Concrete Construction all of our projects are a concrete typically first floor with a wood frame o that some cities you know they can support steel and concrete and you can get a denser project we just can't do that currently with the rents that Shaka gets today I think our maximum rent that I think we've seen is probably close to $3,000 a month but most of our units are probably 1500 to 2,000 a month and for that number you have to do Wood Construction and there's no way to get to that density with Wood Construction Delany can we make that change now and just revisit it later when they do have technology that can maybe support that mayor and councel that's your choice if you want to change it from 6 to 30 it's up to you I I would support 6 to3 Mr uh Mr may members of council right now my concern on that is it was only noticed at the Planning Commission to change the 30 to six not to change the 60 to 30 is that correct correct I'd be a little concerned about making that change on the upper end without the Planning Commission and going through a public hearing on that because that was not noticed to the public as decreasing the maximum it was so that so we could we could uh direct to do that okay thanks for the clarification Mr uh Whiting I I have no idea why we'd want to do that I mean this is the mixed use commercial if you look at some of these spaces this this is be potentially would be a great spot to add more than take away to give them that option which doesn't seem to be possible at this point I understand now your concerns have always been with the higher densities this is not changing the high end it's changing the low end so that we can make some of these work to be a little more flexible in these strange areas where I'm not sure who would want to build an apartment actually but well I I'm I'm more concerned with taking away available Highway businesses and Commercial along the highway Corridor than I am uh you know that's one of my concerns amongst others so so mayor and Council residential is a second excuse me a secondary use so you got to have commercial first so for instance that town home project that I just talked about potentially on the site next to emblem would have to have you know commercial along the main road and the tow houses would be in the back so you'd still have we've done some seen some concept plans that would have a retail and some other commercial across the front what the primary use kind of on the street a lot like holiday and Roars on windmer way yes okay what's the density of Roar per acre I think they're in under 30 exactly so that's my point that's can't be done so but you got the option so I I would be in favor of sending this back to staff 6 to 30 in this classification can I suggest we act on this and then you can direct staff if you have the votes to make that happen so if we have the votes that we would have to vote this down is that what you're telling us to do no let's put it out there first Mr Thompson but Mr R is saying and I I agree I think if it's not if you're all in favor of reducing it from 30 to six if that's not the issue you can adopt that one before you tonight that's before you correct and if you want give staff direction to go back and have a you know notice a public hearing for the Planning Commission to change the 60 to 30 you can do that but I don't know that that would need to stop you from lowering it from 30 to 6 okay Mr Thompson either I misheard you or you misspoke you said if we wanted to lower it to 6 to 30 we could do that but that's no you said six to 60 I think yeah okay okay you can lower it from 30 to 6 cuz that's what was know that we're not okay I see what you're saying that's what is before you yep okay very good so I think our goal would be if you could pass that we'll go back to the planning mission go through the notice process again and then lower the 60 to 30 if that's what you all want but this would at least allow some sites that are not getting developed today to have people start looking at potentially developing them Mr whing that doesn't mean each plan doesn't come back to us for for approval on on some these but it does I see where we have to change the low end of this I don't see how the top end is going to going to affect us much so um I don't see the concern with the highend so with that i' I'd make a motion to approve the resolution as it is before us our 2024 Tac 142 approving a comprehensive plan text amendment to figure 4.13 planned land use overview and Associated P pages in The 2040 comprehensive plan Mr ask a question do we need a super majority or just a majority you're you're required for have a super majority let's get a is there a second to the motion I'll second okay we do have a motion in a second any more comments Mr Lany did you have comment no that's only thing I have comments and just so it's clear you do need four affirmative votes to pass this right all right uh seeing no comments all in favor say I I opposed I um I'm not sure I caught that who's the eyes and who's the nays I'm the Nay guess pick your numbers three to two so that doesn't pass it doesn't pass but you're not lowering the right so I will make a motion to uh approve resolution R 2024 Tac 142 approving a comprehensive plan amendment to figure 4.13 planned land use overview and Associated pages in the 2040 comprehensive plan with the