Council meeting for what is today? This the 5th of uh August to order. Please stand for with me for the pledge of allegiance. Pledge algiance 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. >> So, first item of business is approval of the agenda. I'll entertain a motion. >> Motion to approve agenda as written. >> Second. >> We have a motion and second. All those in favor of of approving the agenda signify by saying I. >> I. >> I. I guess I have to vote too. Uh motion passes. Um I don't believe we have any presentations this evening. We do have some public well we we have some public comments um which some of these are for the agenda item. So, we'll do those at that time. Let me just double check here. My Axel is MIP. >> Oh. Uh, Mr. Ray Camp, is your comment unrelated to something on the agenda? >> No, it is not. It is for something on the agenda. >> No, it is not. >> Oh, okay. Would you please come to the podium? State your name and address for the record, please. [clears throat] >> Good evening, mayor and council members. Thomas Ray Camp. I'm at 4145 Lavender Avenue North here in Lake Elmo. My wife and I, mostly she, uh, owns Levia Bell in downtown Lake Elmo at 3417. Um, she's got notes that I'm going to read uh because she was unable to attend tonight, but wanted we wanted to address the council uh looking for some help. [clears throat] Chris and I own Leviael Gift Stores in Lake Elmo, White Bear Lake, and Hudson, Wisconsin. Uh, I'm here with with or on behalf of other retailers and restaurants in the village per conversations prior to this city council meeting. First and foremost, we are grateful to city and council for all the city improvements and beautifification. It is noticed and applauded for improvements. We know work needs to be happen. We are here to ask the city help. Ask for city help and partnership ahead of any all projects or activities that could impact businesses. For example, large projects like the one currently on Still Water Boulevard and smaller projects that still impact businesses like crosswalk restriping, closing the village down to a lane for half a day. We need proactive partnership and advocacy in the planning and execution of projects to ensure projects are successful for all meaning the city, residents and the businesses. Impact to residents is different than impact to businesses and we are looking to ensure that perspective is understood and considered for all projects moving forward and impact on one type of business may be different than impact on other types of businesses. For example, retail and restaurants in the village are down an average of 30% and greater year-over-year sales for last month. Businesses with appointments are fairing the construction better. Retail and restaurants are dependent on driveby traffic and ease of accessibility. Loss of revenue and customers can cause long-term damage or change habits as motorists will find and stay with different solutions. Communication and planning is done. Communication after planning is done and execution has begun has missed the opportunity and the business community has to react. With a six-month lead time, businesses can financially plan, change gears, refocus, and collaborate differently. >> [clears throat] >> We understand work must get done. Not looking to add additional scope or schedule, but allowing the businesses to plan internally for impacts, inventory, staffing, hours of operation, event planning, client communication, and review [snorts] plan for signage and access concerns for Stillwater Boulevard. Work currently in progress. Businesses are asking for a weekly construction update. We have signed up for this for the contractor updates, but not receiving anything. We're asking the city to take on this role similar to a weekly email we received from White Bear Lakes Public Works team when the parking lots were under construction last fall. A weekly email was sent to all businesses and landlords. What is the construction timeline? The initial timeline was two months. Now we're hearing three months. Again, we're just looking so that we can plan accordingly. Improve signage noting businesses are open and needed. There is some signage but not enough. If traveling to Lake Elmo from the west, signs read, "Rose closed ahead and local traffic only for the next two miles." There is no signage at Manning and we are hearing customers say that they saw road construction and did not even try. Is there incentive for contractors to complete work ahead of schedule? Curious if business grants were considered to offset losses. curious if marketing funds were budgeted or considered for digital campaigns to improve business traffic during construction. Has the city reached out to the businesses to understand the impact and our concerns? Again, impact has been significant and for some it will take time to recover. Could we move the September street dance to Lake Elmo Avenue to create visibility and revenue for the businesses? Events and businesses do not support businesses who help fund the events in our community. asking the council to follow up with a point of contact or a business advocate to represent and connect with the businesses. Work project events happen to the businesses, not with the businesses. We need to change this and create scenarios that are mutually beneficial for all. Thank you. >> Thanks. >> Good feedback. >> Thank you. Okay, we are given the minutes for July 7th council meeting. I'll entertain a motion to approve the minutes as written or if there are changes we can make those now. >> Motion to approve the minutes from the 7726 city council meeting. >> Second. >> All right, we have a motion and a second. All those in favor, please signify by saying I. >> I. >> I. Minutes are approved. Vote 30. On the consent agenda this evening, we have approved payments and dispersements. 180 acres AUR renewal approval. Approve deer hunt in Sunfish Lake Park. Approve amendment to farm lease. Approve Eastn Village Neighbors Market special event permit. Approve special event permit for the Lake Elmo Street dance. Approve pay request number two final for the 2025 Seal Co. Project. accept improvements and approve security reduction for MEP Lake Elmo LLC Milestones Daycare Center and approve MPCA grant agreement for Simmeron Park Water System Connection. All those in favor or I'll entertain a motion, excuse me. >> A motion to approve the consent agendas uh as stated. >> Second. All right, we have a motion and a second to approve the consent agenda as uh presented. All those in favor, please indicate by saying I. >> I. [clears throat] I. >> I as well. So, the consent agenda is approved. First item on the regular agenda is change in payroll and compensation policy. >> Good evening, mayor and council. Tonight I'm here for consideration of a change to the current payroll and compensation policy effective actually 81 2026 to coincide with our current payroll cycle. Currently policy states that ESST and vacation hours do not qualify as hours worked when calculating overtime hours. When it comes to holiday hours, policy states that holiday hours are considered hours worked, but specifically excludes fire from this. Our full-time firefighters are unique in that their normal 21 um day schedule cycle, they are paid for 168 hours of which 159 are at the regular hourly rate and nine hours calculated at the time and a half overtime rate uh equaling seven 24-hour shifts. The overtime hours are part of their regular schedule and can be considered as their base pay. Currently, if they take vacation, which they must do in 24-hour increments, they lose calculating the nine hours as overtime because the 24 they took don't count towards the calculation of the 159 regular hours worked. They're still paid for the hours, just not any at the overtime rate. Because of this loss of pay, firefighters trade shifts rather than use their acred time, which causes them to either pay out some of those hours at year end as they have more than the max carryover amount or possibly lose it all together, or they may put them in a situation where they work consecutive 24-hour shifts. We would like to change the policy allowing uh ESST vacation and holiday hours to be considered as hours worked and calculating overtime hours for firefighters allowing for their normally scheduled pay to be maintained. It is common practice in other cities to count these as acred hours as hours worked for their fire staff. Uh and assistant chief and chief um are here to answer any questions as well. questions. >> Could you just So you mentioned the holiday hours are not counted um towards the PTO for the fire, but they are for other staff. Could you just elaborate on that a little bit? >> Yep. pol in the policy it just states uh holiday hours uh are considered as hours worked and then it goes down uh firefighters are they are not calculated or >> do you remember why we I because I know we had this discussion I just can't remember why we did that >> I do not do >> I don't recall when we were putting together why it was specifically excluded >> is there any reason you can think of with again with how the shifts work that that would have came about. >> The only thing that I can think of is with uh previous personnel if it was just created that way because we we we have a different earning for holiday hours or we have a holiday leave bank if it was viewed as that was how holidays were looked and then it was excluded if the fire staff were excluded from that other language in the policy. Again, we're just trying to be consistent with um other cities and kind of following best practices with this update. >> Okay. And I apologize. I would have called been asked about this before. I just didn't see it in the the notes here about the other cities that this is common for. Could you just again elaborate that on elaborate on that a little bit as far as kind of what type of cities we're talking about that that do that? >> Sure. So, um, we use comparable cities that have very similar shift structures and, um, staffing policies as us. I can't think of any specifics that I want to name right now, but the majority of cities that use a 24-hour schedule are are doing what we're asking to do um, because of how it affects their firefighters and the time off and the trades and things and the issues that we're seeing as well. I think one of the things too that has come out is it took us some time in this new schedule to kind of figure out some of the unforeseen things that we were going