and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> All right. Welcome everybody. Does anyone have any changes to the agenda other than 8B, which has been added for the lift station? If not, I would entertain a motion to approve the agenda as amended. >> I'll make that motion. >> I'll second. >> We have a motion by Robin and a second by Mike. Is there any further discussion? Hearing none, all in favor, please state I. >> I. >> Anyone opposed, state no. That motion carries. All right. Number five, we have guest in open forum. We want to welcome Shane Zahrt from the Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities, and he has an update for us. Welcome, Shane. >> Hi. Well, thank you, Mayor and Council. Uh again, my name is Shane Zahrt. I'm with the firm Flaherty & Hood. Uh but here today cuz uh in that role, we're pleased to represent the Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities. Uh and uh proud to have Becker as a member of that organization. So, uh each year in the legislative interim, so between legislative sessions, we try to get out to as many cities as we can that uh are members of our organization do a bit of a legislative update, take questions, hear what's on your mind. If you have something to throw at me, feel free. Uh if you think we should be working on it, that's uh that's great. Uh of course, a lot happens in a legislative session, so uh there's a lot I'm not going to cover here today, too. Just a few issues that uh were important to the Coalition this year and and uh took up some of the uh time and and effort of the group. So, uh feel free to ask me questions about other items that [clears throat] uh maybe we don't cover here today, too. Uh so, this is mostly a refresher uh for for folks, but also new to others. Uh the CGMC or Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities, uh what is it? Uh more than 100 uh cities across the state. Uh we represent uh our member cities on a range of issues including local government aid and property taxes, environment energy which also often includes under that broad umbrella water and wastewater both regulatory issues and funding, housing EMS emergency medical services economic development transportation annexation land use and then labor and employment we provide a lot of information and and services to our member cities on on that front not just at the legislature but assistance to staff as as requested as well. So again I would recap the legislative session that was a little bit and in order to do that we have to first kind of start by rewinding back to January February of this year and I I think to put it mildly expectations coming into this legislative session were fairly low. For those of us that are often at the capital we would hear a lot of sentiments like well they're not going to pass anything anyway or you know the the budget that was passed in 2025 had a small surplus we'll talk about that in a second but legislature's tied there's nothing they need to get done we don't think anything's going to happen. A big reason for that was just political dynamics Senate about as tight as things could be one seat DFL majority in the the Senate and then house evenly tied between the parties 67 67 which makes everything a four-way negotiation between the governor house DFL Senate DFL all under the same party banner but with that tied house there's nothing they could pass without at least the agreement of the house GOP caucus. So with that expectations were I would say mild to low that everybody could get along but there were some major focal points for for session two. So fraud in state programs maybe you've seen some headlines over the past couple years about that, but a major talking point for legislators heading into session. Guns or gun control became an issue between the 2025 and 2026 sessions. Also pairs with school safety also on the the list here. Especially around certain legislators wanting to to be aggressive on that issue after the Annunciation school shooting in Minneapolis between sessions. HCMC or Hennepin County Medical Center became a major focal point of session but was on the brink of financial collapse. Really as we'll get into a little bit became maybe one of the the items that both parties ended up agreeing we need to do something about it not letting HCMC fail is kind of a backbone to the state's emergency health care system and became one of the must do items where there weren't a lot. And then bonding. And bonding we'll talk a lot more about as a some important to keep some of those programs moving forward and especially for our communities outside of the seven county metro area to keep major state grant programs funded and especially for those who might have some water waste water needs on the horizon. So >> [laughter] >> important there. So our task for session number one was protect LGA in uncertain budget times. I know Becker well two things I'll say about LGA. My bigger concern for this community and LGA is what happens in the event that you know we're talking about Sherco and it's future. LGA maybe needs a little restructuring to best recognize a major tax shocks like what might come with the future of of Sherco. But also here's a little bit of a plug for the organization because LGA is such a focus of the CGMC's cities that don't get any get a little break in your membership dues too. So there you go. >> [laughter] >> So keep that in mind as well. But pass a bonding bill, we'll talk a little more about that. Lead line funding was one of the issues that a number of my colleagues focused on from an infrastructure standpoint. And then, zoning and and development preemption we'll talk a little more about, too, largely on the the housing front is where that comes in. This slide I I've gone back and forth on whether I love it or hate it, but I we we continue to include this when we talk to our member cities cuz I've actually come to appreciate what it's saying and I'll tell you why. On the left there is basically to start this session, how much money did the state have on its bottom line. And so, the $3.7 billion is what that stands for is what after the 2025 budget session, what the state left basically in its savings account. You factor in the impact of inflation plus the fact that we're still spending more than the state takes in. And what does that mean for the the two years that follow? A very very slim surplus in the future. So, why do I say I like this slide? It's because you'll have legislators come to you and say, "The state's budget is balanced. We're okay. State's fiscal house is in order." And they can be right in the short term. You'll have other legislators that'll come to you