I've got a couple of orders. 8:30. >> We're going to start at 5:00 in the morning. That's not going. >> Hey, I can relate to that. >> Yeah, everyone else. >> Even if they're not ready, we're going to All right. >> All right, we're live. >> All right, we are going to call the June 2nd, 2026 City Council meeting to order. Having some technical things going on, so we'll do the best we can. Uh please join me if you're able in the Pledge of Allegiance. >> I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> All right, just so people are aware tonight, we did cancel the executive session that was postponed till June 16th. Um and for council's awareness, we do have a playoff baseball game tonight that I'm coaching in, so I'm leaving at 5:45. So, see where we're at. Let's get to it. Next step. All right. Do we have any changes to the agenda? We already have a revised agenda in front of us. If not, I would hear a motion to approve the agenda as revised. >> I'll make that motion. >> I'll second. >> We have a motion by Mike, seconded by Becky. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all in favor, please state aye. >> Aye. >> Anyone opposed, say no. Agenda is approved. Guest and open forum. Christine, are you here? >> Yes, I'm right here. >> Oh, there you are. Snuck in on me. So, come on up here. If you could just state your name and address for us, and then um the floor will be yours. >> Okay. Um good evening. I am Christine Jacobson. I reside at 125 77 Robin Ridge Road. I have lived there for 30 years. Um my concern is um the crosswalk that I feel is needed on River Street and Banks Street, where Dunkin' Donuts and Dairy Queen is. Um it's a location that no matter what time you go, morning, lunchtime, or coming home time, it is chaos. There are no road um crosswalks going east or west. Yes, there are some that are going north and south, but there are none east and west. I have pictures on my phone that I took today to prove to you what I'm talking about. There is one crosswalk at Robin Ridge Road and Banks Street by McDonald's, Picture, um Center Care, and Speedway. It's a four-block. That's the only one. And then you go all the way down Bank Street where the bank is and where the new build supermarket is and there's not a single crosswalk going north or south or east or west. It's I take my grandkids there. They want to ride their bikes. There's no way. We walk and we hold hands. It's chaos. I am willing to walk around my neighborhood and introduce myself and I will get a petition to keep going so that we have safety in our neighborhood. I will also approach the businesses on Bank Street, too, for um their input, also. Country Lumber property looks like it is being cleaned up. That is prime real estate. We will only get more conveniences for our city of Becker, [clears throat] which is awesome. It's right off Highway 10. It's prime real estate. So again, if we could create a flashing light that is solar-powered, a crosswalk would be much needed in that area. I am trying to be proactive. I did go to the meeting um for Edgewood improvements. Thank you very much. I came up on that day that my bike broke. Again, Edgewood, no matter what time you ride your bike or walk, it's a straight shot. People are coming up Highway 10 at 65 mph and they majority of them go that fast. I'm an adult on my bike. I have a flashing light on my bike. I wear my helmet and I wear bright clothing. When there's a crosswalk, I wait for that car to stop for me and then I walk my bike across Edgewood. I'm looking forward to the improvements. I would also like them on Bank Street and Grove Street. I have been in contact with Phil as we went to the meeting on March 23rd. He did email me on March 25th. I haven't heard anything else. That's why I'm here today to get the word out. I am not on social media but I know that everything is recorded and so that the word will get out. Um one of my concerns is I find it hard to although I get why is safety always on the back burner. It's very irritating. I used to direct traffic at the um primary. I did that in the winter. I was a volunteer. They did change it not to my level but they did change the primary and all the bus garages have been moved out of the congestion where all the schools sit also. So. Thank you for your time. And um just to kind of get the feeling out. I will not let this go. It's just a matter of time before someone else gets hurt and I don't want that at all. Cuz it's just easy fix to me. If you could just paint them there's not even crosswalk painting. I have pictures to show that too. So. Thank you so much and spread the word. Thank you. >> Yes. Thank you, Christine. Anybody else here for open forum tonight? All right, we'll move on to committee reports, presentations, and awards. Uh we do have the Freedom Days proclamation. It's right here if anybody needs a copy. I'm not going to read it to you. But hopefully everybody is prepared. Ready to come out. It actually kicks off on the 13th. We have the barbecue bash and some things going on and then lots of activities throughout that week. Uh food shelf fundraiser on Friday night the 19th and then the grand day activities and the parade on the 20th. So, we hope everybody can take a chance to come out and enjoy Freedom Days. All right, we'll move on to the committee reports, budget and finance. >> Budget and finance met today, 21st. We met remotely because the internet was down here. Uh we talked quite a bit about uh the 2027 budget assumptions and just got some ideas put together. We reviewed the standard financials and the golf forecast. Uh we talked about past due utilities, 60 days plus