to encounter with the schedule, right? Um we've been in the the full-time schedule now um for just about three years. So, it's it's taken some staff time and and for people to build up some time. How do we, you know, when you when you start fresh with a bunch of new um full-time staff, their acrruels are low. You don't really see that in years one and two because it takes some time to build that up and go, "Oh, I've got some vacation time now. I want to use it. How do I how do I use it?" um into last year, halfway through last year is when we really started seeing those um some of the trades move that they were making and really trying to avoid staff from working 48 up to 96 consecutive hours to to try to manage their time and and time off um and use the time that they've earned. Do you think there's any policies more around that side where we could address this issue? If that's the concern of, you know, firefighters working 48 to uh be 72 hours, is there policies that could maybe address that stance, you know, I guess just to address this from a different a different angle. >> You're absolutely right. Uh we could put restrictions on the amount of consecutive hours that firefighters could work. Um, ultimately that could affect our minimum staffing and cause us to go below based on the current way that they're utilizing trades in lie of overtime because they feel like they're missing out on their base pay. But I I do want to re reiterate that we we should and we will look into placing um those restrictions on if this moves forward just to be more proficient with the health and safety of those staff in mind. And that is something we've talked about already. >> Okay. Thank you. Thanks for answering those. >> Y and I believe there was some me. Could you go over how this affects budget for the fire department, please? budget is already accounted for that those hours are scheduled uh are included in the budget as their base pay. >> Okay. So it doesn't negatively impact the budget. >> Correct. >> Okay. Believe you mentioned in your report that that could actually be better for the budget. Could you explain that? >> It could if if they're not using their vacation hours, they could get hours paid out at the end of the year. >> Um, so if we're having them use their hours, there's less likelihood that they would be over the max to to pay out. >> Got it. >> Okay. Any further questions? Council member Kragnus, anything from you? >> No questions for me. Um, >> I can make a motion. >> Sorry. Sorry. One more. I do have another question. I I guess going off of that with the PTO that can be paid out at the end of the year. I believe with all of our departments it there is PTO that can be paid out at the end of the year. Can that be different department by department? Again, I mean I we're looking at this department from a little bit of a different perspective. Can PTO acrruel be paid out differently at the end of the year for >> buyer fighters have a higher max that they can carry over because they're of the rate that they earn it at. Um but it's still 40 hours over the max is all you can cash out. >> Okay. >> Not cash out but put into deferred comp or HSA. And you were saying that if if they weren't cashing out at the end of the year, that would be b it would it would decrease the budget for the fire. >> Correct. >> Okay. Which is the goal. We want them using their time off is is what it sounds like. >> Correct. >> All right. I entertain a motion. Motion to approve the change policy number 2110, payroll and compensation to include firefighter vacation, ESST and floating holiday hours to be considered hours worked when calculating overtime. >> Second. >> All right, we have a motion and second discussion. >> I Yeah, so I guess I am a little bit concerned with this. you know, I I feel like um these benefits should typically, right, these are acrewed on hours actually worked. Um I guess I do understand that obviously with the situation here that that is a little bit different. I I almost want to see if there's some sort of compromise along the line of, you know, if the goal is to encourage our firefighters to take the time off, to not be doing these longer shifts, the 48 72-hour shifts. If we move forward with saying, "Okay, yeah, we are going to take this angle where we will allow these hours to be counted towards PTO when they're taking ESST or when they're taking their holiday hours if we also pair with that a reduction in what can be carried over or paid out at the end of the year. So then we're attacking it from that angle, encouraging the firefighters to take that time off versus them acrewing benefits for hours that aren't actually worked. I I don't know if there's any alignment there. If not, you know, I I understand. But I do just have a little concern of paying benefits for hours that are not being actually worked. I guess uh just for point of reference in the businesses that I've worked in both government and private when I do my time sheet the actual PTO that I use or the holidays count towards 2080 in an annual budget cycle. Um it's not like I don't you know part of the benefit is acrewing that time. I don't know what the max carryover for PTO is. Um some companies have a higher number. It just becomes a liability on the business. Uh the higher that number is because then if that employee decides to leave then you have to pay out the PTO that has been acred. um often times in the construction industry because they don't and in this case probably similarly I would think that there are just times when they can't take the time off whether it's shift differential or whatever um busy summers in construction and so they're allowed to carry over and at the end of the season if they were not able to take the PTO because I I do generally think most people try to take their PTO if they can um it allows them certain payout over their max carry and I think that's limited to what here is you what I hear Jennifer 40 hours >> pardon >> I heard a max uh payout over 40 >> correct >> which was similar to one of the private industries I worked in a few years ago from that standpoint I think this is an alignment with a lot of other industries that are business operate not not owner business operated. Um, it it feels like to me it's in line with industry standards overall. So, I'm I'm [clears throat] okay with this this change. >> Just a followup. I mean, do you feel with seasonal work? Is that similar to compare? Is that is that comparing apples to apples with >> Sure. Right. I mean, just uh I had an employee that worked construction and then he would carry over work in another state during construction and stay busy. He had the max amount of PTO in his bank and he would take vacation when it wasn't as busy and uh but ultimately he would, you know, he would take the payout of 40 hours um in an annual cycle because he would he would add over that. Sometimes he actually lost uh some PTO because he was over the amount even by that much. So he just lost it, right? And there there are employees that do that that don't find the time or maybe they're uh >> what do you call that? Just uh they >> just want to be away from home a little more. >> Yeah. Yeah. I don't know. But some [clears throat and laughter] sometimes they do they do lose that. So, I know that the the state employee system has a max uh I think they can carry 220 hours of PTO and they have until June 30th of every year to get below that max. No, I don't think I know they can ask to get paid if there's special circumstances that you know didn't allow them to do that, but I think that's less uncommon for the state employees, but it's in their ask me MAPA union stuff. So, I don't I don't think that this is really um in my opinion different from a lot of industries. >> Okay. Yeah, that's good. >> Yeah, I think this is pretty standard for the industry that I've been in as well. And I think from what um Mr. Sabota you've seen on your side of research too, I think that it all is in line of what a lot of other cities are doing as well. So I'd be in favor with it. >> My small business industry just is we're just behind the times. >> I think when you're an employee owner operator, right, it's it's a little different viewpoint. I understand that. >> Yeah. is and just to confirm this >> with the rest of the departments they currently don't earn time off during ESST or holiday pay or during holiday um time off as well. Correct. >> No. So paid hours >> during the week like if you have >> so if they're if if a non-firefighter is on ESST or taking a holiday or taking um time off are they acrewing ESST um PTO during that time off >> they're getting paid. Yes. >> So this is just trying to bring the fire department into that same hole. >> Correct. So when I take vacation, my weekly wage stays the same whether I'm on vacation or I'm at work, right? My pay is going to be consistent. With firefighters, they take time off, their pay decreases >> because of the overtime. >> Because of that overtime amount, >> but we're still acrewing time because we're it's based on paid time. your PTO cruels. >> That is just so foreign to me because I just and even in the healthcare I mean that's >> we just haven't had that >> when you take time off. >> Yeah. It's you don't acrue >> anything. It's it's for hours worked. Yeah. >> And so that's just very different for me. But if that is the the if that is the the standard, you know, I I don't want to hold this up and I'm pretty sure I know where the others would be on this. So >> thank you for talking through that. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> All right. All right, I'll call the question. All those in favor of the motion as presented, please signify by saying I. >> I. >> I. Motion passes. 