adjustment to change the dwelling units to the low end to six that's what we just voted on and the six and 6 to 30 currently we can't do that because the Planning Commission has to have notification there're two different actions what was before you was to lower the density to six that has now failed so that will not be coming back if you want us to go and try to lower the upper density we can do that if you have the votes to do that no we don't have we we we could we could move to direct staff to do 6 to 30 and take that to the Planning Commission Mr Thompson is that correct 30 to six you mean no 6 to 30 no you're six to it's 30 now it's 30 now you want to change it from the low to six to high let me ask this we can we can direct the Planning Commission to lower the upper density but we can't direct them to lower the lower density the lower density they just asked you to do okay that the lower density was going from 30 to 6 so if we direct them to lower the upper density to 30 then this can come back with the 6 to 30 we we' be me both of their recommendations at that point you just voted that down right but if it had the other in there maybe it would pass Mr Thompson yeah what I'm what I believe I'm hearing is there's two council members that don't want to lower to six unless the 60 is lowered to 30 so that would happen since it's not a super majority vote for the item before for you is back up the current density in this area is 30 to 60 and I think everybody knows this but just so we're clear the amendment that's before you tonight is to change the low end of 30 to six but not change the upper end I don't think you can change the upper end to 30 tonight because that was not part of the public hearing okay so Mr rold is right the action you just took there was not a super majority to lower the low density from 30 to six so that did not pass that does not preclude that from coming back to you at a later point in a in a proposal to in addition to lowering the 30 to 6 also lowering the 60 to 30 that can come back before you again okay if all right do we want a direct staff to do that yeah you want to make a motion to do that I'd like to make a motion to direct staff to change the lower end to six and the upper end to 30 okay is there a second I'll second it all right Mr May if I could just obviously staff can't I think the direction is to bring that to the Planning Commission go through the process to propose that change let me see if I can get this correct instead of saying you want to lower the the lower end to six the motion should be to direct staff to lower the upper end from 60 to 30 and it should be just that because then it's going to come back with the same recommendation from staff for the lower end no no okay all right you the motion to change the low end from 30 to 6 has failed because it was not a super majority I my only point was I think the motion is to direct staff to start the process not staff can't make the change was just a technical okay so there's a comprehensive planning text amendment process you could direct us to begin that process right is that the intent of your motion Mr Delaney that's the intent of the motion this this does only require a majority vote because you're not amending the plan you're just giving staff action to do something okay and is there a second I'll second it discussion on the motion Mr Wy the spaces we're talking about to me would demand a higher density staff is telling you that they can't build higher densities past 30 well what to have that scope at least in that area to have that ability to do it in case the opportunity came I don't see the reason why we would want to I mean it's already there it's 60 now it it hasn't hurt us the issue is before us is lowering it so that we can have developers take these properties that uh aren't uh currently viable for them so what we're doing here is not developing property yep and if we have something on the books of a density of 60 that's un unachievable and we're being told that 30 is the Magic High Point then we should probably adopt that so any other discussion I'm thinking sorry I'm just trying to um I just feel we should just have done the way it was and then just added to revise it later because I understand your point of the you know 60 W it's it's not getting us anywhere but it again it's not bothering it's just there the issue was you know trying to get it so we can get smaller things done so I I I just feel like we're just yeah well if we don't adopt what the motion on the table then nothing smaller than 30 will happen right okay so if you Mr Lara we missing something I know are you missing something yeah are we what are we missing I I think the issue here is that we don't know what the future holds you only have four years left on the current comprehensive plan and 20 28 you'll have a new one and so what we're hearing today is on the sites that are on that map it's difficult to do 30 to 60 they can get six units without any problem that's you know in the today's technology in today's market that's feasible I think staff's point was in four years whatever when the plan comes back you're going to re-evaluate it and if 60 is too high you know we haven't seen any projects at 60 the only areas we've seen that it's been that high has been in downtown in the B3 Zone I think you can go up to probably close to 