Curious if you are volunteering. >> Uh, yeah, actually I am. >> All right. >> I I found it a very interesting exercise. Amazing what I learned about our community and some of the issues. I I like to go through that learning here. >> It's a mess. It's such a I didn't know about it. It's why people are lost cuz it's not taught in schools. It's not taught in social studies. >> Seeing that it's 6:00, I'd like to call the meeting of the Economic Development Authority of the city of Lake Elmo to order. The first order of business is to approve the minutes of the previous meeting. >> So moved. >> Do I hear a second? >> I'll second it. >> All in favor? >> Aye. >> Aye. >> Okay. Thank you. The The second order of business is the discussion about the sale and development of the 180 acres owned by the city of Lake Elmo. I'd like to invite Community Development Director Stahlecker to make a report on this. I'd also like to let you know that if you want to speak at this meeting, please fill out your name and address sheet and bring it up. >> [clears throat and cough] >> All right. Good evening. I'm just going to give a little bit of a background cuz we're here tonight for a public hearing on the 180-acre site. So, the overview is the city owns approximately 180 acres of undeveloped land on the city's western edge. Uh, it's a result of the 2019 settlement with 3M. It's spread across three parcels and it's at an important intersection of the city over an ideal for the western part of the city. Uh, the city's plan remains to sell the land and anticipates the project taking place over three phases. That's one of the things we talked about is, you know, working with EDA staff. City Council's asked us to work on a development plan for the site. So, one of the steps was working with Urban Land Institute. So, the project goals and guiding principles that came out of that report were were to use the site to maximize community benefit, maintain the image and character of Lake Elmo through site develop through development at the site, establish design and performance standards, remain ready and responsive to the market, generate tax revenue through the development of the sites, integrate open space and trails at the site to enhance community connectivity where possible, advance sustainability and resiliency, and effectively manage the transition of the site from farmland to development with a focus on open communication and easing community concerns. So, what we currently know is that the city maintains its intention to sell the property and expects the future development to occur in three free phases with the intent to market and sell parcel one first. Um one parcel includes mixed zoning, the other two are zoned currently business park. In 2025, the city worked with ULI for recommendations on future development. So, what we don't know yet is who the future develop developer will be, uh specific building plans or site layouts, final uses for the property, or development timeline. The future land use may change over time. So, the contributions to the city, this is also from the report, is development at the study site has the potential to provide the following contributions to the community. Fiscal and economic benefits through increased taxes, increased daytime population, uh increased spending by new residents and employees at businesses located on the site can support the economic health of the city, new services such as direct new people services to Lake Elmo take the form of new jobs, retail ser- uh other services, and perhaps we get new destination for community members to enjoy. New and enhanced housing options, this is specific to parcel three. Housing at the site should cater to different life cycle choices that um than those currently available in the city. These could include one-floor living options or smaller homes with less associated maintenance. The panel also recognized that smaller homes and smaller lots may also provide the community with new price points that could cater to first-time home buyers, young professionals. And also keep the gateway to Lake Elmo, the location of the site so close to Oakdale, its position as a gateway to the city and it should serve as a welcoming point to the community. Also, green space network, the city's park and trails are important community amenities and trails and connectivity across the site can help fill some of the gaps currently experienced in the city's green network. And then they discussed how it could connect to the village. So, it could be economic development um benefits, uh improvements to the site could help feed the energy of the village as a destination, connect people to the site. Um it also physical benefits, the distance between the study site and the village can be covered by an enjoyable bike ride or healthy walk given the opportunity to use trails. So, the idea would be to create trails from this site to the new park to the village that was talked about by the panel quite a bit. This is a draft that they created in a couple days. And this uh just a basic outline that aligns with [snorts] the land use. So, parcel one is the parcel of the south by the tracks. It is roughly 20 acres and it does have a sewer connection currently. Uh parcel two does not, as you know, have the sewer connection. It's 50 acres. Uh the city is working on the study and the the engineering plan to bring the sewer um under the railroad tracks into parcel two. And then parcel three is really the mixed-use parcel, uh 100 over 100 acres and sewer is not