30. Next on the item is zoning text amendment and conditional use permit for 9591 60th Street MP. Miss Jensen. >> All right. Thank you, mayor. The applicant for tonight's application is Yamal Gonzalez. She represents Cuban Properties, MyP Landscape Supply, and Baldez Lawn and Snow. Property is located at 959160th Street. The property is almost 24 acres. About 6.33 of that is over Highway 36. It is currently zoned agriculture and guided in the city's comp plan as rural area development. Little history on the site. It has been operating as an open sales and landscape supply lot since 1988 when it received a cup approval. In 2023 or 2024, the applicant came forward with a zoning text amendment for landscape supply and yard uh landscape supply and yard waste recycling that was denied by city council. After the denial, the property came into compliance and that was verified in 2024. Uh the requests before you tonight are zoning text amendments and conditional use permit for landscape supply. There is no uh yard waste recycling with this request [snorts] tonight. So this slide shows the existing and proposed cup footprint. The existing cup footprint is the red boundary. Uh this is roughly uh what staff was able to piece together. The original CUP references a 1988 site plan [snorts] or sorry a 1979 site plan. U we're not able to locate any of those materials that reference or show that [snorts] footprint. So, we used Google Earth images to compile what it likely looked like. It's about 2.95 acres, which is about 16.9% of the site. The boundary shown in yellow is the proposed footprint. It's about 6.21 acres and it would be about 35.5% of the my site. So, this slide shows a [snorts] breakdown of the uses within the footprint. They're mainly adding uh land to the south for tree nursery, softscape storage, and hardscape storage. And then on the right side, the schematic image, there's a white star in the top corner. That's a parcel that's landlocked by the my property. And I'll circle back to that when we get to the conditions. So, the applicant is requesting to amend three sections of city code. The first section is adding landscape supply, adding the definition into city code. The second amendment is to the the use table just adding a C uh under the egg code for landscape supply and the final section is 650K which is adding performance standards for landscape supply. So staff finds this request is consistent with the past use of the property. Staff also finds the proposed use with conditions and performance standards is consistent with the intent of the agricultural zoning district. The standards proposed are generally based off the intent of the non-eglow impact section which may allow a large property owner an economical use of their property that is zoned agriculture. Staff also finds this request consistent with the 2040 comprehensive plan as it relates to goals and intent around rural area development land use transitions and natural resource systems. Since a zoning text amendment applies to all properties within the agricultural zoning the and the performance standards provide high level guidance if and when a conditional use permit comes in the city may add additional specific conditions to mitigate unique sight specific concerns. So looking at the proposed performance standards and existing operations the hours of operation are outlined in the 1988 cup. The applicant is not proposing to change hours of operation. [clears throat] The 1988 [snorts] CUP outlines that 30 cars maximum are to be parked on site. Applicant is not proposing to change that. Just a note also that the 30 cars does not include heavy equipment zoning. So the property must maintain its agricultural zoning district while the cup is in place. The parcel must be at least 15 acres in size. If highway 36 were to be netted out, the property would still be at 17 acres. So it would meet that minimum requirement. The use may not generate more than three trips per acre per day, which is about 71 trips. The request should not increase traffic level levels above normal operation. And the site is not the site access is not proposed to change with this request. Looking at exterior storage, exterior storage of vehicles, equipment, or goods must be located a minimum of 200 feet from any public roadway and 50 feet from adjacent land owners. Such outside storage must be screened from view of adjacent property and roadway. The applicant is proposing to add an arborite burm along the east side and retaining wall in black hill spruce on the southeast corner. Mature vegetation also exists on site that will provide screening. No trees are planned to be removed as part of the business expansion. [snorts] And then the last sentence is regarding 95 9760th Street which is at White Star property. Just noting that the applicant needs to maintain the spacing and screening from that house. Continuing on with the performance standards, sack units, so may not generate more than three sack units per 3.5 acres or 235 gallons per acre per net acre of land. The property received a new septic system which was verified in 2025. So operational and [snorts] meets the standard non-b businessiness related land area. So the area outside of the cup footprint needs to be kept [clears throat] in a way that's consistent with the egg zoning district. In this case, they're proposing to leave it in the natural state, [snorts] mostly woods, which provides screening. Storm water, they need to meet the city and valley branch requirements. Structures, there are currently four structures on site. The applicant is not proposing to add or change those structures. Enlightened noise, they'll need to maintain and continue to meet the city's noise and light ordinance. The application was sent off for agency review on June 15th. The city engineer provided comments regarding storm water management and access management. Staff added a condition. Valley branch provided comments regarding Cowwater Pond and access feasibility. We've also added a condition there. And the DOT and fire department did not have comments. Staff is recommending five findings for the zoning text amendment. The first is that the applicant meets the application requirements. The second is exactly the three sections that are proposed to be amended. The third is that this text amendment would allow the applicant to amend their CUP. Fourth is that it's consistent with the 2040 comprehensive plan. And fifth is that it meets the purpose and intent of the egg zoning district with the performance standards. Staff is recommending 12 conditions for the cup. In summary, they relate to public health, safety, welfare, not creating nuisances or increasing traffic congestion, consistency with the comp plan and zoning code, should not impact and should be compatible with existing neighborhood, and should not impact natural and scenic features, and they should not create additional public cost. Staff is also recommending 12 conditions for the CUP. Uh the items, the conditions outlined in bold are from the 1988 CUP, their carryover. The conditions that are underlined are new conditions. So the first is hours of operation 8 am to 8 pm Monday through Saturday, 10 a.m. to 5:00 pm Sunday. That's not changing from the 1988 approval. They they are allowed one business sign. Number three is that they shall not store material closer than 210 ft south of Highway 36. Fourth is that they need to maintain the 30 cars on the site. No more than 30 cars, I should say. Fifth is that screening is maintained. And six is that uh any expansion or intensification requires a CUP amendment. Moving on to the new conditions. So they again need to maintain screening and setbacks from that that isolated parcel 9597 60th Street. Eight is that they need to meet those newly created performance standards. Nine is that they need to obtain a watershed permit if necessary and meet all cowwater pond regulations. 10 is that they shall consider the city engineer memo. 11 is that all past CUPs would be null and void if this one is approved. And the final one is that if they cease operations for a period of 12 months, the uh cup would become void, which is a standard condition. Public hearing notice was sent to surrounding property owners on June 29th and published in the paper on July 3rd. City also sent this out via its new push notification tool on the website. We received the following comments. Uh, Peter Castler provided written comments regarding concerns with Highway 36 access, regulating heavy equipment, property maintenance and definition concerns, and concerns with the zoning uh, proposed. Harvey Taipeel provided written comments regarding the scope of property maintenance service and limit on vehicles. He provided additional comments on egg sales and access. Bonnie and Leonard Duran provided comments regarding concerns with access on Highway 36, environment environmental impacts and conflicting land uses. John and Lisa Bourbon provided written comments regarding concerns with the text amendment language and are opposed to the CP. At the public hearing, Alex Hughes spoke in favor of the applicant and noted how he appreciates the way the business operates and communicates with the neighbors. Also noted that there are more other more dangerous and noisy things that occur nearby. Pat Barrett spoke at the public hearing highlighting concerns regarding traffic with Highway 36 and Cowwater Pond conditions and potential impacts. And then after the planning commission meeting, Doug Lovevet provided written comments uh supporting the applicants and the business as a directly adjacent property owner. The planning commissioner reviewed this request at the July 13th meeting. They voted to recommend approval of both requests uh subject to the conditions and findings that staff had provided. And the vote on both of those was seven to zero. So with that I have three suggested motions and then at the planning commission there was discussion on the frontage road work that was happening. So I added a visual in case we need to discuss that and this slide is the ex exact language that's written in case questions come up. So with that I can stand for questions and we do have the applicants here. >> Could member her. >> Yeah thank you. Could you just talk a little bit about the property maintenance services? I know that came up a few times with the public comment. Um maybe just what the intent was with that um having that included with the landscape supply sales. Um and I guess just yeah kind of what is the intent of property maintenance services? What does that all include? >> Yeah, I can get the ball related and maybe the applicant could address it better. Um but the intent is that these these landscape supply materials are usually installed by a service, not typically by the homeowner and then they're also moved on site via some sort of equipment. So this would be a compatible uh use to help facilitate the land landscape supply. >> Okay. >> I noticed that there were some concerns regarding the pond. I'm assuming those are taken care of with any uh permitting by Valley Branch Watershed District. >> Correct. And then [sighs] there were some concerns about how much heavy equipment is back there. Is there any sort of conditions on on