at 28,900 as of April 30th. 2026 water shutoff update, 89 properties. Notices were sent on May 12th. That's all I have. >> All right, any questions for Robin? How about golf committee? >> Golf committee met May 26th. We reviewed the financials, which look pretty good considering what a rough start to the season we've had weather-wise. Um we talked about a fence update that is probably getting started as of yesterday. We talked about the whole 10 pond update and that work is in progress and probably close to completion. >> All right, questions for Robin on golf? Joint planning, we met on May 26th. And we had several simple parcel splits. Uh we're splitting up some 40s into >> Wait. >> two 10s and a 20. I think we split a 20 into a 10 and two fives. So, just some smaller housing things and whatnot in the township. And that was about it. Questions on joint planning? All right, we'll move on to board, committee, and consultant reports. We have the Edgewood Trail Improvement Bid Award. Mr. Knudson is up with resolution 2653. >> Good evening, Mayor and Council. Apologies for the short notice. I didn't send an email out. I think you guys have copies there. Uh we did have bid awards or bid opening uh this afternoon. Uh we did have five uh contractors bid on the project. And uh good news is the work uh the bids came back in very favorable for the city. So, uh we anticipated they would. We have two contractors, Capital Paving, sorry, won one contract for the city this year, and Knife River uh won the 20 Microsoft 23 project with the county. [snorts] So, uh as expected, they were the two low bids with uh Capital Paving being the lowest on this project. Um engineer's estimate on the project was uh uh 2,700,000, and uh they came in at 2,086,467. Um SCH did a really good job uh putting a bid tabulation together, and the uh recommendation for the uh award tonight with that. Uh as noted in the revised resolution, there's also, because it's a state project, there is uh independent material testing that's needed and reporting to be submitted to the uh to the state. Not really having a hard number on what that is. Uh we're just kind of asking for an allowance of of uh another 20,000 dollars. So, we can check that box for the state to make sure testing is done. Typically, we include that in in our contracts uh for the contractor to take place, but again, a state requirement wants that third party just to keep that separation. So, um with that tonight, we're confident in Capital Paving. We've done a pre-con on the 21st Street Improvement project already, and anticipate that this group uh will be able to do this work and get this project started. We all have a timeline should be approved today. But, the nice thing is with the bids coming where they're at, we had a quick impromptu discussion with finance, and there are sufficient funds. If you recall, we did advance funding from MSAS. So, with the allocations they've already given to us or held for us, along with the advance that they've approved already, we have sufficient funds to cover the entirety of the project. We weren't sure that we would. So, the bids came back about $500,000 less than we originally anticipated. So, we're feeling good about that. >> So, >> with that, I can stand for any other questions. Otherwise, go ahead for movement on the resolution so we can get the project rolling. >> Okay. Questions for Phil? >> No. >> No. >> Good when they come in lower than we were thinking. >> We we we were we were told because they're already in town that we would see some some good pricing, and they held true to that, and they did. So, we're really excited about it, and they're quality contractors. So, I mean, the nice thing is is when those bids come back, we got two that are within $85,000 of each other. Otherwise, you think, "Who knows what?" You know? So, like I said, SCH has had a first go around at them, and feels confident in Capital's numbers. So, yeah, we're excited. >> Great. Any other questions for Phil? If not, then we'll look for a motion on resolution 2653 awarding the contract for Edgewood Street to Capital Paving plus the $50,000 allowance for the materials testing. >> I'll make a motion we approve resolution 2653 revised. >> I'll second. >> Okay, we have a motion by Mike, seconded by Robin. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all in favor, state aye. >> Aye. >> Anyone opposed, state no. Motion's carried. >> Thank you. Thank you very much. I think you're up here with the Edgewood easement now. >> Yes, I am. Along with this project and in conjunction with the Luwak Drive proposed improvements, we've worked with the current property owner, Marty Harstad, as well as reached out to the developers that are already interested in that property. Looking to realign, again, trying to get the trail and really some of the crosswalks so that we're taking three and keeping four in place, but trying to make them more visible and more purpose. We're trying to keep the trail on the south side of that property longer. So, basically, from from First Street to 27th Avenue, I believe it is, by Grace Lutheran. The trail will stay on the south side. We cross there and we'll move to the north side through Cassata Drive. But, in order to do that and incorporate a right turn lane for the land, we need the additional easement for the Reached out to to Mr. Harstad. He was favorable to to honor that request as long as it didn't impede what the proposed developers were doing. They signed off on that as well. We've not looked to to assess any of the properties or require payment for that, but kind of an in kind for the the improvements that