and say, "Things are a disaster. We're staring down a fiscal cliff." And they're also right. >> [laughter] >> It's just a matter of a a time frame. But, if you like a household analogy for state budgeting, I think the true story of what this slide tells you is that we can pay our bills this month, but we have to draw from our savings account to do it. Our salary still doesn't match what we're spending. So, the state still has to get its fiscal house in order in the long term. So, you know, this being a non-budget year, what that also tells you though is that one of the reasons I said at the beginning they didn't have to do much this year is in the short term the budget is balanced. So very little spending was contemplated focus on bonding bill and policy. I mentioned the threat to LGA kind of an unexpected 2025 proposed cut from the Senate DFL is what had a lot of cities on high alert about that because of advocacy of CGMC and others really didn't come to fruition or we're able to beat that back before it became something in 2026. So something to keep an eye on going forward. So bonding little background on the bonding bill or the capital investment bill is very important to the CGMC and its member cities. It's the primary mechanism that we use to fund a lot of programs not just I mentioned water wastewater and the public facilities authority. There's also a number of greater Minnesota specific economic development programs that are funded primarily through the bonding bill. One I know that Becker used some years ago which I looked at Greg might predate Greg who used it but the business development public infrastructure program was used as an economic development program. Very important that the legislature pass regular bonding bills to keep those things moving forward and keep opportunities alive for greater Minnesota communities but also requires bipartisanship and not just when the house is tight. Any year that you want to pass a bonding bill if you want to obligate the state and issue debt to fund public projects the constitution says you need 60% of each body both the house and the Senate. So unless somebody has a supermajority in both bodies they all have to get along to pass an infrastructure bill. The governor's proposal had heavy on state owned assets and what's kind of implied there but not said is that it was very light on local assets. So communities with local projects kind of left out of the governor's proposal is heavy on capital complex security. The PFA would have been funded under the governor's proposal 99 million. Sounds like a lot of money when you talk about statewide water needs, it's not. >> [laughter] >> So, other programs I mentioned BDPI 2.5 million in his proposal as a pretty light number and then $0 for local road and bridge programs that are offered out through grants when they're funded by the bonding bill. And then all that the governor set aside for local projects for individual city requests would have been 35 million total. But the good news I guess for multiple communities throughout the state is the governor is only one part of the process. There's also the legislature itself plays the biggest role in in the bonding bill and what the ultimate outcome is. So this slide really just highlights some of our members advocating for a larger bill and for projects or or programs within the bonding bill. But this slide is the important one cuz it's the final product. At the end of the day I think it was in question maybe until the final hours whether they would get it done, but they did. On the final day of session they rolled out and passed a 1.24 billion dollar package. That 1.24 includes both bonding and cash from the state. When I mentioned 4 or 99 million is not a lot as it relates to water programs, 400 million is a little better. So at the end of the day the legislature came through with a little higher number. Important to keep those water wastewater grant programs funded and rolling cuz communities with needs apply for those and sometimes you can wait a while on the list if it's not funded. Local bridges 25 million, local roads 47 million. When it says undesignated next to that 25 that means there'll be a process where any city can apply for those funds if you have a local bridge or local road project. BDPI unfortunately only at 2 million doesn't go very far statewide. Uh and then unlike 2025 where uh the entire bill was largely just state assets and state programs, a number of local projects were included uh at the end of the day here. So, lead service lines, uh we do touch on uh in our our updates uh when as we travel the state. Uh the good news is though, one of the uh primary things that was required uh a few years ago was uh the uh EPA, so the federal government is requiring uh every community in the the country to inventory and replace uh lead service lines to to homes and and uh and other properties by 2037. It's a very expensive and big task. Task one in that though was identification. And uh Greg, I know you know this too. We can gloss over this a little bit as it relates to Becker cuz yours have been identified as far as I can tell in the mapping tools, and you don't have this issue uh as well. So, um lead lines though major health hazard and something that the state has had to take on the the cost of uh helping communities meet this federal requirement, communities and homeowners I should say. Uh so, in 2023, uh the legislature uh put 240 million dollars as a kickstart to this. Uh we do highlight this one though cuz I think it helps tell the story of session where um 2023 with the state's fiscal house uh was I guess I use the fiscal house uh in order analogy too much here. When the state had a lot of money slashing around, 7 billion 17 billion dollars surplus in 2023, they put 240 million toward this program. Uh even though it's one of the uh bigger public health challenges facing the entire state, this year with a tougher fiscal outlook for the state, they only put 15 million toward it. So, uh I think a lot of concern that not just this but other programs uh that are benefiting communities throughout the state might have a uh tough road ahead uh if the uh state's fiscal situation uh continues as it is. So, housing and zoning. This one starts with a little bit of a headline cuz we're talking about a theme that's developed over the last few years. In 2024, a bill was introduced called the Missing Middle proposal, 2025 the Yes to Homes Act, and 2026 the Starter Home Act. We kind of lump all these together in one headline cuz they're got to three different names for a similar thing. Each of these three sessions the legislature has introduced and pursued legislation