available. The plan will be for that roadway to go through and run the road and sewer just north of the tracks and then bring it up to the connection point where you see that roundabout. So, the timeline is just the settlement 2019-2020. Work to um you know, zone the land business park with some commercial residential public facilities. Public Works is at the site. And there's some parkland that's currently guided. And in fall of 2025, we were with the Urban Land Institute for guidance or recommendations on how best to approach the project. Winter 2025, we adopted the TAP report. It was completed. And at this point, we're in the community engagement process. And June 30th, we have an open house. Uh May 2026, we are issued the RFP for the broker to market and sell the property that would be um started in the fall of 2026. So, we had 12 public comments prior to um the meeting. I'll go ahead and summarize them. Um Matt Henke from 8011 39th Street North was mainly concerned with traffic and the high speeds. Uh would like to lower the speed limit and add a four-way stop sign on Lake Jane Trail and Ideal. Julie and Tom Pierce at 2769 Imperial Avenue North uh were concerned with the level of noise, traffic, light pollution, people, potential crime, loss of natural um areas that support wildlife. They want less development, less like Woodbury. Uh we have limited water and the negative tax implications. Uh what they don't want built on the 180 site, no big box, no air else, no high-density housing, apartments, townhouses, no bars or restaurants, no commercial buildings. A more appropriate use would be rural housing, single-family homes, parks with green space, uh forested boulevards, ponds, walking bike trails, country living near the city. Then Sue's Young from 3735 37th Street North basically was concerned about noise and more apartments. And Bouchek 2301 Legion Avenue concerns regarding future water costs, why the city didn't use the site for the baseball complex, and how the revenue from the sale will be spent. Uh Jeff Strong, uh to understand the housing development is going to occur, but do not believe that more brick and mortar and heavy commercial is necessary in the parcel. Wants that he's referring to parcel three. Want to keep development parcel one and two. Wants natural and park buffers. Doesn't want the development to connect roads and trails to existing neighborhoods. Wants more parks and fields. Mike Fritz, 30 30 33 Inwood Avenue North. Say there's a severe water infrastructure strains, escalating utility costs and property tax burdens, increased traffic congestion and road funding demands, erosion of community character. Dan Gerding, Wildflower Shores, wants future development or use of this land to be consistent with the safety, environmental integrity, and overall character of the surrounding neighborhood. Kyle Blongs, uh resident of 38th Street, has concerns about sound pollution, light pollution, wildlife impacts, loss of green space. Would like the land preserved as a natural space conservation area. Mike Anderson, 82 29 38th Street North, uh stated he would please keep Lake Elmo as rural and open um open space as possible. We are against developing the parcel of land situated near Ideal and County Road 14. Like fields, soybeans, corn are what we want. Robert Dew, 30 36 Inwood Avenue North, shared that overall he's in support of the city presenting these properties to the development um community to get high-quality development completed in the city and get them on the tax rolls. With specifics about parcel one, um shared preferences about land use in the staff report, shared that industrial buildings up to 250,000 square feet seem appropriate for the site if the market supports it without major subsidy, and the heavy traffic can be managed both in the short and long term. Stressed noise and light lighting importance adjacent to residential areas. Shared concerns about workforce housing and questions why it would be a good location for it. Uh shared notes on the idea of workforce housing, explains that this is um if this is the intention moving forward, wants to know what AMI percentage uh if that needs to be established with guidelines and RFP issuance. Um shared concerns about comp plan alignment, shared thoughts on expanding public works facilities to parcel one if parcel three is the most marketable from a retail standpoint. Curtis EDA and >> [clears throat] >> uh city council to avoid making decisions based primarily on short-term market opportunities and shares concerns about multi-family housing as it could limit city's long-term interest. Bill and Lynn Brozak, Wildflower Shores, shared support for feedback submitted by neighbors of Wildflower Shores. Shared that they understand the opportunity that the development presents, but also concerns about safety, environment, character of the surrounding neighborhood. Shared concerns about multi-story multi-family housing that was included in the ULI tap report because of the traffic and rural aesthetic of the location at the entrance to Lake Elmo. Debbie Anderson, 8229 38th Street North, shared her preference for making something special on the land as the gateway to Lake Elmo. Open space, ball fields, dog park, open says open space. Shared strong preference for buffer zones and shared noise concerns. So, these are our 12 public comments that were received. Uh at this point we want to move into the public comment and accept these into the public comment. >> I'd like to accept the comments that uh Director Stahuber has uh listed here and uh add them to the list of what people want to say at this meeting. I I would like to open the public hearing uh on this topic. Do Do I need a a vote? >> You need a You need a vote. >> I I move that I move that we open the public hearing. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> Aye. >> Okay. With We are [clears throat] open. Now we have two people so far that have turned in if if if you wish to speak, please turn turn in your sheet and we'll put it do them in order. We have time for about seven people if each takes six minutes. The city council has ordained that public comments are no more than six minutes at these meetings. So if you want to speak, bring bring up your sheet and we'll put you in line in line. The first person uh is Andrew Wolfram. >> Name and address. >> Please state your name and address for the records. >> Hi, my name is Andrew Wolfram, uh resident at 8308 Stillwater Boulevard North, uh about 100 ft from parcel one. Uh when this project was first presented to us and we went to the public comments when the builder that originally, I think in 2021, was it? That was going to be developing the site. Uh they had done studies with traffic and impacts to the area, but they failed to account for the increased volume of commercial truck traffic. I am a truck driver and by putting warehouses and commercial use development on that corner, in particular, we are going to be increasing the volume of truck traffic, especially coming off of 94. Just to avoid the 694 fork County Road 14 area. Um currently, Ideal, I believe, is a 7-ton road in the spring with road restrictions. We have a 50-mph speed zone. Having an increase of commercial truck traffic coming from 94 north on Inwood to Stillwater, taking the left turn to go over towards partial parcel one off of Stillwater and Ideal, is going to be a significant impact to the safety of anybody that is on that road. Whether it's speed limit, whether it's deterioration of the road, whether it be um the noise pollution. Um part of the reason why we like Lake Elmo is because it is rural. We really didn't want to live next to big warehouses and industrial developments. Um if we could look at something knowing that you guys want to keep the gateway to Lake Elmo and the aesthetic of the community, that kind of goes in the face of what Lake Elmo was. So, those are my concerns and a lot of safety issues, particularly for coming out of my driveway in particular on Stillwater, that this increase of traffic is going to have a significant negative impact, and I'd [snorts] like to ask that if moving forward we do this, if we can talk with the county about reducing the speed limits in particular, um and making sure that those are posted and improving the intersections, so that they are able to accommodate larger vehicles making all of the turns without going over the curbs or potentially running into other vehicles because the corners there are not conducive to semi trucks with trailers making the corners and they are going to follow GPS and Google will send them that way. So, that's what I have. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Wolfram. Your Your comments are appreciated. The The next speaker is uh Robert Dew. >> Is that my buzzer already? Robert Dew, I live at uh 3036 Inwood Avenue. Um I did submit uh some comments for the record, so I'll uh maybe just summarize the highlights. Um Um I I'm I might be I might be rare with my neighbors. I do think that this I am supportive of the development. I don't think that leaving land sitting there off the tax rolls makes any sense. Um I do think that we should find what's right for I I think the overall message that I would have um really I have a number of comments regarding parcel one, but if there's one takeaway from the whole thing um my concern is that we get this RFP out for the brokers. Um there's no doubt in my mind that you know, the brokers are going to bring in half a dozen apartment people right out of the gate. Easy delivery. It's quick. It's ready. Um I I'm I'm really concerned about rushing to judgment. I don't think that workforce housing on site one makes any lick of sense. Uh in the report the ULI report uh it mentioned it's a good site for workforce housing, but never explained why they think that. I could probably stand here for 45 minutes and tell you why it's not. Um my other concern about workforce housing in particular is uh workforce housing if I'm not mistaken is a term that was actually derived by the Urban Land Institute and it's an ill-defined term. It it it could workforce housing could be anything from a million-dollar condo to uh $20,000 a year rent on an apartment. And so if we go down that path of workforce housing whether it's on site one, parcel one, or whether it's anywhere in the city, I would highly recommend that we put some real parameters about what we as a city want that to be. Um at before it goes out to the street. So, you know, what if we're setting uh AMI thresholds, whatever it is we're doing, uh make clear to the development community what that product needs to be. Because if we don't, what winds up happening, proposals roll in, and then we wind up saying, "Well, this is the best one we got. Let's take it." We put it in there, and that that parcel in particular, parcel one, being on the far edge of the city, I can see that being forgotten out there. It really doesn't make sense to put workforce housing, or any sort of housing, quite frankly, on that parcel. It needs to be incorporated with other housing