100 units an acre 125 I think it is yeah 125 but that's the only area today that supports that kind kind of density um we're a suburban community um and you're seeing that kind of development I think that because we require commercial in the areas as the primary use it's hard to get up to that 60 today that doesn't mean somewhere down the road we're not going to have first floor commercial with you know imagine um Shak Flats in one of these areas in a parking lot like you see in other cities it would have a grocery store or something on the first floor but it would be a concrete building probably entirely I mean today the rents don't support that will that happen in two or three or four years I can't tell you I can't predict that but I think that customer witing leaving at 60 there there's nobody coming forward and it just will move the process forward and we have projects I think that if we had it at 6 they'll come in at 6 to 10 or 6 to 8 sooner than later all righta um if we lower it to 30 is there anything that we would be missing out on with that would would that uh deter developers coming forward to those Pro presenting those projects to us we won't know I can't tell you that because I haven't seen any project like that however if you left it at 60 the benefit for you all is those projects come forward for rezoning because none of them are zoned today for that kind of project so would have to be a mixed juuse project you could vote up or vote it down then I mean the 60 is kind of the sky but you regulate that because again this is just comprehensive land changes the reason where we're going down to six is you'll still see the unit the projects at six units an acre because none of them are Zone the the piece next to the emblem I think is Zone agricultural so you're going to see the rezoning on that anyway and then you can judge does it meet you know the six units minimum does it have commercial that that's up to you and the Planning Commission to judge does that answer your question yes okay any other discussion discussion all in favor say I I opposed right I'm not sure where that was at so hands all in favor opposed okay motion fails all right thank you well that takes us to 8C monthly financial report yep hang on get this out of the way for you questions on uh yeah uh good evening mayor and council members uh tonight I'll be covering the monthly financial report uh through November um probably seen a slide similar like this uh before but this slide shows uh the general fund through November uh so at this point we're 92% through the year uh so we'd expect to be about 92% of our our budget and revenues uh the 2024 budget column has been adjusted for the budget amendments that were approved on July 2nd uh additional proposed budget amendments uh were on the consent agenda tonight um those aren't reflected on those numbers uh but I did put a column on the right hand side that um coincides with those budget amendments uh these budget amendments explain many of the differences or the budget variances uh and once these are entered into our system um should be brought within our budget uh allotment uh which I'll walk through those budget amendments uh on the next slide we did receive our second half property tax settlement uh first week of December so tax revenues will be um up to those uh budget expectations uh there are three other um areas or three areas on the revenue side that have already exceeded the full year budget uh which would be building permits uh intergo revenue revenue which is a primary result of Grants related to uh Public Safety police fire and Building Inspections and then the other area is miscellaneous uh which would include our interest earnings on on investments uh which also exceeded the full year budget expectations uh on the expenditure side in total uh we're at 86% of our uh full year budget so just kind of wanted to walk through these budget amendments just because they do explain um those budget VAR variances on the previous slide uh with um there's five identified budget amendments for each um budget amendment I also provided a reference to the the council meeting date that those projects were approved uh similar to the past couple of years um city council approved budget amendments for um significant budget variances uh there's still several line items that have um positive and negative variances uh but this at least acknowledges those significant uh deviations on a formal level uh the first one here um is uh the Minnesota Historical Society Grant uh Council accepted the Grant in the amount of 77,500 and then agreed uh to provide 100% match uh for archaeological investigation in the Shak cultural Corridor uh as well as apply for the national register of historical places uh this budget uh Amendment recognizes the revenue and related expenses uh fire state aid um or fire state aid has passed through to the Fire Relief Association uh that amount um came in much higher than we had budgeted uh by about 102,000 uh that Amendment increases the revenue as well as the pass through um expense side uh the State Building official Grant uh Council accepted a grant from the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry and authorized the hiring of a building inspector Apprentice uh the amendment recognizes that $65,000 Grant and then the related position expenses uh the police