to increase housing availability and affordability throughout the state. That's a laudable goal. The issue that we've had with it is that each of these proposals the primary mechanism it would use is to take a top-down one-size-fits-all approach where the state would tell communities what they can and can't do from a land land use and zoning perspective. So, this year's bill looked a little different than those previous years in that all of these requirements or nearly all of these requirements I should say that are listed on this slide and the next one in previous the previous two years would have applied to every city in the state. This year, we'll call it an early compromise I guess. Still maybe not great for for local governments throughout the state, but was a little more of a choose your own adventure and it was kind of a tiered approach. So, the the first bullet point there where we're talking about preemption of aesthetic and material standards, HOA preemption, requirement of ADUs throughout the state. Every community would be required to allow them throughout the state. Those would apply to everyone and from there it was population based. And this might be Greg, I'm going to look at you as a resource here. This might be particularly unfortunate for Becker cuz if the population threshold is 5,000 I think at the census you were maybe just under and now you're just over. Is that correct? So, >> [laughter] >> that's right. So, uh so, cities over 5,000, uh maybe there are other benefits. You get more state transportation dollars. So, there's things like that for tipping over 5,000, but this bill, and don't worry, it didn't pass at the end of the day, uh but would have applied these requirements to you as well. So, must allow up to four units on 33% of areas zoned as single family, no minimum lot sizes greater than 1/8 of an acre in greenfield areas, must allow multi-family in 33% of areas zoned commercial. Uh you know, I think these are all toned down versions of some of the proposals we saw in the previous 2 years, but you can kind of see where these are going. Uh it's the the state telling you uh how to plan your community, how to develop, and taking control out of the the hands of folks like the one sitting at your in your seats, and uh who would prefer to plan your communities, I think, with input from folks that sit in these seats. Uh uh So, cities over 10,000 would have had a little bit of more of a choose-your-own-adventure, where the bill, as it was introduced this year, would have allowed cities over 10,000 to kind of pick you must do at least some of the requirements listed in these bullet points here. So, we include these though to say, you know, this this bill didn't pass. I'll preview the next slide. The CGMC, our counterpart organization the metro area that some of you may have heard of, is called the Metro Cities Municipal Legislative Commission, is an organization that represents some of the kind of inner-ring suburbs specifically at the the legislature, continued to push very hard for local control on this issue. The League of Minnesota Cities this year, they've been very active in the prior two sessions on this bill. This year kind of took a backseat or dropped their active opposition to this legislation. Still though, the bill was heard in the house, uh, lost on a vote in committee. It it was scheduled and then unscheduled a couple times, but never ultimately heard uh, in the Senate. Uh, but we still highlight this because we've been at this for 3 years running. We've seen three similar proposals with some variation. We expect that whatever, you know, the makeup of the legislature is after the November election, we'll probably see some version of this uh, come forward again. And this is where local input is going to be essential to uh, uh, shape whatever the state's future housing policy is. No one disagrees that we need more houses and more affordable houses. Uh, but it's the approach that I think that has drawn a a lot of discussion and controversy. So, looking ahead, uh, you all know this. All eyes on the election. We've got a a governor's race. The field will be set uh, well, it's a week from yesterday, isn't it? The the primary here. So, the final field for governor will be set. Uh, all 201 legislative seats are on the ballot. Uh, there's a lot of retirements uh, among uh, both the House and the Senate. Or I think there'll be a lot of new faces, a lot of institutional memory from both parties, from very influential committees that's moving out of the legislature. So, as uh, you know, we talk to folks at the legislature about Becker, about what it's like to be a power plant community, about uh, uh, the the needs that you all have. There'll be a lot of education for a lot of new legislators coming in uh, too. Uh, the CGMC, uh, we're actively use the interim to engage with candidates for office. We put out a legislative uh, uh, uh, kind of issues packet, a a candidate packet that has a rundown on a number of our issues that's accessible on on our website and everything. And then if you're looking ahead and marking your calendars, uh, the session starts on January 14th, uh, 2027. So, upcoming events, we just had a couple weeks ago our summer conference and uh, it was in New Ulm this year. Um, the uh, 2026 fall conference coming up in Waite Park. Uh, so, not too far of a drive. So, you can uh, look forward to that one. And then legislative action day is in February. That's when like a lot of folks do have a day at the Capitol where city leaders come and tell your legislators that they have good ideas, bad ideas, whatever you want to tell them. Come do it with us. It is very important that they hear from you directly. And then our 2027 CGMC summer conference will be in Owatonna. So, it's rare. We usually rotate it north to south, north south. This year we're in southern Minnesota two years running. So, Owatonna will be the 2027 summer conference. So, another thing to look ahead to. I think the final slide, yep, is just a question slide with my phone number and email on it. So, feel free to bug me if I didn't cover anything or if you don't like how I said something, too. But >> [laughter] >> But I'm also happy to answer any questions even if they aren't about things that were in my presentation. >> [clears throat] >> Questions for Shane. >> I'm just go wondering why they're on a push to control housing like they are. Where they're putting these requirements and what's the reasoning for that? >> I think well, you know, I to be honest, I have similar question as you. So, I'll try my best to stand in the >> [laughter] >> shoes of someone who thinks it's a good idea. I think what