being put on that? >> Staff did not add conditions regarding heavy equipment. It was hard to draft. Uh it'd be kind of regulating private property which is tricky to do. >> Yep. Okay. I saw a lot of uh comments regarding the safety on 36 that's been notwithstanding. Is there any recommendations on future improvements to be done with the access offer 36? >> Not at this time, but I do believe the engineer memo discusses uh cooperating with the frontage road in the future, which I believe the applicant is is more than welcome to have. >> Uh Mr. Mr. Mayor and Council, there's currently no plan for a French road extension beyond Keats Avenue at the time. Uh what's being built with the Highway 36 and Cass 17 improvements right now on Zets. Um and so um it it's the accesses to remain MDOT had no comments. [clears throat] >> Okay. Council member Kra. >> So I Well, you were talking about the CUP limits parking of 30 vehicles. Um, is there a defined limit on the number of heavy commercial vehicles? >> So, the any cars or trucks would fall under that same category. >> Okay. >> Um, heavy equipment. I'm thinking more like forklifts, skid steers, >> not something you're taking on the road. >> Okay. >> Okay. Let's um we do have some people that signed up to talk about this. So, I'll call your name. You come to the podium, state your name and address. You'll have six minutes to speak on the item in the agenda and then we'll give the applicant an opportunity to discuss their plans as well. So, first person I have here is Mr. John Bourbon. Good evening, mayor and city council members. I am John Bourbon. I'm here with my wife, Lisa Bourbon. We're a longtime Lake Elmo residents moving in in 1994 and uh reside at 961257 Street North. Uh, regarding the zoning text amendment language for landscape supply sales, we're certainly in support of folks engaging in farming in an azone area to use a portion of their land. Now, portion is important because um I think when you were reading um your presentation, you forgot to say it's a portion of the land that's allowed to be used outside of agriculture and that's in the performance standard. So, that that's an important thing I just wanted to mention. Um however we have issues with the proposed definition. Uh retail sale of goods made or grown on a farm or an egg land um should be made on or grown on the farm, not those that are purchased from a supplier and then distributed. That just creates a distributorship which is purely commercial use of the land and has nothing to do with agriculture. For some reason, the list of permitted items includes pesticides and fertilizers on an open sales lot. It's just bound to be an issue because it's not protected from the environment and the conditions. I understand that they're not interested in doing that, but why have that in the definition in the first place? What problem are you solving with adding that? Because this is going to apply to everybody in the future. And if somebody wants to do that, it's already there. So that language definitely needs in my opinion needs to be stricken. The reference to ancillary uses of supply, storage, and property maintenance maintenance services. Now Sophia said the ancillary equipment is needed for installation. Installation is one thing. Maintenance is a different thing. If I need a hole dug for a tree, that's different than a lawn being mowed maintenance. So I think that is again there's others in our group that had issue with that and I think that language doesn't make any sense to be within this definition. Um the minimum parcel of land is defined as 15 acres and if that's the case suggest there be a defined portion of land that is already zoned as agriculture to be used for these landscape supply sales as a percentage of the total land a portion the allotted area should be a minor percentage of the overall usable land area since the primary zoning is agricultural and not commercial this is actually consistent with performance standard uh in in Sophia's presentation which indicates a portion of the property may be used for non-aggricultural uses. Otherwise, what prevents all the land from being used for essentially commercial purposes and not anything left for agricultural purposes, which was the intent for in the zoning. So, in conclusion, we're in support of a permitted use of land for landscape supply services. However, feel the current definition needs work prior to being approved tonight. Regarding the second topic of the request to expand a coop, we are not in favor of this request at all. NYP's inclusion of their cost to restore the land into compliance in their narrative solely precipitated by their lack of adherence to the original CUP and their establishment of a recycling business on the site. Had they not done that, they would not have incurred the cost, the compliance expense. And so any mention of that expense seems like a request for consideration due to hardship inflicted and has no bearing in this discussion. They brought it on themselves. We do not know the exact history behind the first COP in 1988, but we can only assume the city limited the use of the land because of the impending development in the area and work to minimize the potential incompatibility between commercial business commercials businesses and residential neighborhoods. They even added a no expansion condition to the cup. I don't think what you showed was actually accurate. I have the original cup here on my phone. And item five says there shall be no expansion beyond area and function now being used. I think your item had something you need a new cop if you want to expand, but that there's clearly strong language in the original COP that there's no expansion here. The city at that time decided the allowable area was was compatible with what they saw as the future and now the area is even more developed than it was before then. And so that just creates more of an incompatibility. So we personally don't have any issue if they sold trees, shrubs, of course, no fertilizer or or pesticides. But in our opinion, that should be done on the land that was designated for them to use in a way consistent with an open lot approach that won't create hazards, not expand their land use beyond what they've they have to use. When they bought the property, they knew the limitations of the property and the usable land. They certainly could see with their own eyes what part of the land was an open sales lot, what wasn't. Now they want to expand beyond what they had agreed to when they bought the property. We therefore expose oppose any expansion of the land use and ask that it remain was defined in 1988. We're also not in favor of their request to park Vald's lawn care vehicles and equipment on the site as that appears to be a convenient commercial use of the land and also since their request is unbounded in number. NYP knew what they were getting into and should stick to the agreement they inherited when they chose to purchase this land. Additionally, expansion of business will certainly lead to more traffic entering and exiting the property from Highway 36 with most of the vehicular traffic being slower moving trucks or vehicles or trailers. This creates a traffic safety issue for anyone utilizing Highway 36, which has a posted speed limit of 65 miles per hour right in front of NYP. Lastly, item 10 of the proposed COP indicates that the city engineer in his memo indicated the plan needs to be revised. So, should that not happen prior to any approval of the COP, shouldn't the plan be figured out prior to you guys seeing it? Because if you vote on it, you actually get to see what ends up resulting from that discussion. So Lisa and I have shared our concerns with our neighbors and received feedback in agreement and opposition from 12 other neighbors including but they're not here tonight. Christa and Brady Liberty residing at 9844 57th Street. Sherry and Jeff Peterson residing at 9856 57th Street. Suit and Glet residing at 97195th Street. Marcy Brad Bergie residing at 948157th Street. Reeba and Mua Jang residing at 9543 57th Street and Linda Ramsey and Ren Warren Scholes residing at 5673 Juel and other neighbors have sent uh their concerns directly to you guys including Len Guran who's here Harvey Ty make it and six six minute time limit. Thank you. >> Thank you very much for consideration. >> Thank you. Bruce Junker. >> Is Bruce Junker not here? >> Yeah, I'm here. >> You can you come? >> I'm just listening. >> Oh, >> so you didn't want you want >> Don't have anything to say. Okay. >> Can I come back and get on the list after I've heard all the >> No, this this is your time to speak if you want it. Thank you. Okay. Uh Len Dan. [clears throat] >> Uh I'm Len Duran. I live at 978457th Street North in Lake Elmo um in this area that we're talking about. And uh I sent on earlier today uh which you guys should have a a copy of of a a letter outlining what uh I was concerned about uh because I uh paid attention to the planning commission and of course they went through with everything and I got a couple questions that I want to make sure are answered and become part of tonight's record. Number one is that my would not be storing any bulk uh pesticides or fertilizer or hazardous material. That's very important to me because we believe in the environment. We're in a residential area that's adjacent to my and we don't want that in the air or in the water which we are uh which is qual pond. But at any rate, what um I I guess I'm wondering if that's true because um in the the mayor's recap on it, they had the uh uh uh what do you call it? The uh decisions, the planning and what have you. And uh it's kind of like some of the things that happened at the planning commission just disappeared and I want to make sure they don't come through in a different way. So that's one of my real important questions. Um, number two is in the uh letter that I sent you guys. I wanted to make sure that you understood that MINDOT will not do anything in regards to private entries to p private property. uh they haven't and there they I was at a meeting four years ago regarding uh highway 36 and and Lake Elmo Boulevard and they made it very clear that they won't do anything with private driveways and uh my is a private driveway. It becomes a situation in my thinking and understanding that to enlarge my now would be to make more money and make more money you need to have more volume and so I'm concerned about the amount of uh vehicles coming in and out of my realizing