areas and amenities that come with it, and connected to the city. Um as far as the rest of um I I I did have some comments in here that uh you're welcome to read later regarding what the comp plan said, future land use plan said, versus what is being proposed and put out there. I do see some conflict. I did see an updated future plan uh future land use plan on the website on the city's website. I don't know if that's been formally adopted and incorporated into the current comp plan. Uh I don't think so. So, uh the the 2040 comp plan clearly states that there will not be any workforce housing put in uh rural residential. Uh and it will be kept in the MUSA, and the MUSAs are down there. I I see in the current plan, I don't know if that's been approved or not, that that those areas have been designated as a new MUSA, if I'm not mistaken. That's That's what I read. But, they're still zoned industrial. So, I There's some zoning There's a lot of conflict between the documents. And so, I would encourage you to maybe go back, take a look, and understand what that says. We can't say one thing here, "Hey, this is our plan, our vision, our strategic our strategy," and then go a different direction. That That tends to upset people. So, the last The last point I would make I would encourage you to read my comments if you have the opportunity. The The last point I would make is having You know, I spent 14 years on an EDA as in a city, so I I understand the challenges and some of the things that come up. I look at our current public works building. I I can only envision that they're probably facing demands that I'm unaware of and they'll certainly face future demands as our city continues to grow. As a former contractor and developer, there's no doubt in my mind that that corner where that public works facility sits now is probably one of the most valuable pieces of dirt we're talking about. I think that that parcel one is an ideal spot for a new public works facility. You've got You've got room to control the traffic. Traffic's going to be a big problem given the adjacent uses. You can control it cuz it's your people. You You've got opportunity to obscure that whole area and conduct public works types activities that you know, make noise and people don't want to look at and you got quite a bit of an expansion space over there. I did suggest also I didn't run the math, but I'm sure you can make up It's going to be a big construction cost for sure, but I'm quite confident that whatever you can get for the corner of that parcel where the existing facility sits will pay for a great deal of the construction cost for a new facility. So, I would strongly encourage the council to take a look at that. I also looked at city-owned parcels. I didn't see any unless you guys are hiding something somewhere. >> [laughter] >> I didn't see another spot within the city that would make sense for relocation without acquisition costs and everything else that comes with that. So, I would strongly encourage it the council look at that. >> Mr. Weaver >> That's my real buzzer. Thank you for your time. >> Thank you for your comments. They They will be be recorded. Uh the next person uh is Jennifer Stathman. I'm sorry if I didn't say your name right. Stathman? >> I'm left-handed, so Jennifer Stathman. You probably can't read my handwriting. Um I'm a resident at 3857 Ironwood Trail North. I'm the HOA president for Wildflower Shores, um which is the roughly 24-house development that is just east of parcel three. Um so, I've attended a couple of these meetings. Um a lot of the comments that you saw shared here are from neighbors within our development. Most of the neighbors in our development have been there for 10-plus years. I myself am on my 10th year here as a Lake Elmo resident. Couple things I just want to make sure are covered. First, um want to thank another opportunity. We've been giving a lot of feedback, whether it be in sessions last uh last year, live, via email, this forum. Um I want to continue that discussion live before things are decided. I'd like to make a couple comments. There's a There's a quote around Gateway to Lake Elmo, and it's something that uh during the ULI presentation last year was a comment, and I I feel like it's getting a little misconstrued. So, the comment that was actually given around Gateway to Lake Elmo was, and it came from one of our neighbors who wasn't able to be here tonight, but it was as you drive into Lake Elmo, as you come east on 14, it feels like the lights shut off, right? The lights shut off. It gets It's nice and dark. It's a quiet community. We keep a lot of the the um suburban sprawl kind of stuff behind us, right? That's [snorts] what we talk about when we're talking about as a neighborhood and as a community that is how it was defined in the ULI uh presentation. So, I want to make sure that it's clear that that idea of sort of the light shutting off and the quietness of coming into Lake Elmo and leaving what's left behind. That was actually the intention of that comment just to bring them us back to that that study last year. Another point that I want to make it make sure is included which I've not seen represented for Wildflower Shores is on the west and south part of our HOA. We are in a watershed district and there has been zero discussion with ULI or any of the reports on what that means for what building and buffers need to go to on the eastern part of that parcel three. So I'd like to make sure that whatever ends up happening with parcel three, again, we are