they're drawing from or the folks who are advocates for this type of change is you know, looking across the country saying that things like you know, where cities have imposed parking minimums or other requirements that are imposed locally have driven up the cost of projects. So, you know, when I though look at around the country at places that those requirements have been pulled back or where cities have adopted zoning and land use policies to bring some of that back and where it has encouraged maybe some housing growth. The cities that have done it effectively are cities like Seattle, maybe to some extent even Minneapolis. Uh, but where we have an issue is that when you try to say something in Seattle should work for every city in the state of Minnesota and including Becker, that's where I think we have I think that those decisions are better left to the Becker City Council and your residents. But no, I think that their advocates for these changes have some other examples from throughout the country where they say, you know, what market dynamics did benefit from rolling back some of the maybe local locally imposed regulations, fees, other things that have >> [snorts] >> they think have held back housing development. And to the extent they're right, I think we could also point them to examples throughout greater Minnesota where cities are taking a creative approach or frankly where the greater Minnesota just doesn't look like the metro area where a lot of our communities are begging for housing developers to come to our communities and you know, trying to work actively to encourage housing development in ways that, you know, the the changes that they're trying to impose here just wouldn't work or would hamper you know, efforts that are already underway. So, I don't know if that's a satisfying answer to your question, but kind of is. The I just wonder how much of it is there. >> [sighs] >> Some communities could be setting restrictions and got because they want a particular development. >> Mhm. >> Um, like I think one of the things is uh low income the percentage was quite high and whatnot. I think a lot of cities try to avoid that. >> Sure. Yeah, or I think that you know, when you see things in there like some of what they've tried to restrict are aesthetic mandates and things like that or certain materials being used. You know, cities might have some of those requirements because you know, even if it's just from a aesthetic standpoint, they want a certain area of town to look a certain way or uh you know, uh kind of have a certain feel or a certain type of development come into an area of town. I think their argument is requirements [clears throat] like that might restrict or discourage uh developers from coming in. >> will. >> Yep. And so, some of that, yeah, there's a >> Reason that they want to do that, though. >> Yes. Yes. >> Is what I'm getting at. >> Yep. Yeah, so there's uh that trade-off is kind of inherent in this debate is uh you know, who is best equipped to make those decisions about, you know, if there's a certain area of Becker that uh we want to develop in a certain way, who's best equipped to make that decision? Is it you guys and the residents that give you input in the decisions you make or the state telling you you have to do this? And uh that's kind of uh I think what you're going after. >> what I'm getting at. >> Yep. All right. Great questions. >> All right. Well, thank you so much for the update. Thanks for your time and work. We appreciate it. >> All right, thank you. All right. I'm just going to close out of this, I think. Are we good to go? Thank you again. >> Thanks. All right. Is there anybody else here tonight to address council? All right. We will move on to committee reports, presentations, and awards. [clears throat] Budget and finance committee is up first. >> All right. Budget and finance, we met July 23rd. Uh short meeting. Um so, we went through uh the numbers through June 30th, so they were uh we'll call them preliminary numbers, but 50% of the year, so um as a city as a whole, our expenses, we were uh 44.6% um of budget after 50% of the year, so uh tracking good there. Uh golf specifically, uh golf had um golf was at 57% of uh projected revenue and 50% of uh projected expenses for the year. So, there were uh two two noted there. Um we [snorts] keep a constant uh track on past due utilities. Um past due utilities are sitting pretty good right now. Um we're at a number of 10,600, which if you, you know, might sound high, but that's actually pretty low compared to um where those where those can often track. So, um community center memberships was another thing noted. Uh we are uh over the thousand member mark. Um memberships mark. Uh 1,039 memberships uh to be exact. Uh 2,407 20 2,407 members uh members at the community center. So, um that was a number we um always used to dream about hitting thousand members and now we're at that level. So, uh that was about all I got there. >> All right. Any questions for Rick on budget and finance? Then we'll move on to planning commission. >> Planning commission, um we didn't have any uh any formal votes, but we did get uh updated on the Foss and Fields uh third edition revised uh developer's agreement, which is in our consent agenda tonight. Uh we did an update on that. >> All right. Questions for Rick? All right. Joint Planning Board met July 28th. There was two developments uh in the township. Uh one was platted. Uh I think it just took it's like a 40 that's becoming three buildable lots with a wetland bank credit in it. And the other one was uh pulled from consideration as there needs to be further research done on some tile lines running through there and if they're supposed to be there and what they're supposed to do with them. So, not a whole lot. Any questions on joint planning? All right, we move on then to board committee and consultant reports. And Mr. Knutson has some updates on the 122nd Street road improvements. >> Good evening, Mayor and Council. Um as you recall back in May, we had a resident come in and talk with us about the uh shared road 150th and uh 122nd. So, we uh went to work on it to start studying it and see what we could do. I met with the township road supervisors. Uh worked through our public works committee on what possible solutions were, and we all arrived at the same fact, which was to diminish the traffic, we needed to uh terminate one end of the road. Uh after a a good discussion, uh we went through it, and it was decided that we would look to terminate uh on the east end of 122nd Street, as illustrated in your in your packet tonight. Uh after we designed that, again, we floated that through the uh