that trucks and cars and trailers and all those things don't accelerate the way high high performance cars do And uh I don't know, I hope everyone here has had a chance to come down Highway 36, especially since they opened up or took out the stop lightss. It's it's 70 75 80 [snorts] miles an hour. And uh I realize uh once the Sentry interchange is updated, it's going to be more volume and more concern in relationship to the fact that if Mandot is not willing to accept the responsibility for the private driveways that it either becomes my responsibility or Lake Elmo's responsibility. And I think that that is something that should be considered in this decision making at this point. So the other thing I brought this up at the last two meetings and we're back here again. I happened to spend some time with Ruben back in the earlier days and uh he understood that this this whole area was going to change and it has. We have residents uh bordering on MYP on three sides and you've got Highway 36 on the other side. It doesn't make good sense to me that this would be a location to expand commercial in this tiny uh uh property situation. So, um I got to say that, you know, I'm concerned or not concerned. I want uh Mr. Gonzalez and my to be successful. I have no problems with that. I want want that to be and uh but I am concerned on how they're going to do it. So, I still haven't heard an answer in relationship to the bulk um fertilizer and pesticides and what would be stored there along with the uh big trucks because that's going to make a difference. Those big trucks don't have good acceleration. what's going to happen when they try to merge into traffic on Highway 36. So, um I guess that's where I'll stop at this point. >> All right. Thank you, Mr. Tran. >> And uh we have Alex Hughes. >> Good evening. Thanks again for the allegiance. I love that. That's the last time I was here. That's great. Um, my last name is spelled h u g hes. I noticed it was different up there. Might be bad because of my penmanship, but I'm sure it's on some lake homo thing somewhere, but just like Howard with a few less bucks. So, um, I [clears throat] want to address a couple things. Number one, I think we need to get together as a group and slow the speed limit down, at least during the construction of what's going on near our homes. Now, another thing I want to address is the noise. I'm the closest neighbor they have. And the loudest noise I've ever heard was a couple of dump truck trailer uh tailgates banging. And I have one phone call to Joe to his personal cell phone. Put an end to that almost immediately. They're nowhere [clears throat] near as loud as the traffic. They're nowhere near as loud as the planes and helicopters that fly over our neighborhood every day that the rest of these neighbors hear too. Um the cars racing down Highway 36 from that point all the time. That's way more noise than these guys have ever generated by a long shot. Um, the [clears throat] other thing I want to address is next door to them to the west. They're fixing car haulers, 10 car haulers, and they have no slowdown lane like so built for his business on his own dime. And they're pulling out with 16-speed trucks that take a mile and a half to get to 65 miles an hour. And no one's addressing that. And that's way more dangerous than what they have got going on. The only one only been aware of one accident that happened, one un one unfortunate accident that happened there a few years back. That was unfortunate. But I can literally see people coming and going from that property from my property, from my home office. So, I don't see anything egregious going on there ever. And I'm not here to tell you guys how to do your job. I'm just here to give some opinions on what I think since I am the closest neighbor. Um, I'm more bothered by my neighbors have a tendency to can't stop mowing grass every three days is more annoying to me. Uh, I just don't think it's a big deal. They're trying to make a little run a business. They've been great neighbors. I don't know how many people in here have done business with them, but I've done quite a bit of business with them. And they're good at what they do. They're more than fair in pricing. And they're more accommodating for deliveries, everything. I mean, they're great people to be neighbors with. So, I'm a little disappointed that so many people are kind of picking on them a little bit. Um, but I don't see the I don't see anything wrong with what they're doing. The rest I kind of said the last time I was up here talking, so I'm sure that's on paper somewhere. But, but, uh, I hope they get what they're looking for, and I hope everybody does a little bit of business with them. >> Thank you, Mr. Hughes. Yep. Did the applicant wish to speak? >> Um hello everybody. Uh my name is Jame Gonzalez. I'm part owner of Cuban properties at NYP Lionscape Supply. Um I own both businesses with my brother um Joe Valdez. I want to begin by saying thank you to everyone um both staff um and neighbors. We have learned a lot throughout this whole process. Um my hope is that tonight uh we finally get to answer all the questions and um have a full understanding. So if that's okay with everyone, what I would like to do is kind of go through like the main points that seem to be a concern for neighbors and try to answer those questions. >> Excuse me. Um [clears throat] so time and time again we're being told that we uh violated the previous up. I would like to once again note that um we went we came to the city. The city never came to us. Uh we came to the city looking for guidance and unfortunately the staff at that time we did not receive guidance. It was not until there was a change in the city staff that we were correctly directed. Um [clears throat] we corrected the mistakes, addressed everything and every issue as quickly as possible. We are told that we should not bring up burden of um financial that we put into that. Um but I strongly disagree. Reason being is that um we have done not just um bringing the property back into compliance which um as uh it was previously stated we didn't even have records of it. Um but we also have um done more to make the property safer which is another big point that is being brought up. Um when we first move into the property we noticed um the situation with 36. So we um actually reached out to Mindat. We did the city was not involved. We reached out directly to Mindat. [clears throat] Um at that time when we met with them, we asked for a number of things. Uh we asked for an acceleration lane. Uh we asked to see if there was a possibility of posting signs ahead of our property to let them know that we had trucks uh entering and exiting. Um we asked uh for at least warning signs that there's um um heavy truck um trucks coming. Uh all those were denied. Uh the only thing that was approved was a right turn um into our property which we paid for. Um additionally um based on that we implemented um company policies. Um, for example, we um we didn't allow any of our trucks to turn um left on westbound um 36. Instead, they will go across and use the frontage road. Um we also went ahead and involve our insurance company. Uh we have a person assigned to follow our vehicles and conduct road supervision to better implement company policies. We additionally added cameras and GPS to our entire fleet to be able to um have record uh and make sure that our employees were actually following our policies. Um we also work with our vendors uh to make sure that um if possible to deliver products um in the time that is not that busy traffic uh for 36 to avoid that entering and exiting of those large trucks. Um, [clears throat] another point that keeps coming up is the number of vehicles and trailers at the property. Um, I would note one more time, um, we had to purchase a property in Wisconsin to move over all of our large equipment over to Wisconsin. We do not keep any, um, trucks in Lake Elmo. Um, as noted time and time again, um, and I don't know why this keeps basically being ignored, the equipment that we are keeping in Lake Elmo is mostly to just, um, help the operations of my. I want to talk a little bit about um the landscaping side of things. All we are asking is for Valdes Lancing snow removal or other business to have an address at um Lake Elmo and for our employees to come in and park their vehicles in the morning which will be under the 30 cars that is currently in the CUP and um leave at night. Um so in terms of the concern of the safety of the large equipment again we do not keep large trucks in uh Lake Elmo anymore. Um [snorts] also for Valdes and snow removal most of our equipment is kept at the site when the the job happens. Therefore, we are not coming in and out with say um truck with loaders and and you know in a trailer or anything like that. We basically hold that from our location in Wisconsin to where the job is taking place and then once that's done is brought back to our Wisconsin shop where is uh maintained in store. There's no reason why we need to bring that back to Lake Helmo. Um lastly [clears throat] I would like to talk a little bit about the comments of our business that not fitting within the community. It is quite disappointing to be honest with you especially when we have a small businesses u from the community and members of like Rock Point Church telling us how happy and grateful they are that we are part of their community. I should note that prior to the hearing, [clears throat] sorry, I should note that prior to hearing any feedback from the city, we were visiting neighbors. We were approaching neighbors. We uh we happened to move into the property during a very wet season. Some of our neighbors were dealing with uh with flood at the time. A simple comment from one of them was enough for us to visit and try to help. based on what we saw within their property um elevation, we made a rain garden in our property to try to keep more water into our own property. Say rain garden had to be filled up during the process of bringing this site back into compliance. [clears throat] We never heard a negative complaint about our business until we came to our very first meeting here. We did hear about noise complaints once or twice and those were addressed immediately. I do not understand why we are being painted as this type of business owners who only uh only only purpose is to get a final profit. We have tried time and time again to communicate with our neighbors. We invited them to an open