we're making to the Luwak Drive are proposed. They would give us this in exchange for the assessments on it. So, win-win for everybody and improves corridor traffic, pedestrian and bicycle safety along that corridor as well. So, with that, yeah, I mean, Mr. Harstad has already signed off on these pending council approval tonight. Then, you will get it recorded and then it will take over and it's already incorporated into the plan sites for Edgewood and we'll be working and doing on the land as well. >> Great. >> And with that, I can stand for your questions you have. >> Any questions for Phil on the easement agreement? Anybody like to make a motion [clears throat] on resolution 2652 to approve that easement agreement? >> I'll make that motion. >> I'll second. >> We have a motion by Becky, a second by Mike. Is there any further discussion? Hearing none, all in favor, please state aye. Aye. Anyone opposed, state no. Motion is carried. Thank you to staff. I know we've put a lot of time in the Edgewood, and I think when it's done, people are going to be really impressed with the safety improvements and the trail and upgrades. >> And the drainage is going to be a huge benefit, so we appreciate your work for us. >> Awesome. Thank you. Thanks so much. >> Have we started clearing that corner on Edgewood yet? >> Um, we just discussed that today. We're We have the fence on order for that property owner, and until we have that, I won't let the guys get get after it until we have it on site. >> No, cuz you want some >> We We [clears throat] We want to try and keep their privacy as best we can, so we anticipate thing to. It's supposed to be here next week, so I anticipate in probably 2 weeks we'll get started. We're going to do the parallel portion on Edgewood and the angle portion, and then we'll do wait till the county approves the trail, and then we'll place it. I I want to make sure we're not screwing up with the the drainage portion of that. So, I would say about 2 weeks. We've been been current with Mr. Williams up north at his resort, and Mrs. Williams is is here, so we can try and keep you hit with both of them so they're understanding how it's affecting the project. >> Okay. Awesome. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. >> All right. Next up, the PLC replacements, Mr. Wilson. >> Good evening, Mayor and Council. Tonight, I have for your consideration resolution 2649 [snorts] for PLC replacements in three MCC centers at the wastewater facility. Um, included in the packet is the quote from Total Control, including an email from Ali, owner of Total, confirming that his quote is still good. Um we have Overall, we have 23 PLCs in our water waste water system for the city. Uh PLC is a programmable logic controller. Essentially, it's the brains of a motor control center. It's what basically allows our processes and our machinery to be ran by our computers instead of us having to physically do everything. Um some background, expected life for a PLC is 10 to 20 years. Um oftentimes, the physical hardware itself will last longer, but the support for that hardware and more parts and availability is is gone in a shorter amount of time. Um the ones we're asking to replace tonight are from 2005, so they are 21 years old and they are obsolete, so if something goes wrong, you would have to replace them with an upgraded version. And so, instead of doing that when they fail and being kind of behind the eight ball and potentially having uh interruption in our treatment process, we're trying to do that proactively. So, there's three the three oldest ones that we have, so we can replace those tonight. Um we did discuss this with our public works committee. The committee did recommend it coming to council for consideration. Um we do budget in all three of our enterprise CIPs for PLC replacement. Uh so, we took a total roughly of what the value of all our PLCs are, divided it by their lifespan, then we just plan for that amount each year, and then we'll replace them as they age out. Uh with that, tonight I'm looking for a motion and a second to approve resolution 2649 approving the waste water treatment facility PLC replacement project for the quoted price of $81,618 and the price not to exceed $89,800, which is a 10% contingency. Uh every once in a while we do things like this when we're taking old equipment out of the plant and putting new in. There might be a need for an electrician to do things beyond what Total can do, you know, so planning in case that would come up. Hopefully, we won't have to, but then we have it if we need it. And with that I can just stay for any questions. >> All right. Any questions for Chris on the PLCs? Looks like they've all lived their useful life, so. Anybody care to make a motion on resolution 2649 to replace the wastewater treatment facility PLC? >> I'll make that motion. 2649. >> I'll second. >> Okay, we have a motion by Mike, second by Robin. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all in favor please say aye. >> Aye. >> Anyone opposed say no. Motion's carried. >> Thank you, Chris. >> Chief is up with the police sergeant position, resolution 2646. >> Good evening, Mayor and council members. I appreciate the opportunity to talk to you tonight about our police sergeant position. This has been a work in progress as many of you probably know since I became the chief of police back in June of last year in identifying the supervision needs of the Battle Police Department. We identified that a sergeant role would make more sense than the lieutenant role and for a couple reasons that I'll highlight in a moment. But part of that process was establishing the sergeant job description first and foremost. So that was reviewed by staff. It was adjusted slightly. We had a previous identified sergeant position that was in our our our city descriptions and we took a look at that, made sure that was up to date. There were some minor adjustments to some things like some scheduling, some job duties and the rank and where that falls in our command structure, but relatively minor. That job description was reviewed by personnel and police committees and the staff recommended approval of that job description moving forward and that was included in your RCA. Uh we then took a look at the sergeant wage scale. Um the sergeant description was redone, and then therefore we review it internally with our decision band method, which is uh a way that we can take a look at that job description and see where that falls into our pay structure. Uh we did do a review of that internally, which identified as a C51 DVM rating. And then uh in addition as you're aware as council, we reached a contract with Flirty and Hood uh recently to do this kind of citywide too. Um so we reached out to them to say, "Can we maybe take a look at this now?" Um and they did that and came back with the same C51 DVM rating for that uh position, which is good because it tells us that our internal methods that we've established are are working. Um that being said, uh the wage scale for that band is 4237 to 5509 uh with nine steps. Um in order to have the sergeant starting wage above top patrol wage, the actual uh hiring wage for this position would be anticipated to start around that $46.20 mark with six steps to top pay. Um Staff recommended approval of the sergeant wage scale identified, and then that was attached to the RCA as well. Little bit about the history of the sergeant role. Um we didn't operate with any type of supervision before uh 2013 at the Chippewa Police. So 2013 council identified the need for a night shift supervisor. Uh we hired a sergeant at that time, and he was in place for about two years prior to leaving for another job opportunity. And at that time uh that role uh was left vacant um essentially until 2022 when I was promoted to the lieutenant. Um however, due to changes in the department structure and needing to maintain investigative work, um I conducted both the lieutenant role and the investigator role for the department. Uh the lieutenant role has more administrative duties, but because it was combined with investigations, that role did not allow for much supervision of our night shift patrols. Um and the lieutenant role has since remained vacant since I was promoted to chief. Officer Hankel was hired in 2025. Uh the department has the same staffing number now as we sit sit here tonight prior to my promotion, which is [snorts] eight full-time officers including the chief. Uh patrol officer uh will be assigned that patrol investigator to perform the investigations portion, but they remain in our rotation. The department operates with alternating power shifts shifts and evening shifts. Um and the chief or me is identified as their primary supervisor. Um I do take a considerable amount of calls after hours. I'm always able to answer my phone and wake up in the night to answer questions. But I don't have the opportunity to be on calls with them, which allows the supervisor to gain the knowledge of their job performance, how things are going, answer any questions, or sometimes just have an idea of what's actually going on. Um as you can imagine getting woke up at 2:00 a.m. and having somebody explain a situation going on uh in another part of town is is takes a little bit to kind of wrap your head around. So, having that that in-person knowledge is vital as well. Um as our department grows, well, we need to fill vacancies and those officers with the least amount of experience typically work the night shift and then therefore should have the most supervision. Uh based on my previous experience, I recognize that the supervisor can't do both jobs um of supervising and investigations while working evening shifts. Nor is it effective to have uh both department supervisors working the day shift. Based on those needs, I had recommended the addition of a sergeant position be added in uh 2026 beginning mid-year. Our sergeant will be the first one of our first-line supervisors for the department um covering our evening and night shifts. Uh he'll would command of the Becker Police Department in the event that Five is unavailable. They'd be responsible for assisting patrol officers on calls for service, ensuring compliance with policy and procedures, scheduling for evening and night shift, providing input on for for performance evaluations, and managing training for the officers that report to them. The sergeant's schedule might change, but in general, uh it would be uh that mid-shift cover, so kind of a power type shift. And they would work uh eight 10-hour shifts per pay period and rotate weekends as well. I wanted to make sure that the supervisor got to work weekends for both sides of the schedule as well. And that way they would have in-person contact with both sides that they supervise. Um we established a hiring process, which would uh include several steps, including the initial application, the review of that, uh some oral interview boards, um a chief's interview, and then your pretty standard background investigation, medical, things like that. Uh and we did elect to um have them participate in a leadership assessment, similar to what I went through um during my um my chief uh candidacy. So. Uh that being said, I presented the sergeant