road supervisors. We reviewed it at public works committee. They supported us uh looking at that measure and taking it out to uh solicit bids for the project. Um I worked with engineering just to give us a concept drawing of this. It's very straightforward as far as what we're doing. Um as you see the results of the the the bid numbers, I didn't want to spend that much money on engineering road when we uh we felt we could do the accomplish the task at hand with the road that's out there, knowing we had um interested parties that are currently working in the community or have done a lot of work in the community. So, uh we reached out uh Capital Paving, uh Bartson Excavating, and Ruck uh Excavating were the three contractors that we we discussed because of their current proximity to town and uh the work that Tony does not only for the city, but the township as well. Um having done that, Bartson uh did elect to uh not submit a bid. It just wouldn't work into their timing schedule. I pushed for a fall completion, and uh they weren't sure if they could hit the timelines that we wanted to. So, instead of uh running under the gun, they just decided not to uh submit a bid. Uh Capital Paving uh was uh over the engineer's estimate on that, uh which we did give them a little grief. Um >> And the mobilization. >> Yeah. Yeah. That That shot them out of the Exactly. Shot them out of the out of the the ballpark, but um but Rock came back with what I I I had hoped uh initially coming in that we would see a number under $25,000. And um uh surprising to Tony hit hit that mark. I did walk him through the project this morning. We met out on site. We walked through the whole thing just to make sure that we're covering all of our bases, and we've got everything identified out there. What we will do, uh we hauled some excess material from the golf course out there and dropped it. I worked with our street supervisor um this morning. He's actually going to get crew out there. We'll move that out of the area, so it's not going to be part of this project that the the township isn't going to be paying for us to to move any of that excess material. So, he'll he'll have a clean uh slate to work with. We'll have our engineers go out there and stake uh five radius points uh in the new road uh cul-de-sac, and we'll we'll set set a control elevation as well as elevations on the side of that shoulder, so we can crown even though it's it's gravel, we'll still crown the cul-de-sac so we get proper drainage out there. Um we'll create a ditch. The existing roadbed will be completely removed. It'll go down to uh existing um what we'll call ditch pavement or ditch elevation right now. And uh internally, it was always our intention to work on staking the dead ends or flagging the dead ends. So, we'll put uh internal barricades up there, so we'll prohibit people from driving through there. So, I have a meeting tomorrow with the county on their 23 road project, and I'll work with their right-of-way supervisor as far as what um notifications that we'll put in there coming off of County Road 24 as you enter onto 150th. Um we're we're hoping that he'll allow us to to put a longer-term um road traffic control change ahead. So, when people come in there and immediately when you turn on 150th, we'll flag both sides of the road with permanent no outlet signs on there as well. The other side, it's our road that we'll flag with traffic control signs ahead, and then it'll just be a a no through access on that road. So, we'll leave the existing paving on the east side of 122nd Street right now far enough that you can pull in and back out to get turned around if you pulled in there not seeing the barricades that are put in place. So, with all of that work done, I'm I'm very comfortable that Tony fully understands the scope of the project. We're not importing any material. The material that's out there is adequate enough to widen the the bulb of the cul-de-sac and use it if there's any excess material. We don't think there's going to be much if any. It'll be left close proximity to the park because we use it for future pad expansions, pavilion, or play equipment expansions out there as well. So. >> So, are you basically taking all the street material beyond the cul-de-sac and using that to build the cul-de-sac? >> Correct. The the majority of that is going to be used there. I've also asked Tony since we'll have the equipment on site and a grader on site that we're going to take from the cul-de-sac, work our way back out to County Road 24 to make sure that the the the any any washboards, any any slope changes, or anything, they'll just do a a final good grading to make sure that we're we're when he pulls his equipment out of there, the road from 24 to the cul-de-sac will be in great shape. It's our responsibility to to keep it you know, summer condition and winter condition, too. So, if we have to use any there, we'll use it there. Otherwise, we'll use those those materials. I don't think there's going to be any there, but we'll we'll look at it and see how it settles out. The trade-off is if there's any materials there, we're not charging them for all of our engineers out there doing an inspection just to put eyes on the project. We're we're assisting with anything. I'm soliciting the bids, communicating with contractors, doing all that. We're not charging the township for any of that. It's kind of an in-kind service. And if there's any materials left, it'll be minimal and we'll use it at the park because it serves their residents there as well. So, this is going to uh I've talked with the road supervisors as well as the township clerk. It is going uh on their agenda on the 17th of this month for consideration. Uh we would not move the request tonight is to fully fund this uh Tony Tony Rock or Rock Excavating's bid was $19,775. I've added 10% just in case something comes up that that's unforeseen and I'm asking to spend all of that. The city will lead out and and cover the check so the contractor isn't looking for two entities to to cover his check. We would be the lead agency on that and then once the work is done and completed to satisfaction, we would look to then work with finance to create an invoice back to the township that they can reimburse the city for that and we'll put to that fund back into the CIP if you guys choose to move forward with this tonight. >> And I have not heard any opposition from the township. Is any anybody >> The I've talked with with I've I've reached out to the township and asked them, you know, you know, communication with your residents, you have seven, we have one. Uh I've been in steady communication with our city resident out