house that we conducted um to bring up our ideas and get their feedback. We invited them to our property. Those that never happened um so they can actually see the operations. But at the end, all we keep hearing is that we should have known better and simply accept that we made a bad business decision when we purchased the property. To those comments, I will simply say that we are just simply two people that are trying to run a small business. Uh we would not we would have walked away way easy. It would have been way easier to just simply walk away and I have to deal with everything that we have been dealing with over these years. Um, with all that being said, I guess I'm just trying to understand what the big issue is about having a small business servicing a city and its surroundings. Um, all we are asking for is to be able to use a little bit more of the land that we own at the site address um, basically have the address where um, for Valdes remove our older business and allow our employees to park on site. uh within our requests we have taken into account every suggestion from the city and the neighbors and make sure that we fit every current and future uh future city plan. So um I guess at this point I'm just trying to understand what it is the big problem with what we are asking for. Thank you. >> Thank you. Uh can I ask a question? >> Just a question. I think you addressed everything. The one the one item that kept coming up was the um storage of pesticides. >> Yeah. >> Are are you planning on having those on your site or No, >> we don't we currently don't have them on site and we are not >> I would imagine if you did you would have some court some covered shed or some storage. >> There's a lot of restrictions that go along with that. A lot of permits that you have to file for that. uh we have worked for many years very closely with the University of Minnesota. We are very aware of all the details that go into pesticides and uh just as a general knowledge and everybody is aware there's a lot of organic stuff coming up into the market. There's a lot of good research being done for better pesticide. When we hear that word seems to be a very bad word these days, right? But there is a lot of science going into it. Um and as of right now we do not. >> Okay. >> Uh in fact our business none of our business applies any pesticides. Thank you. >> Any other questions? >> You guys have any questions for the applicant? >> Yeah. So, I I've been hearing a lot of concerns about the the [clears throat] traffic of heavy machinery or trucks going on to 36. How much do you think the traffic would increase with this expansion? Would there be a lot more trucks or a similar amount? What do you think? >> No. In fact, uh the type of expansion that we are asking for would not increase the traffic at all. Okay. of what we currently have. So, uh, all we are asking for is really in addition to is to have our employees to come in in the morning, park, um, hop in, uh, company truck so they can go as a group to the job site, come back at night, take their home, uh, take their car and go home. >> Okay. >> That's the only difference. >> Um, and then I, you were talking about, um, having the vendors come in on down times to bring those trucks in. Is there a time window that is not a [clears throat] nuisance to neighbors where they're coming in at, you know, 4 in the morning or like do you have a window where they >> Oh, no. We we we try to do that with within our business hours, but um if you try to drive 36 at 4 p.m. is literally impossible, >> right? >> So, we try to avoid those times for >> So, you usually do it later in the day or >> We try to do it at the beginning at the beginning of our business hours. Okay. or usually in the middle of the day is al also better around noon or so. >> Great. Okay. Thank you. >> Anything else? >> Anything council member? >> Nope. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thanks. >> Any questions for staff? Move to adopt ordinance 2026-11 approving of the proposed text amendments to section 105.12.620. Table 9-1 section 105.12.110 zoning use types classifications and section 105.12.650 site design and development standards is presented by city staff. >> Second. >> All right. Discussion. >> I I think um I have a little bit of a soft spot too for uh these agricultural uses. I you know it's I I do kind of find it funny too. We hear from residents very frequently um about how the land becomes built into houses and how frustrating that is and we have a a small business here that wants to use their agricultural land and they have to make profit on this and farming is not an easy business and and they're trying to find a way to make it work. So I I have a real soft spot for this. I I think this is a totally acceptable use of the land. Um, I know we'll talk about the conditional use next here where we can dig into, you know, what that ex exactly means with each situation. Um, but I think this fits very well. Um, with again with the environment that we live in nowadays, farming is very difficult and for people who own this land, they're trying to find ways to make that land work. And if it's not going to work, then they're going to sell and they're going to develop it and then the neighbors are going to be just as angry and there's going to be more traffic. And so I just I I I feel for you on this and I I think that this is very acceptable um a tech a very acceptable tax amendment. >> Yeah. I mean the couple concerns that I had right off the bat was the pesticides and fertilizer having that being addressed that there's not going to be any pesticides on the property or being stored there. Um, is there a way that we could have it as an amendment to like have certain pesticides or fertilizers banned or like stored? >> I think there's so much regulation behind it. >> I think when you look at >> or [clears throat] is there already regulations in place? >> Regulations in place in the state and federal level. Um, when you look at other, let's say, hardware stores that carry that or other landscaping places that do carry that, you'll find it in a covered uh, it's not touching the ground. It's on a, you know, covered ground. >> So, I don't know that that's really >> Sure. >> something that we need to It's It's already been covered. I'm pretty >> Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. It's not my expertise is fertilizers and pesticides, but um I want to make sure that was covered. And hearing that there's not going to be an increase in traffic in and out, I think that puts my worry to rest on that as well. So, I'm in favor of having [clears throat] a small business take advantage of the property that they have to keep it agriculture. Um yeah, 36 is creating a lot of issues for for uh a lot of people along the city of Lake Elmo and Grant. Um I have uh been a a uh customer of MYP for various things and when I felt younger and more exuberant to uh tackle them, uh my back yelled at me afterwards. But yeah, you do have to be careful going in. And I I do commend my for taking the extra step to get themselves an access on the eastbound that is safer than when it was because I did also go one when it was lossing the the previous owner. Um I think they try to be as good a neighbor as they can. They've corrected anything that was withstanding previously. I don't see how this is a negative impact. um of the land use and um I do want to see businesses in Lake Elmo be successful that don't negatively impact uh their surroundings. So, and I and I think in this case it's it's not a negative impact. So, I'm in favor of this uh ordinance and the the next uh resolution as well. So, I'll call the question. Move to adopt ordinance 2026-11 approving the proposed text amendments to section 105.12620 table 91 section 105.12.110 zoning use types and classifications and section 105.12.650 site design and development standards as presented by city staff. All those in favor please signify by saying I. I. >> Motion passes. Uh move to adopt resolution 2026-055 approving the request for a conditional use permit for expansion of a landscape supply sales business at the property located at 959160th Street based on the findings of fact and subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> Thank you. So on this one, I'm just going to thank staff for taking the time to come up with some language that's acceptable to the city and thank the planning commission for doing their due diligence and reviewing this previously. So and having the the uh open house on that. So or public public open >> what is the right word? The what? >> Public hearing. >> Public hearing. Thank you. I knew public was in there somewhere. >> All right. I just weren't hearing the rest. >> Yeah. Can I call the question? All those in favor uh to adopt resolution 2026-055, please signify by saying I. >> I. >> I. Motion passes. >> Move to adopt resolution 2026. >> Hang on a second. I think we have to table this >> until the next meeting for public >> for publication because we need four votes. Correct. So, I'll uh move to table resolution 2026-056 >> till the next uh city council meeting. >> Second. >> All right. >> Do we need a vote on that? Tabling what? >> Do we need to vote on that >> or do we just need a second? >> Yeah, you'll need a vote. >> Need a vote. All in favor of tableabling that resolution for publication till the next council meeting, please signify by saying I. >> I. >> All right, that passes. Third on our agenda this evening is tap and ladder machete update plan B discussion for the machete site. Mr. Stoopa, >> good evening. We're here to give an update on the machete site and also Brian is here to provide a presentation on the plan B and a discussion with the council plan B. Just a quick update. It was awarded to both uh tap and ladder machete, two teams working together for a competitive RFP process. Uh the site has been subdivided into two lots with the proposed tap and ladder in the fire station, a machete in the parks building. Uh but both owners would own a portion of a shared parking lot that would include public spaces. The project is currently in the draft development agreement stage with an anticipated closing date for Tap and Ladder in October. machete plans to close at a later date. After the July 14th special session, the development team shared that they may want to pursue a plan B for the machete site. This concept was shared with staff in January when ICE enforcement was in uh the cities and affecting the owner's