discussion several times at both the Police Committee and at Planning or at Personnel Committee. Um I've been working with the job description, the hiring process, and the wage review, uh as well as how that schedule would work, um and uh we discussed all of those positions, the wage, schedule, and the job posting. Both committees supported bringing it to full council tonight. Uh during the last budget process, the council approved funding for the sergeant position with a start date of late June. Uh the total for wages and benefits was identified at that time at $69,136, uh with the regrading of the position and pushing back uh to a likely probably August start date at this point in time, the revised budget impact is around $52,000. That being said, I'm uh open to any questions you have uh about this position. Otherwise, I am looking for a motion and a second to adopt the resolution 2646, which would approve that job description, the wage scale, and posting for that position. >> All right. Any questions for Chief? >> And did we say for sure, I know it's the 8 10 hour shifts per pay period? And I did ask you on email, I wasn't understanding, is it going to be a two to two, I mean out of two to two, a four to two >> Yeah, I think >> or maybe it means six to four. >> Yeah. I think we'd have to kind of see what the needs are and where that where they they fit in best. Um, like I discussed, that it'd be that mid, so four to two, six to four. Um, initially early on we had the discussions, I think we wanted to extend out till that 4:00 a.m. So, we'd have a little more coverage. Um, with some of the the night shift movement, some of our part-time stuff that we discussed recently, there may be a change where we actually would switch to having those night shift off officers work double at night. And then that way we probably slide that sergeant up to the four to two instead, if that makes sense. So, right now in in the posting, it's identified as an evening and night shift sergeant. >> Right. >> Just so that anybody that would, you know, have any interest in that position knows it's going to fall into that that category, but this this sergeant position won't change. >> Yeah, so your description isn't putting a specific time in there. >> Yeah, it's a night evening sergeant. That's how I described it, just to keep that a little bit open while we kind of figure out where that best fit will be, but it'd be one of the two. >> Okay. >> I personally [snorts] I would really like to see us have coverage till four, just because person's off at two, we're right back to you answering the phone for those four hours and only having one coverage. And I know that we've looked at the call volume and our early drop's off at four, so that's that's definitely would be in line with I think what we discussed originally, so I wouldn't even think of that. >> And we did have some internal sessions just as you're aware, too, for those times when no one's supervisor is working, is to maybe establish a on-call who's your supervisor. That way, it's not always tell the sergeant when they're gone. Often, they call for a week, sergeant can take phone call for a week, and then that way not one or the other is getting those late night calls more often than the other. >> Sure. Other questions? >> I'll second that. >> All right, then we're looking for a motion on resolution 2646 approving the job description, the wage scale, and posting of the sergeant position. >> I'll make that motion. >> I'll second it. >> Motion by Robin, second by Becky. Is there any further discussion? Hearing none, all in favor, please state aye. >> Aye. >> Anyone opposed, state no. Motion carried. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Next up, Mr. Peterson has the planned unit development and preliminary plat for Edgewood Village, resolutions 2650 and 51. >> Thank you, Mayor and Council. Mr. Crandall, may we have a PUD for the Shady Spur Estates preliminary plat for Edgewood Village? Uh some background on this one is the applicant is Todd Owen of Land and Resource Consulting. Um it's on behalf of Keepers Land Development, owned by Steve Keepers, and Tribute Construction, or Scott Thompson. Um the application was received April 24th and deemed complete April 27th or May 26th. Uh property is approximately 19.23 acres south of Edgewood Boulevard along the Minnetonka Drive corridor, um east of First Street. Um the owners of the land currently are I cheating. Or I'm already car started on seven parcels. and John McChesney owns the other parcel. Both of which have signed the applications as well. And so the project is going to call it Ezra Village. It would be a mixed-use residential flat for 215 total dwelling units, uh 11.18 units per acre. It would be four three-story apartment buildings for 152 units between those four buildings. Between those four buildings. Uh three eight-unit townhomes uh with tuck-under garages. Those would be 24 units. Five five-unit townhome or row home buildings for 25 units. And then seven twin home lots for 14 units. Um a PUD was requested to establish some dimensional standards, specifically a reduced reduced lot width, lot depths, and a 20-ft front yard setback for some of the certain twin home lots around the cul-de-sac. Um maximum height for all the building types would be 45 ft. And some actions have already been taken by the city. Um May 5th, 2026, Council approved density amendments to the comprehensive plan and UEL via resolution 2641. On that same day, May 5th, Council approved um a self-managed agreement with SCH for the Luedke Drive building [snorts] utility design. Uh and then the Luedke Drive