there. I've talked with one, two, three uh four of the township residents. Uh showed them what's going on with this in the exhibit. Made sure that the township is aware, you know, let your people know. The other thing that we'll do as soon as it gets approved, uh um if you approve it tonight, it gets approved at township, I'll immediately work with Tony to post this on our website and Facebook. The hardest part of this road, I would estimate that 90% maybe even 95% of the traffic that's out there on that street doesn't live there. It's through traffic. So, the hardest thing to communicate is is we're shutting this road down and I don't know how to communicate that with everybody other than to try and push it out on social media and they're just going to have to see it. We We were out there this morning. >> to a dead end, they'll they'll know. >> Yeah. That's why we're trying to flag it in the in the the cul-de-sac as you see called out here. We're We're calling for a 90-ft cul-de-sac out there. So, everything, trucks, trailers, fire engines, school buses, everything can turn in that radius because of that. We know the first couple of months we're going to have to retrain a lot of people, but we're trying to get the message out there as best we can, but it's really hard when when the vast majority of traffic doesn't live there. I have no way of really notifying them other than maybe I talk with the paper and see if they'll >> Well, if they say no outlet on it, that should give them some indication. >> We'll do everything we can to give them advanced notice, but what we see all the time is until it impacts them, then they say, "Hey, you never talked with me." So, we're trying to share this as best we can. I tell everybody I talk to, "Hey, tell your neighbors, tell people that you know that this is this is happening." The residents that I've all talked to are super excited about this. >> Yeah. >> And this morning when I was out there with with with Tony, we're going through the project, I purposely counted, you know, six vehicles, four coming from the township coming into town. That and I just watched them drive all the way through town. So, they use it as a cut across. It wasn't, you know, residential traffic there. So. >> Well, and the fact that you have one of your residents come in a public forum and you know, presumably speaking for all of them saying, "We would like it closed." I mean, if you know, if that wasn't your wish, I think you would probably speak up at that point. >> Yeah. There's, you know, two of the residents My My biggest concern going into this, two of the residents have lived out there for over 50 years, right? And I had the opportunity I I just happened to run into them and we started talking about that cuz I was very concerned about those. I mean, it's Rebecca, right? And they were very supportive of this, both husband and wife. They signed the petition. I just wanted to make sure and said, you know, "Do you have a preference if we cut one side off or the other?" And what we were proposing, they were completely on board with. They were They were very excited that we were doing this and moving forward with it. And and to their words, you know, it's like, "What's 30 seconds?" I mean, for us, we go to Monticello, we usually go to Becker anyhow, take Rolling Ridge, use the stoplight, and go. So, that was good to hear. I felt I felt better about that knowing that that we've socialized it as best we can. And the impacted parties are in favor of this. So. >> And thank you for going above and beyond and we mentioned it at a previous meeting. We have one city resident on this road. So, thank you for going over halfway and and speaking with those other people. >> Yep. Absolutely. >> All right. So, if there's no further questions, we are looking for a motion on resolution 2670. >> Yes. >> Um which will allow us to put that cul-de-sac in on 122nd Street. >> I'll make that a motion. >> I'll second. >> We have a motion by Mike, seconded by Becky. Is there any further discussion? And one more question. We're not We're not abandoning that road, correct? >> The the road easement, rights-of-way, everything will stay intact. We will not surrender any of that stuff. The road will just disappear. Yep. But all the [snorts] legal boundaries and everything that we've got there, we're not increasing the size of the cul-de-sac to recognize a permanent cul-de-sac out there because we own the property. That's why we're using that that portion of the property. But we're not touching any of that stuff. So, something happens in the future and 122nd wants to go all the way through like it was planned for for prior development, that'll stay intact. We're not going to change that. >> Okay. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all in favor, please state I. >> I. >> Anyone opposed, state no. That motion's carried. >> Great. Thank you. >> very much. Moving on to administrator and staff reports. 8A, we have the Northland Securities TIF Assistance Professional Services Agreement, Mr. Sanders. >> Thank you, Mayor and Council. Uh we have been approached by a developer who's interested in putting apartment units on the lot that was adjacent to Becker Furniture World. This has been discussed in the past. Um the owner of this property is Jim Husby who used to um be the owner of Becker Furniture World. And this lot was rezoned, I want to say last year at some point or maybe the year before, but it was rezoned to high-density residential. So, it's already in the land use category for allowing this type of use. Uh the developer, uh you can see in the image in your packet in the figure, the phase one of this would be a 56-unit three-story apartment building has one- and two-bedroom apartment units in it. They do have plans potentially for another apartment, but this is what they would start with. Um which is not unheard of. Typically, a lot of these apartment developments become phased approaches. The Northland Securities, obviously, is our uh public finance consultant that we use on a number of issues. You'll have seen one of these previously on the Luanne Drive development, so the Edgewood Village. So, what you're voting on tonight would be just the agreement that would allow them to do the analysis of the TIF. So, you're not voting on approving a TIF or anything at that moment. This is just to allow Northland Securities to complete the analysis of the TIF and submitted materials in the application. Uh once the analysis analysis is complete, the results would be presented to Budget and Finance Committee for review. If they recommend moving this on to Council, this would come back to you for consideration at a