in a watershed district, we have folks from Washington County coming to our neighborhood twice per year to evaluate the water quality and all the native plant life. That is one of the reasons how and why that parcel was built back in the year 2000, 2001. So I'd like to make sure that it's on the record that whatever happens with parcel three really need to be thoughtful in bringing in the right people from an environmental perspective to make sure that the city's not encroaching on something that the county and ultimately the state deemed necessary. So with that, I'm representing the neighborhood and want to thank you for your time. >> Thank you for your comments. Thank you. The next person that signed up to speak is Lucian Justin. Hi there everyone. I just I'm a retired banker. I live at 30 3918 Ironwood Trail North. Um So again, the the eastern neighborhood adjacent to parcel three. Um again, a retired banker and I've not seen any numbers around this these development proposals. I mean, you know, I keep hearing that, you know, increase the tax base. To what projected revenues? I keep hearing, you know, development. Well, have we had any any sense from anyone at all, any commercial real estate folk, about what the value of that property is? You know, I understand that the city wants to sell all three parcels of land, but what what's the offset to selling that, you know? What's what's the intention for the the money that's we the city would get for selling the these properties? I've I've seen no sort of financial forecast. No, okay, this will increase our tax revenue by X amount of dollars over time. And have have any of those kind of studies been done is my question. And I think I'll leave it at that. Thanks. >> Thank you very much. Are there any other people who wish to speak? Please state your your your name and address. >> Sure. Zack Diesen 8030 38th Street North. And I'm not here to uh necessarily just have a discussion. I just want to ask some questions about how we got here, right? So, just got curious, is this a community open house? No, it's not, right? So, on the discussion, the timeline, there was supposed to be a public house before this even happened, right? >> This is a public hearing to to to get input from the community. >> Okay, understood. Just want to make sure that we're not like slipping off the timeline that's on the Lake Como website. So, um also, which city council meeting was the ULI study approved and the proposed sale of the property approved? Is there a specific date we can note for the record? >> There is. You'd have to look it up. I don't remember it. But >> looking it up. I couldn't find it. So, I just That's why I'm here to have the discussion. So, I'm just curious if that is the >> This is for you to make comments. We can't really respond very much to your comments, but >> We had 6 minutes. But if you can't find it, we can find it maybe later. Okay, that's fine. We can find We can find it later. When was the city aware that this property was available after the 3M settlement? Was that like 2019 or 2020 or earlier? Okay, just making sure we're on the same path here. Um by expanding our city's tax base, do we have an idea of how much tax relief our residents will see receive? We have a lot of residents that are on fixed income, right? A lot of elderly residents that are on a fixed income. Do we have any idea of how much expansion of this tax base will help our current residents? Anybody want to fill that question respond back? >> This is not a question and answer session. This is for you to comment. >> Uh well, well, my comments are questions and I would hope that the people that are here can respond back to these questions because these are questions that are affecting our whole community. Okay? All right, so we're just running the clock down, that's fine. Um did the city ever consider this property for the Central Park of Lake Elmo or is that not in the same timeline? Because we got this property for free from 3M and now we have a dueling proposal for an RFP for the Central Park of Lake Elmo, that's the Sunfish Lake property. I mean >> All I can recommend is that you go back and look at the history or you can call us afterwards. I'll be happy to to talk to you afterwards. >> I'm trying to address the timeline, that's what I'm just trying to figure out. It's like, you know, we knew this property is going to be available. There's a moratorium with Oakdale because they were building the Willow Brook, right? They built the Willow Brook property, great. The city went out and bought property for this this RFP for the public works that they were sorry, the public parks property because there was a study done in the interim to find out that, "Hey, we don't have enough green space in Lake Elmo, right? We don't have enough parks, playgrounds. We don't have enough facilities for the residents that live here." Should I run the clock down? All right. How do we anticipate handling the the additional water constraint on our current contaminate contaminated and restricted water system? Do we have any idea how we're going to handle the additional water that's going to be required for this build? This person's not answering questions. Okay. I had a question from a a fellow neighbor. They were concerned about the traffic. I I I guess this is just uh not going to be like quite the forum I was hoping for, but um we we live near Ideal Avenue. It's extremely busy now. We have a ton of residents across the street now with the Willow Brooks. If we add more residents, there's