extension is a city-led, grant-funded infrastructure project. Um and so all this all may not come to fruition or put that on hold right now. The key issues to note is the city engineer's civil plan review is already going. Um there are a couple of conditions in the resolution um that address some required amendments. Recreation Staff will give an approximate of Pleasant Valley Park is roughly 3/4 of a mile away with recently updated equipment. Um and outside amenities on this proposed development including a play area and a dog park. Staff recommends a fee in lieu of $200,000 or $930 a unit which is which will be addressed in the required developer's agreement. For storm water, they show three infiltration basins that are proposed on lots A, B, and C for drainage. Um and there's some open space as well as a dedicated channel for the Grey River energy transmission line easement. It is a bit of a TIF application. Um approval of the PUD and plat becomes null and void if TIF is not approved or if either developer decides to withdraw or not proceed. Um environmental assessment worksheet or EAW is required before construction on this project. Um for the Planning Action and Review Committee um May 18th, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing with one resident in attendance who discussed the southern landscape buffer with the developer and they were satisfied with what the developer um had to say. And Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of both of those resolutions, PC 2607 and PC 2608. So with that, I'll be looking for a motion and a second adopting resolution 2650 uh PUD conditional use permit for Edgewater Village as well as a motion and a second adopting resolution 2651 uh preliminary plat for Edgewater Village. I can answer any questions. >> All right. Any questions for Austin? >> No. We've spent quite a bit of time on this at our meeting. >> Mhm. >> Yeah. It's been pretty thoroughly reviewed. >> Great. Then um would anybody like to make a motion on resolution 2650 to approve the PUD CUP for Edgewater Edgewater Village? >> I'll second. >> A have a by Mike, second by Becky. Is there any further discussion? Hearing none, all in favor please say I. >> I. >> Anyone opposed say no. The motion carries. Now we need a motion on resolution 2651 which approves the preliminary plat. >> I'll make that motion also. >> I'll second that. >> We have a motion by Mike, second by Becky. Is there any further discussion? Hearing none, all in favor please say I. >> I. >> Anyone opposed say no. The motion carries. Thank you. Thank you, Austin. Next up, Chief is back up for suspension of the rules for Freedom Days. >> Suspension of the rules? >> Suspension of the rules. No rules. >> No rules. >> I'm just kidding. All the rules. >> School's out. >> You don't want to publicize that one. But yes, as Mayor Colgrove bigger reference to Freedom Days this month which is always a fun week for us here in Beckley. We do have a lot of rules and regulations that aren't pertaining to things like signing and alcohol consumption on the streets and riding golf carts down the road and driving on the right side of the road. And as part of that process each year we do a suspension of the rules for those Freedom Days activities. So this is nothing different than anything in the past. We've discussed this with the Freedom Days Committee that we're there and we're asking for the suspension of the rules. All the specific rules were identified in your RCA so I won't bore you with those. But that being said, we're looking for a motion to second adopting resolution 2647 providing for that suspension of the rules that were identified in your RCA. >> Yes, the alternative is we ticket everyone in the parade. >> That's it. >> Revenue generation. >> Revenue generation. We have resolution 2647 for the suspension of certain rules during Freedom Days. Anybody here to make that motion? >> I'll make that motion. >> I'll second. >> We have a motion by Becky, a second by Mike. Is there any further discussion? Hearing none, all in favor, please state I. >> I. >> Anyone opposed, state no. >> And that motion carries. >> Thank you very much. Mr. Wilson's back up, looking for some MRX meter reading unit replacements. Sounds exciting. >> Very exciting. I thought it came with the business. Um so, yes, the MRX unit that we use to read water meters was having some issues. We worked with IT manager to see if he could troubleshoot it. He couldn't make any progress. We then sent it in to the Ferguson for them to look at it. They gave us a response, which was included in your RCD tonight as one of the attachments. It stated basically due to its age and unavailability of parts, it could not be repaired. Um so, we currently have a loaner from Ferguson that we used last month and we'll use this month. And tonight we're asking for a replacement, um approval to buy a replacement unit so we can continue reading meters and collect the revenue from the water usage from the residents. Um in doing this process, kind of want to as we want to plan for the future, we'll add this to our CAP in that we were kind of reaching out to Ferguson asking them what they would say an expected life for this unit is. We got a pretty broad answer, anywhere from 4 to 20 years. >> That's >> That was based on his experience because he has cities that have them machines that are over 20 years old and are still working and some that have 4 years old and have already failed. So, >> Operator error. >> Well, maybe. Now, if you throw it out of the truck, it's not going to last very long, but Um so, going forward, what's that? >> Good luck budgeting that