future date. So, if you decide at that point to proceed with TIF, uh then we would work with Northland and the City Attorney to complete any of the remaining tasks. So, with that, again, this is just to uh approve the agreement allowing Northland Securities to go through and complete the analysis. So, a $5,000 application fee and a $12,000 $12,500 escrow was received. We got that today um from the developer to pay for that analysis piece. So, with that we would be seeking a motion in a second approving resolution 2669, which would approve the securities agreement for TIF analysis assistance. And with that I'll answer any questions. >> Jacob, was the application fee 500? >> Yep. And then [clears throat] the 12.5 is the escrow to cover You'll notice in the the agreement um there is a not to exceed amount of 11,900. If there are any additional things, which again we don't anticipate those are hourly rate that's established in there. But, the 12.5 is set to to cover that amount. >> All right. Questions for Jacob. >> Maybe just a comment. I know um when we had talked about this before that you know there was um I had some [snorts] folks, you know, "Oh, why don't you put a commercial building there? Why housing?" And all that. And I mean, you think of how long this has sat there. You know, I mean, decades. We Yeah, we would have entertained and we've looked at a few over the years, but we certainly would entertained, you know, commercial options there, but it's empty. It's been empty. It's, you know, um at this point we got something that can go there. So, um you know, would would I have liked to have seen a Bass Pro Shop there? Yes, but you know, that never materialized. So, >> Did you call them? >> Uh they were they were approached, yes. >> [laughter] >> Well, good good try on that one. >> I didn't call, but we used other digital digital contact methods, yes. >> All right. Any further questions for Jacob? If not, we'd look for a motion on resolution 2669 approving the PSA for Northland Securities for TIFF analysis. >> I'll make that motion. >> I'll second. >> We have a motion by Robin, second by Rick. Is there any further discussion? Hearing none, all in favor, please state I. >> I. >> I. >> Anyone opposed, state no. The motion carries. >> Thank you. >> Thank you very much. Mr. Lissens up next for lift station number 16. >> Good evening, Mayor and Council. Uh tonight I have for your consideration RCA resolution 2672 for replacement of the lift station 16 pumps. Uh we replaced these pumps back in 2019. Um the station is what serves Cali Crossing. It's on Hillcrest Court. Uh it's a very small station. Uh originally it was private. It was taken over by the city. Uh pretty low flow um pretty low flows in that station compared to other lift stations in the city. Um so at the time we replaced uh with what we thought were uh reasonably priced pumps that we could do out of our operations budget. Uh since that time we've added these pumps into our CAP. Uh we had hoped to get 12 years out of those. Uh obviously we hoped a little high maybe. Uh we got 7 years out of them out of the one pump that has failed. Um overall, these given the flows of that station and what the station is, we feel like these pumps are still a good option. They're a they're very economical option for what the station is. Um so what I would look to do tonight is I'd recommend replacing both pumps um for the price listed in the in the resolution and RCA. Uh and then we would take the one pump that is still working, keep it on the shelf as a backup, and then kind of start fresh on both pumps. Uh so we're not looking at you know, replace one now and the next one fails 6 months and we're coming back and looking at that again. So uh we did not discuss this with the Public Works Committee as it failed last Friday and we're just looking to move forward and get it replaced. Um Let's see. These were originally uh scheduled for replacement in 2031 in our CIP. So, due to the failure, that's why I'm here uh looking for this action tonight. And with that, I would ask for a motion and a second to approve resolution 2672 approving the pump replacements for lift station 16 as presented for a price not to exceed $11,400. And with that, I can stand for any questions. >> Are you going to reevaluate your CIP? >> Yep. Yep. [laughter] We'll bring it down probably. I still might shoot for 10. I mean, I'm I'm thinking this what they should have went a little longer, but you know. We You could look at other pumps that are rebuildable, those kinds of things, but um when I do the math, these are still they're cheaper per year even at 7 years of life. So, um like I said, if it was the characteristics of that station were different, if it was lift station 20 where the pumps are running 8 to 12 times a day and you're high flows, that'd be different. This station is not going to change much. The characteristics of what's going in is not going to change much. And if I look to change the style of pump now, I would have to potentially change base elbows and rail systems, and then there's an added cost. So, I I'm very comfortable recommending [snorts] replacement in kind for this station. >> All right. Any other questions for Chris? >> Nope. >> So, there's the one pump right now servicing it or >> Yeah. You can operate off of one pump. It's just when that one fails, then it's a little more iffy. So, yeah, the preference would be to get back to two. >> Yeah, for sure. >> Yep. >> I'll make a motion we approve resolution 2672 pump replacement. >> I'll second. >> Motion by Mike, and I heard a second from Becky. Is there any further discussion? Hearing none, all in favor, please state I. >> I. >> Anyone opposed, state no. The motion carries. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, sir. Mr. Leroux is up with the consent agenda. >> Mayor Coburn, Coburg City Council members, items for review, approval, or adoption on tonight's consent agenda include the revised hiring and termination report. Authorize the Wednesday, August 5th, 2026 payment of claims as presented. The claims listing has been provided to the city council as a separate document and is available upon request for public view at City Hall. The total claims are $418,266.18. Approve the minutes of the July 21st City Council meeting. Approve the minutes of the July 21st executive session. Review the minutes of the June 15th Fire Board meeting and the minutes of the June 22nd special joint city township Fire Board meeting. Adopt resolution 26-71 approving the revised development agreement for Fossom Fields third edition. Approve partial pay request number two in the amount of $190,811.11 to Capital Paving for the 2026 street improvement project. Approve partial pay request number one in the amount of $461,946.65 to Capital Paving for the 2026 Edgewood street improvement project. And I'll be happy to answer any questions. >> All right. Any questions for the consent agenda? >> No. >> All right. We have a motion to approve the consent agenda. >> Make a motion to approve the consent agenda. >> Motion by Mike. Do we have a second? >> I'll second that. >> Rick seconds. Any further discussion? Hearing none, [snorts] all in favor please state I. >> I. >> I. >> Anyone oppose state no? The motion carries. All right. We have some anniversaries we want to celebrate. So, we have some seasonal positions. Eli Scheideman working at golf for six seasons and Braden Grening also working at golf for five seasons. Part-time positions, Macy Spear at golf food and beverage for five years, Lanine Duke at the community center for five years, Louie Keenan at the community center for six years, Cadence Cox at golf food and beverage for six years, Jamie Langley at the community center for eight years, and Christie Fall at [clears throat] the community center for 17 years, and a couple full-timers, uh Troy's Willing, our lead operator at the wastewater treatment facility for five years, and Josh Kuha at the golf course, our wreck and leisure services assistant director for eight years. So, thank you to all those folks for your continued work and dedication to the city. If anybody's wondering why we met on a Wednesday, it's cuz last night was unite tonight, so I just wanted to pass along a thank you to we had seven uh night to unite events, we'll call them. Got to give Third Street a shout out. They had custom t-shirts made. That's >> [laughter] >> uh that's pretty much uh that wins the award, I think, for most organized. Everybody else did a fine job as well. And thanks to the fire department and the police department. And we had the ambulance from Century Care stop at the last stop and said they would love to participate in the future as well. So, >> Nice. >> uh great conversations. And just a reminder that uh let's just say you were sitting at home and someone rang your doorbell and was trying to solicit you to change your garbage service. I'm just picking one out of the air. Thank you to have a solicitor's permit. They need to be permitted by the city. You can ask them to see that permit. It's specific to the individual, not the company. And if they do not have it, yes, they are actually breaking the law. So um >> Did that happen possibly last night right in front of the chief and the mayor right in the middle of the night tonight event? >> It It did. Actually, [clears throat] yes, >> [laughter] >> it did happen at the night to or the night to unite event, which um It's either incredible timing for us or terrible timing for that uh young gentleman who was out doing that. So um Yes, it did happen and there was a lot of questions, so it was a great educational opportunity. Um and I would just encourage all business owners to follow the rules. We appreciate your business here, but it's really frustrating when it's a repeat business doing it here all within the the uh fairly short amount of uh time [clears throat] frame. So that gets a little bit um frustrating and it's not fair to the workers if if they're not aware of what's going on. So you can always ask to to see their solicitor's permit. You can check the city website. We do have a list of anybody who's currently licensed. It doesn't apply to um right, the Cub Scouts or something like that or religious or political things, speech that's protected by the Constitution. But if you are trying to sell a service, um you know, if we had hail or something like that, it does apply. So um and just for council's information uh Greg and I have spoken and we're going to put the that on a future >> second meeting in September uh exact session. >> Exact session. Just I've had some residents reach out and there's a lot of questions and um so we're just going to kind of review that whole thing and and see what we can do >> Right. >> to encourage compliance with with that. I had one resident tell me that eight people stopped by within a week. >> I believe it. >> for different different services. So, I live on a cul-de-sac on the edge of town. I I don't get a lot of them, but >> [clears throat] >> um some people do. So, we will be reviewing that here in September. Anyway, want to add anything about night to night or >> Yes, I do. Um we were at the senior apartments on Edgewood there and they were very appreciative of staff uh keeping the roads open for them. And they wanted me to pass that on to you. >> All right. >> Yes. >> There you go. >> And good job getting the pony yesterday. >> [laughter] >> It was fun. I I would like council to weigh in. I don't know if this is appropriate timing, but Officer Hickerson, everybody saw the photo with the pony. Um I am in possession of an artificial intelligence digitally altered photo with him riding the pony. Um I personally think it would be like that was the most fun I've had on social media in I don't know 18 months. Um so, would anybody have an objection if if the chief became in possession of that? >> No. >> I I think that would be perfect. So, we did have a I offered to add a bale of hay and a bushel of oats to the budget. We had a resident step up and said they would fund the fuel for that steed. So, it was that was a lot of fun. And thank you to public works too for helping uh get that to the owner. And as one of our employees mentioned, it's a rescue pony. They are working to uh give him the him or her, I guess, I didn't ask the proper veterinarian care, but those things take time cuz you can't just rescue the pony all in one day, so lots of fun. >> They were not a city resident, we should make sure we have that. >> Yes, they were not a city resident. They were not >> [laughter] >> So, they don't have farm animals in town. >> Only thing about if they were, they would not have claimed said illegal pony at that time, so lots of fun, great job by our staff. Thanks to everybody for having fun with that. Anything further? If not, we would entertain a motion to adjourn. >> I move we adjourn. >> Second. >> We have a motion by Mike, second by Robin. All in favor of adjourning, please state I. >> I. >> One opposed, state no. Meeting is adjourned at 5:54. There is no executive session tonight, that's been canceled. >> So, that little visit last night saved me $40 a month. Did it? >> Sure did. I got my bill today. I had just got my bill from Ace and it was another 10 bucks. >> Mhm. >> So, I was like, all right, but it's all right today. And I said, uh, I happen to know that