unions uh or police Captain's Union contract uh which was approved um that recognizes that additional cost uh which will be offset by savings uh and other line items within the police department and then the buildings repair and maintenance uh proposed amendment uh this doesn't increase the budget at all it just um it'll take Building Maintenance expenses that we have in our facilities department and allocate them to the Departments that have um buildings that had expenses like the police uh station and and fire station um with that I'll um stand for any questions you might have questions of staff I I have a I have a question if if we look at uh number nine inspections building official Grant so we have the original budget at 8815 you have the amendment of 65 and it makes the revised budget 880 showing that 65 in there does that mean that the following budget will be increased by that 65 correct so the 2024 uh if I went back to this previous slide um for example um in the 202 budget column would be increased by 65,000 on the expense side as well as the intergovernmental side with the grant Revenue okay so but what used to cost 8115 um and then is revised in 24 to 880 will 25 reflect 880 um I I can tell you we have included that in the 2025 budget that was pardon me yes it's been included in the 2025 budget the building inspector position we also we also applied for a second pH phase of that Grant so we anticipate getting funding for that second year of that position so if you get the second phase of that that will lower that one single budget item and then the excess goes where well it's been it's been budgeted that way in the 2025 budget so we budgeted for both the Grant and the position expenses and this in this at this time when we had set the 2024 budget we did not know we'd have this grant okay and if the grant is not received in 25 then we do a budget amendment to fill that hole he said he had it both both in there with yeah I mean I suppose if we did not receive that Grant we'd we probably bring something back and alling that we did not proceive that if we aren't able to fill it some other way okay any other questions okay thank you sir thank you 8 comprehensive plan map amendment to regu two properties from open space to mixed employment center the Workman mayor and Council this is a comprehensive plan amendment to reu two properties from open space to mixed employment center one property from open space to Suburban residential and one property from utilities to mixed employment center so City Shak submitted an application for a comprehensive plan to reu the following 26 Acres which is the Northwest portion of 12460 wman road from open space to mixed employment center approximately 20 acres from open space to mixed employment center approx 5 Acres on wman road from utilities to mixed employment center and then approximately 54 Acres on Buenavista drive from open space to Suburban residential in the 2040 comp plan the request to reu these properties is based on potential development opportunities which are not consistent with the current plan so these are the properties that we're speaking of I get this to work so this is the uh EXL energy Scott substation this property next door which is not affiliated with them got guided as utilities even though it's not utilities this parel here which is next to buav Vista was guided as open space um which it won't be eventually buav Vista will build out at some point into this area and they actually own this already and then this piece here um was guided as open space when it's really part of the Gravel Pit so give you an idea how it would look um here's the current B of Vista parcel this parcel in the back here um this was considered open space which is part of the gravel pit and this piece here you can see the fine blue lines accidentally guide guided as utilities when it's not so the reiding would basically be um this little piece down here which is currently utilities this piece and this piece which are currently shown as open space and this piece over here would now be Suburban residential which would match the guiding of the current um buen Vista so the state staff believe that several of the required criteria are met on this um should the application be approved staff anticipates future zoning requests consistent with the current proposal versus the approved 2040 comp plan Planning Commission recommended the changes five to zero questions for staff no okay so what is no go back to your colorful map will you thanks okay so what is allowed and mixed employment center um basically that's our uh mayor and Council that's our business park um so right now in mixed employment would be the um something like the Opus development that occurred out there so it's not warehousing it's places that either make things develop things and then churny is the best example I give people so they have offices in the front they have an R&D section they have a manufacturing section and then they have uh warehouse and distribution in the back so warehouse and distribution would not as strictly as a use would not be allowed in the mixed employment center okay what else is allowed uh anything but that anything that does not require exterior storage and is warehouse warehouse and distribution so data centers um manufacturing um residential residential residential can be in mixed