one. >> Yeah, I know. Uh so, we would look to put it in our CAP with an 8-year lifespan. Um seemed like that was kind of a settling spot and we can kind of assess as we go. Um we did get a quote from Ferguson that was included in the packet. We did uh this up to the Public Works Committee. They did uh recommend they go forward to Council for consideration. Um we did confirm the finance that we do have sufficient reserves in our water CIP to cover the cost of the replacement unit. And so tonight I am looking for a motion and a second to adopt resolution 2648 approving the purchase of the replacement MRX for the quoted price of 15,000 and price not to exceed 16,500. Um just in I don't think it's going to be anything beyond that, but in case they come back and say, "Oh yeah, you got to update your software and that's 500 bucks or something." So we'll plan for that. So Yeah, I can stand for any questions. >> All right. Any questions for Chris on that MRX meter reader? >> No. >> Anyone care to make a motion on resolution 2648 at a price not to exceed 16,500? >> I'll make that motion. >> I'll second. >> Motion by Robin, second by Mike. Is there any further discussion? Hearing none, all in favor, please state aye. >> Aye. >> Anyone opposed, state no. Motion carries. >> Thank you. >> Thank you very much. And Mr. Peterson is back up with the development agreement with Fossom Fields. >> Yes, Mayor. Thank you, Mayor and Council. Um this is a development agreement for Fossom Fields 3rd Addition. Um Council previously approved the final plat for Fossom Fields 3rd uh via resolution 2640. Per condition number 13 of that resolution, the developer, Sugar Maple Company LLC, wants to execute a development agreement before construction begins and before the final plat is recorded. Um so some key kind of requirements of this agreement is the developer must submit a letter of credit or cash escrow before any work begins. The exact amount will be set up once the city engineer reviews the developer's [snorts] engineer's opinion of cost, which they're currently um obtaining bids on that so that'll be coming later at a time. Parkland dedication Um due to a new 6.41 acre park being located roughly 5th of a mile away uh northwest of the site, staff recommends a reduced fee to $80 [snorts] a unit or $30,392.09 for phase one's 31 lots. Um They are required to have escrow and the $8,000 escrow fees was actually already submitted to the city with the prior land use application to cover engineering, legal, and city administration costs. The developer will need to replenish that if those costs run low. Um for storm water um they are kind of an ongoing review with that. It's continuing to be reviewed by the city engineer and staff. I've had discussions with the developer on that. Um one big development is that any additional language is needed as a result um in the development agreement, we do have provisions that allow the city engineer or attorney to add some additional language if required. Um Also, it is a two-phase two-phase project, and so phase one will be 31 lots, phase two will be an additional 21 lots. And with that, I guess I'd be looking for a motion and a second adopting resolution 2654 approving the development agreement for Folsom Fields 3rd Addition. Um One thing I probably should have mentioned is this agreement does authorize the mayor and city administrator to sign the finalized agreement. Um I can stand for any questions. >> Great. Any questions on Folsom Fields 3rd Addition? It'd be nice to have that going. All right. Anybody like to move approval of resolution 2654? >> I'll move that resolution. >> I'll second it. >> Motion by seconded by Robin. Is there any further discussion? Hearing none, all in favor, please state aye. >> Aye. >> Anyone opposed, state no. Motion carried. Thank you for all your work on that. Mr. Leroux is up with the consent agenda. >> Mayor Houck, members of the city council, members, items for review, approval, or adoption on tonight's consent agenda include the voluntary termination report. The unauthorized adjusted June 2nd, 2020 6:00 p.m. claims is presented. The claims listing has been provided to the city council in a separate document and is available on request for public view at city hall. The total claims are $369,415.96. Approve the minutes of the May 19th city council meeting. Approve the minutes of the May 19th executive session. Review the minutes of the following committee meetings. The April 20th fire board meeting, the April 23rd budget and finance committee meeting, and May 15th police committee meeting. Adopt resolution 26-45 approving the Greater Minnesota Housing Infrastructure Grant signers and representatives. Adopt resolution 26-55 approving election judge appointments. Now, we have no further questions. >> Any questions for hearing? No? Anyone like to move approval of the consent agenda? >> I make a motion to approve the consent agenda. >> I'll second. >> Motion by Robin, seconded by Mike. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all in favor, please state aye. >> Aye. >> Anyone opposed, state no. The consent agenda is approved. Have some June anniversaries. Full time, 5 years at the golf course, Melanie Shapen. 4 years at police, Kristen Mayo. 4 years at public works, Kyle Wigeland. 