other restaurants. After the surge was over, the plan was not discussed because staff believed that it was not being pursued. It was mentioned that if they wanted to um pursue it, it would have to come back in front of the council and that's why we're here tonight discussing it. Uh the development team would like flexibility to pursue either the restaurant or plan B concept, but proceed with the development agreement for the tap and ladder in the fire station building. We have a issue before you um or I guess like options what to consider after hearing the presentation from the team. basically uh either accept plan B concept and proceed with the development agreement, request more information, come back to another meeting, uh consider how it affects the terms of the agreement and schedule another special session to discuss or deny the concept and require that a restaurant be constructed as part of the agreement. So that's what we have at this point and I'll invite Brian up to give his presentation see on the screen. [clears throat] Good evening. Um, before we start talking about the parks development or parks building development, I was wondering if it would be prudent to talk a little bit about, and I didn't talk to you about this yet, Jason, uh, just talk about where we're at on the uh, development agreements. And I think there's two issues on the fire station project. Parking and um well now I'm drawing a blank on what the other one was. Um oh the valuation and I'm wondering is it because part of this discussion is a request to move forward with the fire station while we figure out or request a little bit more time to figure out the parks building development. And I don't know if we can do that until those two issues get resolved. Is that a separate conversation? >> So I think you should discuss the parking lot how this would work out and then I think that's what we're discussing tonight is moving forward with the development agreement on the fire station. >> So if you have more details about that, you don't have to talk about the valuation. >> Okay. >> You know, that is still um considered private, but if you want to just kind of talk about the parking lot and >> Yep. Okay. Nope, that's fine. So, um, one of the pieces for the development agreement was trying to put into that how many spaces would be available for public use. So, going back to our RFP submission, we had committed to leaving the parking lot open for public use and our intent really was just to not have a bunch of private parking signs put up. So, I am wondering what the city is looking for as far as what type of language to put in there regarding parking. Um, and I guess that's the the basic gist. I don't know, being able to talk through what council had in mind for that so we get a little bit better understanding and kind of make a decision on that. >> That's probably a better discussion for a workshop than a council meeting to be real honest with you. >> Okay. I'll follow up with you Jason on that then. Yep. Okay. So, um, as far as the parks building redevelopment, I mean, we're we're happy to go through and kind of talk about this. Um, I'm just going to pull up my notes real quickly here. See if I can Can I shrink this down a little bit? go full slides there. Can you guys Is everybody see that? Okay. >> Yep. >> Okay. So, we appreciate the opportunity uh to update council on the parks building. Uh I just want to reiterate, we remain committed to developing the parks building. Um tonight, we just want to provide some context that council may not have been previously uh aware of, walk through a contingency plan that we had put together back in January. um and explain where things stand today and discuss how we believe the development agreement can give the city appropriate accountability uh from from the development team while also allowing us to deliver the strongest project. So um again to be clear developing the parks building into machete is still our main focus and our main plan. Um but given the economic uncertainty and timeline for the development agreement, we had asked to have options written into the development agreement to allow some flexibility, especially in the timeline um and um consider a potential contingency plan just based on uh the conditions of that building. So, um I guess we'll talk about that on the next uh slide here, Julian. So, why we developed a contingency plan in the first place? Um so, when circumstances affecting the Okmpo restaurant group changed, we went back to the request that council and the economic development committee uh had made of us to always keep in mind some other options for the parks building given the condition of that building. So, uh, in January, as Julian will mention here in a moment, obviously, um, his eight restaurants, uh, took a an enormous financial hit, being closed for, uh, more than a month. Um, and so we at that time submitted this contingency plan to city staff. Um, and, uh, we recently found out that council had not been made aware of that. So, I think a little bit miscommunication on both our parts. um that when we had submitted that, we immediately turned our attention to the fire station, which has been moving forward with a permit set um and and put the parks building on hold so Julian and his family could not lose their eight other restaurants uh to what was happening in the cities at the time. So, um, now that we're at this point with the development agreement, I had asked the question of is there going to be some language in the development agreement for the parks building specifically for flexibility around either a timeline or uh a different plan that had council pre-approval? Um, and so that's why we're here tonight. So, Julian, I'll let you go ahead and kind of explain how things are on your end. So I mean we all know um everyone thank you for having us again. Um but as everyone knows January December uh was a very hard time here in the Twin Cities for um you know minority owned uh businesses. Uh we were in a better position so we you know were able to survive and u be in a better place coming out of it compared to a lot of people. Um you know just like one that's close by to here. I think you [clears throat] know we've all heard about it. chest. They were closed for a while. Um they got hit pretty hard. I think they're back open now. Um and me knowing how our business goes throughout the year, I thought it was going to pick up again and we were going to be in the same place we were a year ago when we were here, you know, starting all this where we were in a really good place to keep expanding. Um and now being here in August 2026, the numbers aren't there yet uh to where we were last year. So that's where, you know, this this plan came in. And uh we've been focusing on keeping everything we have right now. And it's not just uh keeping these restaurants. You know, we also have uh other properties that we had mortgages on. We're putting those up um you know, for sale. We're going to try to uh get rid of other debts that we have in order to continue to pursue this. So um that's where we are now. And that's just me being completely honest from what happened this year. and I thought it was going to pick up and um we were going to have you know be at the same level that we were last year but it's not there yet and that's why we're here asking for more time or having the u you know going through this contingency plan if if it doesn't work out but um I think that's everything >> yeah okay um so the the two points I guess the the two major points are one Um, we're hoping to have some flexibility written into the development agreement for the parks building that has a longer time frame attached to it than the fire station. One point to that is um when all of this happened and we turned our focus to the fire station um we contracted with DSGW um right behind the fire station and began the permit set process. That's taken almost six months to get to that point where we can actually submit our permit plan. So, uh, when we do close on the property, the very next day, we can actually start construction instead of having that long delay. Um, so at a minimum, the parks building development is going to have, uh, that lag behind the fire station just because of how long that process has taken us for the fire station. Um and then the other piece is in the event um this contingency plan was approved um then we had an option just in case um if there are continued issues um with the machete concept and if council does not like this idea or does not approve of this idea then we would obviously remove that and uh we would continue forward with the plans for machete um just obviously having that request for some sort of an additional timeline just to be safe um to be able to figure out um when we can actually begin that development. So, I guess with that, before we actually start talking too much about the the contingency plan, um do you want to go through and actually hear and ask questions about that plan or is um being able to include additional time in the development agreement for the parks building something that we can consider and we can just go ahead and scrap this plan and continue with what our original plan was. comments from council. >> I mean, are we having a vote on anything tonight or is this discussion? >> This discussion. >> Um, so if we did have a if we did give a longer time frame then um what was in the original agreement with the idea that we were only open to the machete restaurant being there, not this this second concept. How do I guess and maybe this is more of a legal question, but how do we protect ourselves if you know we give them an extra year to go about doing this and then [snorts] the the fire building gets developed into tap and ladder and then all of a sudden a year from now they say, "Oh, never mind. We we can't move forward with machete anymore. We don't have the funds for it." I guess legally how do we protect ourselves there or what's are we just so at that point? >> Uh Mr. Mayor, members of the council, I guess I wouldn't recommend going forward with a development agreement on the machete property at this point. Um, you might want to give them an option where they could have an option to purchase the property. So, that would give them the exclusive right to purchase that property during a certain time frame. So, they'd have, you know, like a year or two, whatever we agree upon with them to, you know, basically come in and say, "Okay, we're