employment as I think a tertiary use and what does that mean it could be a little corner or something of a parcel I mean we don't foresee that happening a mixed employment center we would not support that and no one has ever looked at the changes we're making tonight are because the Gravel Pit is currently under contract and noted that this piece accidentally got included in this open space over here the Buena Vista um is listed as open space when their eventual plans we've worked with Scott County as they will expand that park into this area so these are just Corrections okay and the mixed employment by Strunk Road um I don't where's the railroad that's that's right on got be that green line huh where's the railroad on here railroad U May and council is that Gray Line well that's kind of Strunk road is actually kind of on the side of that I think the other side of the roadway so that's that's kind of back in its own little down a hill and its own little area and it's kind of an industrial use right now in that Gravel Pit so again mayor we're the mixed employment center is the future 240 land use what we're trying to do tonight is to fix this piece of mixed employment that has this odd piece of open space that got dropped on it when they were making the map fixing this also which is not supposed to be open space fixing this piece down here which is considered utilities which is not a utility and then allowing Bueno Vista at some point to expand into this area because it's not going to be open space okay so now let's go to your other map the Blue Line map there you go okay so you got the white area that says area to be regid which is currently open space so typically no one can explain how this happened we don't carve up Parcels land use is based on parcel bases so somehow that when they were coloring the map that got colored open space but it's part of the Gravel Pit so just this piece of the gravel pits being rided back to match the Gravel Pit and the Gravel Pit is currently guided as Mi mixed employment center okay so that so we're we're proposing that the open space in the Gravel Pit be guided to match the rest of the Gravel Pit which is mixed employment center okay and then the there you go then there's this piece back here which is also open space which will be future industrial land right now this piece is being farmed um this is just some trees and that matches the rear which in the future will be some sort of U mixed employment area some kind of industrial area and then this piece here is you can see there's homes already built into this section eventually this will get sewer and water someday or they'll figure out a way to do their um septic system and the park will expand this is owned by the same property owner and then this is a landscape business that's clearly not a utility and needs to be matched to The Guiding around it okay so couple of questions if the the township had a concern that we would be bypassing areas that are the townships and we're supposed to like go continuously so how do we how do we tackle that this is not this mayor and Council this is just this has nothing to do with acquisition land this is strictly a land use fix on the map when a project this is all outside of the city right now but we do the land use by law in the township because we have an orderly annexation agreement so we're trying to fix the map tonight and then as these properties they'll petition to Annex into the city in under the current orderly annexation agreement if they so choose but as we discussed at the township meeting this land use is a ways off but the people looking at this are looking long term and going to have to invest a significant amount of money now they want some assurances that in five years or whatever it is that they can bring this property into the city with the proper land use makes sense and we are allowed in the agreement to create Islands because there's an existing Island over on Mary's Town Road where the two property owners don't want to come into the city it was the Township's decision where they didn't want us to Annex in this residential neighborhood that's up here and I think Council agreed oops I guess I'm not totally clear on on this questions so all we're doing tonight is fixing the map but why are we fixing the map because it's wrong because somebody is looking at the Gravel Pit well someone we've met for a year with the um B A Vista people and despite everything they want to do they couldn't do it today because it's the wrong land use and the guy that owns the landscape business has talked to us and said I don't want to be a utility I'd like to be mixed employment center because that's I'm not part of the utility so we're trying to correct errors that are in the map where would the uh trailer park put a future drain field but that's not that's not before us tonight that we don't know it's not what this is about this is not about us figuring out what the trailer park is going to be able to accomplish it's to ensure that the property owner has its property uh properly guided so if and when they figure that all out they have the opportunity to do so they they may get sewer and water someday we don't know but the the problem is is that the map as it currently stands is not correct and it could change in four years again guess mayor when there's an obvious in Council when