1 year at community center, Brandy Thomas. >> [snorts] >> 7 years, Becky Ohmshiede of the city council. >> What? Where's the Ohm shy? >> Sorry, you're in Princeton. Congratulations again. >> [clears throat] >> Five years at the community center, Kaylee Sint. Three years at golf for Taya Borkowski. Three years at community center, Jordan Matejka. Three years at the community center, Merritt Rogers. Two years at golf, Lyra Betters. One year at community center, Sophia Halverson. One year at golf for Alicia King. One year at the community center, Taylor Wilson. Four years at golf, Emma Matthews. Three years at golf for Olivia Meekins. Two seasons at golf for Alden Johnson. Two seasons at golf for Lisa Knuppsteadt. One season at golf for Louis Heinrichs. And one season at golf for Carson Schuster. Thank you to all those people for your continued service to the city. >> Did she say the last name? >> Those weren't too bad. If I butchered them, I apologize. Um I would just like consensus from council to have the crosswalk referred to public works like we do with all traffic matters. >> already discussed it with someone at public works. >> Okay. >> And we were going to do a study on it like we do with like we do with others. >> Yeah. So, we just follow that same process. >> So, we'll come back with something on that. >> Okay. >> Excuse me, what do I need to do as a citizen to to help you and to educate me and to educate other people that would like to be part of the team to create the crosswalk and safety on Bank Street in River. >> Okay. >> That's why I'm here this evening to get my answers and not be >> Well, I think you will get your answers. We follow the same exact process with every crosswalk. And with all due respect to citizens, we have traffic engineers that study it and make sure that we're following best practices in the engineering world. And I know it takes some time, but we want to do it correctly and so every traffic or crosswalk request we get follows the same process. >> Can I have a light? >> You may have a light. >> Cuz we're going to do it right and everybody deserves the same attention and and we're not going to take any shortcuts on those. >> Okay, well, I have a big mouth and I'm going to walk around my neighborhood. I am. And I >> Feel free to do that. But we're not going to change how we do things cuz what we do works and it works really well. >> Well, school is out tomorrow. Yeah, and the kids are out. And that's the issue. >> Okay. >> Okay, thank you. >> Just to echo what what council's talking about, referring back to Bank Street and Sherman Avenue south or uh sorry, north, Route 23. Going through that study as we work with Grant and extended that sidewalk before they used to come into a a parking lot. Uh partnering with Grant, improving that sidewalk. it's not just the sidewalk, it's the ped ramps, it's the crosswalk markings. So we've got that in place right now. The we're working in this year's street improvements to add on the corner of Bank Street and Route 23 a new truncated dome that is ADA compliant that will get us to the crosswalk on Sherman Avenue. so we're making that improvements now. We'll get folks that can cross Second Street on the sidewalk, cross 23 onto Bank Street. There'll be a new crosswalk that'll get them They can stay on our side of Bank or or move to the south side through a crosswalk as well. So as part of that process as it unfolds, that's where we're at there. So, that corridor, you can walk the full north side, you can walk the full south side, and you have crosswalks on both ends of the of the street to get you there. But, that's just kind of what we're talking about, and unfortunately, government it moves slow. You've got to go through some of these processes, and we'll continue to do that, but that's the progress of it is you get that continuity of your community, and you get the safety of the community. But, we we've had seven different crosswalks proposed to us. So, it's not like this is the only one. We understand the importance of it, but we've got to look at what everybody's saying to us, and then look at the viability of it. The more you have, the less they're followed. So, >> One of the most important things too is that we make sure we don't just pop a crosswalk down and it creates unintended consequences of people crossing other streets to get to that crosswalk. So, >> The other thing too is is you can't just put paint down for a crosswalk. You got to deal with pet ramps. >> Yep. >> ADA >> You have to have ADA compliance with that. >> Yeah. >> And then the other thing too >> is there's studies out there right now that tell you that crosswalks actually uh increase conflict because people have a false sense of a security in a crosswalk thinking people are going to recognize that and stuff. So, there's people on both sides of the street here. Obviously, with what we're doing, we're we're trying to promote pedestrian and bike uh traffic safety throughout, and it's just it we're trying to nibble off everything we can as we can. So, but just as an update there that we we you're you'll see those improvements with this year's street improvement projects, and that's a big corridor across. You know, there's a lot of traffic that moves swiftly on on US 23. So, >> Well, I appreciate the thoughtful approach and the research base that staff follows in doing it cuz we're going to do it where it is safe and like you said doesn't give that false sense. So, thank you. >> All right. Anybody have anything else? >> Nope. >> I'll look for a motion to adjourn. >> I'll move we adjourn. >> There's a motion by Mike, second by Robin. All in favor of adjourning, please state aye. Anyone opposed, state no. Meeting's adjourned at 5:48. >> Very close. Three minutes only. >> You almost made it. >> I watched the screen going up. >> Self-inflicted. Self-inflicted. Right? Turned the ask price and went down. >> Yeah, but we need to call him. >> They didn't call him back. >> Tony from Chicago.