a lot of traffic happening on Ideal right now that's speed is 50 mph. I have two young [clears throat] kids. We're very concerned about the speed of Ideal Avenue, the water from Lake Elmo. I'm not sure what other city you get a water report for that has contamination of PFAS in it. I mean, that's that's I mean, I'm glad we get the report, right? But, the fact that we had General Atomic General Dynamics, sorry, doing a study for PFAS in Lake Elmo. That's great, right? Awesome. You know what they did? They were doing a study for how much PFAS they could condense and burn off. They were not filtering anything in our system for our residents. None of that had any benefit to our residents in Lake Elmo. Sorry, I'm I'm getting a little frustrated. Just I have two young kids. We filter the water twice. Our kids are drinking the water. I'm drinking the water. My wife drinks the water. So, it's a little bit perturbed that we're going to try and build more property and expand our residences when we don't even know how we're handling the water in Lake Elmo. Do you guys drink the water in Lake Elmo? Do you have filtration systems in your homes? I'm I'm trying I'm just I'm curious. I'm I'm very And again, I guess this just isn't the forum I'm looking for, but how do you guys handle it? You guys live here, right? I mean, just Oh, I'll just give my time back to somebody else. Thanks. >> Thank you for your comments. They will be recorded. Does anybody else wish to speak? If not, I'm going to call the public hearing >> I need to take a motion. >> Who will make a motion to close the hearing? >> So moved. >> I second. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> Aye. >> Aye. >> Public hearing is closed. The next order of business is >> Wow. >> Quick question. So, we do have an opportunity to provide feedback at this point. We do. Um >> Okay. >> But I should say that the just for the for those watching, if we provide feedback or answers, if we have a back and forth with staff, it it's This isn't a forum, per se. I totally get the question. Um My time's up. >> Time's up. >> So, I I totally get the question, but we do have an opportunity because you are here. You took the time to to be here. So, we do have an opportunity. We We're not going to address all of them based upon either my knowledge or your knowledge or staff's knowledge. Like, some of these like, I know I don't know offhand the date that you all I contract was done. I know it was done here in public in a recorded meeting. But as an example, do we have that easily documented or is it something where we can we can provide maybe a a list of answers afterwards in the next week or two to say, "Look, here Here are big questions that were raised." Valid questions. The answers are available. They are online. They're in our agendas. They're in our minutes. They're in our videos. But as a resource, you know what? People came and asked, so is that something we can put together? And by we, I don't mean we. >> Yes, we can. There's certain >> I'll say. >> There's certain questions that it can easily >> Okay. And and I can say that I have kids as well. Traffic is a valid concern across the board. Anytime a development comes in, whether it's housing, whether it's business, whether it's a change of use, uh traffic studies, if it's a big enough scale, which this concept would be, traffic studies are required. And those are two county roads in which, you know, it obviously there's city roads to the side, but development often will then be required to pay for changes when they are required. Um but it's based upon those studies. I can't say uh how the impact would be to semi-truck traffic, but that is a valid concern. I told Where'd you That is a great concern. I wouldn't have thought of that. So, thank you for bringing that forward. [clears throat] I'm also not a traffic engineer, and I know better than to act like one. I do know what a traffic engineer nearby. But that that is the type of thing, yes, that information is necessary and is required whenever there is a a development that is proposed, and based upon that information, changes are made. That would be as an example when the new elementary went in, changes to that county intersection were required based upon the traffic studies. That's why there's a stoplight now and why there's discussions as to whether that's long-term a traffic light or a roundabout. Because of that because of those data points, because of the concerns that are brought forth. Um but yeah, there are many great questions here. Number one, the speed and traffic flow just from a process standpoint, what does that look like? Well, that is something that occurs at this stage as traffic study occurs. I probably shouldn't answer the water topic cuz I will go for an hour. Um because that is a very valid concern and it is something that we're all asking. The The shortest answer is all the water that is on a city line meets health standards. It is legally safe. Now, one can say, well, what's legally safe? Do you drink it? Yes, I drink it. >> I drink it. >> I Yeah. I My kids drink it. We are also in the process of building a Well, actually, we already have operationalized a filtration on well number two. All three of our city wells essentially blend. There's a filter on well number two cuz the water from that well needs a filter. We are in the process of looking for land and building a plant for the southern part of the city, somewhere along 10th Street, in which that filtration plant then has a capacity to also have additional