there's an obvious mistake on the map we're supposed to fix it so there's some obvious mistakes on this map and to be honest we never looked at this area that seriously because there's never it's in Jackson Township we have since annexed everything across the way and people that are looking in this area and particularly the trailer parks said you got the wrong land use the Gravel Pit owners said the little piece in the back how did that get open space and we said we're not sure but we need to fix it well now I'm back excuse me to what staff said that the trailer park is looking said they can't expand because it's a long wrong land use it has to be Suburban residential they own it yeah they own it but they can't expand because it's a wrong so let's fix it for them well if we do do that they can't expand because they don't have nowhere to put a drain field in and there that's up to them this is strictly that's good so we don't's on the map if they can come up with a way to fix their drainage or we can find the county had a plan that the owners weren't willing to do right now there's it's owned by two people right now at some point hopefully they're going to sell and a new owner will see the benefit of having sewer and water but right now that property that's currently open space is B basically worthless cuz it's open space so we're trying to fix some errors in the map couldn't even be what's the current land use designation on the trailer park Suburban residential okay all right any other questions Mr Lara make a motion to approve resolution r224 d143 approving the comprehensive plan map amendment to regu two properties from open space to mixed employment center one property from open space to Suburban residential and one property from utilities to mix employment center I'll second that all right we have a motion in a second discussion on the motion just a quick question on the property guided utilities does he pay taxes on yeah he he's paying taxes on his on the utility based that's got to be some high taxes he's not CU land use does not set your taxes okay I was just wondering about that yeah but I that's owned by somebody that said you know long term being next to the highway that's probably not a good land use and would like to sell his property and being a utility right now he can't sell his property if he wanted to yeah is is there going to be any Highway business along this highway in this area mayor and councel we don't have the landan ett highway business we have the commercial district and that's that red color at the corner so the answer is no then in this area just in a corner so mayor and Council Highway business so B1 which is what we would have some of the red area would be Zone B1 was uses cross over in many cases too we're mixing zoning and land use here no you know the first time I saw this was at the township meeting and it wasn't very much long of a discussion um it'd be nice to have a broader workshop on this whole area and uh I'd feel much more comfortable with that actually all right well any other discussion I think it's pretty straightforward I'll call the question all right question's been called all in favor say I I poos motion passes thank you all right let's see here item number nine Lon reports and I don't recall which end we started at last time started on my end all right we'll start on this side okay 169 Coalition we did do a presentation on the priorities um I just left the material at home I'll get that to the next council meeting nice little handout packets um went to attended Holiday Fest um great event great vendors a lot of good displays great pirate by the way it also Igloo from our shaki Public Utilities got our Jackson Township meeting and uh what else do we have I think that might have been it um that's it thank you sir Mr whing thank you I have an mvta meeting uh tomorrow I did also attend the Holiday Fest uh one thing I'm going to talk to the chamber about uh I parked myself right down in Hubert Park for the fireworks and must have watched 50 60 people try and get into the bathrooms so they were not open and I think that probably have to be a chamber request on their uh thing but uh that was kind of sad to see but uh um hopefully we can work on that but other than that that's all I have very good councelor contrar thank you mayor um so Friday morning I attended the scale general meeting um lots of updates so we had the CDA have their update um their programs are coming along around 700 vouter throughout the programs um um that was that and then we had the smsc talk about a little bit um uh the Organics hold on let it has a name um where did I write it oh sorry the the Dakota Prairie composting part of the sms's organic recycling facility which has been accepting commercial yard and wood waste since August and will be soon um new you know part of the or facility after its relocation um we had Miss Lisa bratsky over from Scott County Public Health um talk about the o opio settlement update um provide an update um on funds ACC um allocated to our community Through the state's opio settlement she presented on um how those funds were used in 2024 and how they will considerations for the funding of 2025 uh that was that um people wore their holiday we um what was it called holiday outfits or where it was a contest U holiday where you that's what it was called um some