ready to purchase the property." And then at that point, we would enter into a development agreement with them. and then that would have a time limit on how long they need to develop the property. So that would give us and them a little bit more flexibility and then we're not wasting everybody's time by, you know, entering into a development agreement that's never going to happen. >> Okay. Thank >> there would be two development agreements just to be clear and then any mention on the original development agreement would completely separate machete from Ta and Ladder and that's one of the requests they're asking is to separate these two projects. Here's the problem I have with this whole request. The ye came out with an RFP and various teams. I think there was what five that we reviewed or more. >> Um you guys came in as a business with Tap and Ladder and Machetti. No disrespect, but when we looked at the financials on that for the city's side of the business, that me matched out. We have no idea what four alarm fund would be. At this point, I'm not interested in that at all because it doesn't fit the character of any downtown. It looks like a strip mall type thing for me. And I've gotten several comments from people that have seen this and and were uh very disappointed. Um I'm a little disappointed that we didn't hear about that there might be a contingency plan when you came up with it back in January. I don't really care whose fault it was. I just think that should have been. We've had several closed dooror meetings. This was never mentioned. Um, you know, so this proposal was presented along with other ones that were scored in a ranked scoring, right? Um, each of the proposers had time to go review the buildings. We had an appraisal. Thank you to you guys for getting another appraisal done to come back uh with the negotiations. I feel like the city has negotiated in good faith. Uh we have acquiesed on certain things and and we have it have a DA that is uh protects the city and its investment for its overall residents, not not just the people in this room. Um I do recall that the condition of the building um Mr. Compo, you mentioned, if I recall, a building that was going to be it was derelictked and you guys fixed it. So you guys had had a chance to look at the buildings and see what site they were in. So um my stance on this and and others can speak freely is that either you deliver what was in your proposal and have a DA that's agreeable or the city has to move on. that that's where I'm sitting and other people can vote differently than me, but that's just that's what was presented in front of the public and I would expect the same of other people that had proposals had they been chosen. >> So that that's really where I I sit on this at this >> I appreciate that. Yeah, thank you. >> I sit in the same spot. Um, and and I guess just to elaborate, I I think one of the big pieces for me here is the process that went into this was very elaborate and and you mentioned this, but you know, we had the commission all look at this, do that rank voting, and it was very well thought out for that specific development that we agreed on and that we had, you know, had presented to us. And so I I if we're not moving forward with that, I I just I'm not interested in propo or I'm not interested in any other concepts with this right now. >> Okay. Y >> yeah, I I [clears throat] second both of those comments. Um just honestly disappointed to see this four alarm fund. It's not even close to what was in the original proposal. And I would just expect when you're coming to the table, you have your ducks in a row of how you're going to accomplish this because I feel like I just feel like other folks had I don't I don't want to speak to what their plans were, but it just it felt more put together. This I just it doesn't feel right or put together and this um four alarm fund just does not fit the city or the downtown area. >> No, I appreciate that. And as I said, you know, we our plan is still machete. We thought through uh the request long ago of make given the condition of the building, make sure you have other ideas in mind and then obviously January happened and we had submitted that. So we're committed to moving forward with machete wanted to give options out there and I think then the request would be just come up with some sort of mechanism to make sure that there's enough time to be able to move forward with that um once the uncmp family is able to get through the uh issues that they're still being affected by from from December and January. >> Yeah. And the building we're selling is on Lake Street too where it got really hit. So doesn't make sense business-wise for me to have that instead of having something here, you know. So, um this is the plan, but this was just a contingency that we we thought of. So, the machete is the plan. >> So, just to be clear, want to move forward with the tap and ladder development agreement and then give them time >> if they if they present a time that's um uh that's agreeable with the city. It's not an open-end thing. Everything has an end time. Um if if we're not okay with that, then then we'll move on and we'll stop discussion and move to our to our next one. >> Is that a conversation with Jason separately about timelines or do >> Yeah, you can you can talk with Jason about that. That's that's appropriate. >> Okay. And um just like we did with uh negotiating on the price from from appraisals and uh we can see what's acceptable, what's not acceptable. I >> think we can work on the development agreement for Zap and Ladder and when that's done >> I I think the development agreement is one development agreement. >> One development agreement. >> Yes. In my in my mind, they can they can uh it's it was one proposal that came in just like any of the other proposals. Yeah. I think I think it gets messy with two proposals personally because I don't know what the timeline is for machete and I don't want to get caught with our pants on her ankles with not having the parks building taken care of or have an agreement in place. >> Okay. So the plan will be to have a single development agreement with a different timeline and then when we bring that to the council we'll have a you'll have to approve that right. So at that time it can be discussed. >> Is that a >> for everyone? >> Okay. >> Works for me. >> So one one agreement two timelines and we'll just coordinate on a timeline for the machete project and then we'll >> Okay, >> that works. And just so you know, if that's not acceptable, I'm we we've gone back and forth on price. And again, I'm one of five, but I'm I'm not looking to do this over and over and over again. Right. >> Understood. Yes, sir. >> Have had a lot of people ask me where are we at? When's it going to happen? >> Why hasn't anything happened yet? So, I I I second that. I do want to move this along. >> Yep. >> We do as well. Um, you know, the obviously the back and forth has has gone on for quite a long time and there's a lot of things that we have to do on our end when we hear back from city staff on we're going to need A, B, or C and we have to go to our contractors to be able to get those items. So it is the part of I guess the concern around it's taking so long is I think uh twofold because we have to have time to react to be able to get the information that's required and then working with city staff and then waiting on specific council meetings and things like that. So there's been an awful lot of progress over this last year to get to where we're at. It is it's it's taking longer. >> Mr. I we have closed meetings as soon as we can and we get back to you as soon as we can. So, um, again, time, you're on the clock. >> Yep. Okay, understood. Thank you. Y >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Thanks. >> Council reports. Mr. Jaguch is in here. He's off somewhere doing the boot scoot and boogie in Nashville, I guess. >> Obviously. Uh [clears throat] [snorts] and council member Holtz is in visit is uh enjoying vacation with his family. So um I hope people got to enjoy the national night out last night. Very uh well done. We uh I don't know who ordered the weather. Wasn't me, but that was great. Thank you for the fire department and public works staff, planning staff. Ashley and Sophia were there um answering questions, handing out uh tote bags, and um it was great to see a lot of kids running around, well attended. Um good job with the I think it's Molly, Gabby, and Nina that helped put that together. So, good job by them. Um, great to see the community come together and and enjoy a night out and learn about different organizations that are in our community. And [clears throat] so that I'll pass along. Council member Hearn, >> agree. Uh, other than that, nothing else for me. >> Yeah. What was the deal? You had some like like uh how long you could hold a medicine ball. And >> can you do it? >> No. >> It was perfect weather for us. Y'all are nice. >> Yeah. I I enjoyed watching a little kid. How heavy was that medicine ball? [cough] >> 20. [snorts] >> Okay. So, these little kids trying to hold this medicine ball up. >> Oh, no. He might have had the >> We don't have It looked bigger than 20. >> Okay. 50. >> Yeah. >> If they were struggling with it. >> Pragnus. >> So, just a little bit of an update for our September 12th um Lake Elmo event. I have six food vendors lined up. Um we have I'm going to have attendance from Lake Elmo Crearyy as well. else. They're going to have a tent there. Um, but we got international options, burgers, hot dogs. So, should be good. >> Great. Yeah. Thank you. >> I will. >> I'm saving it right now. I'll send it to you. >> Miss Miller, >> no report for me. >> Denver, >> no report. >> No report. >> No report. No report. >> I'll just throw out our date of our fire department open house on Monday, September 28th. So, we're a little ways out. We're starting our planning. We're going to have some pretty good demonstrations out there. But, >> is there going to be ice cream again? >> Uh, I've got Johnny Pops. [laughter] >> Johnny Pops. >> We're We're still working on uh we've been we've been really fortunate over the past couple years to have some local vendors come by and provide some things. So, >> I'm just saying. Johnny pops iron ice cream, man. >> I know. I know. >> Just saying. >> I don't want to disappoint. >> Mr. Stanley, >> no report. Council, >> no report. All right, with that we'll adjourn this evening meeting at 8:39. Thank you.