came in pretty cute it was you know they were not ugly sweaters okay they came out with socks and all so pretty good questions yeah um did uh CDA bring up our little project that we're going to do here um the one that we approved the home Rehabilitation oh my god get some winds you got me that was a lot they have a lot of updates I'm sure they my second question um how did they spend some of that opioid money um you're asking really detailed questions Jesse I did not take notes but I can totally give back to you I know Lisa rossky and I can totally ask her sounds good all right and then after that wel I'm pretty sure it was Rehabilitation probably yeah but I I I can get that for you um and then after that I did the RTC um the RTF um meeting and pretty much it was just an update of on the um they talked about how they presented that presentation that that um Leo daily update um they they presented it to the Del um scale Service delivery um Team um and they had good questions they said they also um the other main reason we were there was just um to do the 2024 um financial performance year to date and approve the 2025 budget and pretty much um the year-to-date budget is where needs to be and the 2025 budget um there will be an increase of like 7,000 compared to the 20124 and then they talked about like the reserves how are they are they where do they stand and they talked about how they will be running out by the end of 26 the beginning of 27 the message so that's pretty much the RTF um yeah the the reserves yep um and then after that I ran over to the Holiday gas station ribbon cutting and that was a great turnout that place was super busy great cookies like always and coffee so that is it for me thank you councelor contras councelor Lara yes uh let's see December 7th also went to Holiday Fest um always a great turnout um seems to get better every year um Jackson Township meeting was on the 9th uh December 12th went to the hearing life ribbon cutting um they've been an established business for uh few years now here in Shaka they just joined the chamber and then December 13th I am still I actually I'm just warming up from that ribbon cutting at the Holiday cuz that was cold but uh yes great turnout it was cold thank you sir uh December 4th uh mlc meeting the 5th was our monthly staff meeting December 7th Trail liting mayor Choice Award was first steps Learning Center um there 's a lot of cool uh floats down there and displays so December 9th we went to the township meeting December 12th I was at the Savage mayor's Janet Williams's retirement uh 13th was the new Holiday Circle K on windir way very nice store um you know there's two ways into it it's kind of a circle around it we'll see how that works out traffic-wise in the future um December 16th yesterday I was called to testify at the election trial um I I did that um and I was there as a state M the state mandates who's on the canvas committee canvasing board at the County canvasing Board in in the state requires the mayor as a part of that so uh I did that and that's my report nine a is the city Bill list anybody have any questions on the bill list no questions item 12 other business Mr Delaney just see if there's any interest in doing a workshop early next year to look at how we can get to a reasonable stable property tax I mean just bounce ideas around something yep I'm uh I'm in favor is there anybody else that's willing to do that workshops more pardon me no I'm just yeah that that'll be fine I mean okay I always talk about I think with the one of the lowest property taxes in the area it's I mean it's that race to the bottom I'm worried about and I won't be part of that I mean uh we have needs here we have we want the fire department to show up we want the police department to show up we want to pay our people correctly I'm not going to be stripping jobs because that's what it comes down to it doesn't come down to that's it's looking for best practices and right now we just come here every year and seems like we have a budget goal and again being the lowest in the area is not a strategy that's just a result I like to just see if we can bounce some ideas around it's not saying we know everything but I would love to hear just best practices see if there's something we can we're not doing that we could be doing I'd like to go broader I'd like to I'd like to have uh you know County school all of us in our area get together and figure out how all of us um can do this always because really all of all of them have an impact whether it's a school district's budget or Scott Cy's or the guy in Tahiti with his martinis that says other um or the Met Council too for that matter um everybody should be trying to work toward that end so I'm all for it um it's always good to know how everybody's thinking what they're thinking uh there's no harm done even if there's disagreements so I'm I'm I'm good for that practices continuous Improvement anything else other business obviously I have one it's the uh Merry Christmas to everybody in Shaka all of our residents all of our businesses our staff and happy New Year to everybody we will see you again next year and uh I hope everybody has a great holiday season Christmas make a motion to adjourn to January 7 January 7th 2025 at 7 pm second any discussion on the motion discussion all in favor say I I I opposed we adjourned