wells there. But again, we haven't built it yet, but we're in the process of using the 3M settlement dollars. But the water is legally safe. People are free on their own to add additional filtration. I know many neighbors in my neighborhood that do that. Absolutely, that if that's a concern you have, yes, do it. GAC filters are a great tool. There's also reverse osmosis, and there's also ion exchange. Um Yeah, there's several several questions here. I Buffers is a part of the Oh, the comp plan. Yes, the comp plan has been changed. That question came up. So, on the website, that future map is what is in place. So, the zoning has been updated to be business within a buffer of housing and park space along the northern parcel. But that's that's the current. That is also something we have a 2050 plan coming up as well. But we also have this process. So, the Many of you were here, and I recall Ms. Stoltzman, where'd you go? I I recall the comments beforehand from your neighborhood when this came up in 2021, when it came up in 2022. Your involvement has been critical and helpful. That's why those buffers exist in that comp plan. And I I fully expect from an economic development side, I certainly wouldn't want to be pushing for something that expands the tax base to help all of us that has a substantial negative impact on others. I I don't want that. Um but I yes, I think this is a great opportunity to say what what are some of the answers we can put forth as resource because these questions are going to continue. If you raised them now, someone else can be raising them 2 weeks from now. So if we can help to spread that information based upon the feedback and questions you raised, that is a value gained. So thank you for that. >> I believe there was a question related to numbers. Was that Mr. Johnston? So page 24 on the um ULI report that's on the planning depart- or the community development planning page. If you go in there, there it's it's all listed there. I mean they're they're broad in context, right? Given in the that it's broad in general, but but there are some numbers there, sir. And I certainly um understand the gentleman's frustration from not being able to answer questions during the speech and if if somebody has his name or number, I certainly have no problem reaching out to him and talking to him and taking more time to um and that goes for anybody really. If there's questions, feel free to to give a call. So. >> Questions Can I ask that now? >> Well, we >> Is there a little bit more of a back and forth? That's something We just We can still submit our comments and >> You can still submit your comments and then staff will respond. Um yeah, but also I think my my name and number is and council member all the council members' names and numbers are listed on the website, so. >> And anytime you want to talk to Tony, go to Sunfish Lake uh visitor center. >> [laughter] >> We have the nature center at Sunfish Lake Park. Come and see me. Don, do you have any comments? >> No, thank you. >> Yeah, I have a few items and some questions for staff. Let's start there. So, there's a pub there's a public opinion survey. I've seen that out there. I've been sharing that with my neighbors and I encourage everybody in the room to do that as well. How much longer does that survey run for? >> That closes July 3rd. >> Okay, good. So, for the record, the survey closes July 3rd. I I think I've seen it in the public on the Facebook group for the city. I guess email in if if we need that get access to it. It's a really great way for residents to provide feedback. And then, do we have a date? I see it says TBD for the community open house. So, that's a really going to be a good back-and-forth forum 4:00 to 6:00 p.m. scheduled June It says June 30th. Any updates there? >> Yep, that's correct. June 30th, 4:00 to 6:00 here in the community center. >> Great. So, yeah, for the record, that's a great forum for the open house and some discussion which we are eager to take in. Um [snorts] my comments for the record are the the move of the public works building was an interesting one. Not something I thought about. So, appreciate that comment. I don't know if that's something worth exploring further. >> The comment at the at the ULI discussion was that the cost of moving the public works building and rebuilding it is is a lot higher than you'd get than the extra value you'd get for that land. >> Yeah, even including the future the present value future tax increases. Okay. Thanks for clarifying that. And then, there was a public comment from this gentleman. You mentioned a lot about parcel one and building residential there. I just wanted to clarify there wasn't Maybe there you're referring to parcel three. >> It was parcel one. There's a idea to do workforce housing on parcel one as an option. >> Okay. Got it. Okay. Sounds good. That's all I have. >> Okay. >> I'm excited for future comments and open houses and engagement. >> Okay, I'd like to just make a a short comment. It is my understanding, and I could be wrong, that the reason that the city of Lake Elmo has this land is as partial compensation for for harm done by the by the materials that were deposited by Twin City Amoco. And that we had uh spent the city of Lake Elmo spent quite a bit of money for water remediation with no chance of getting it back until we received this land. The purpose of selling this land and and putting it into the tax base is to ameliorate a problem we have, and that is that our debt service is 31% of our expenses, which is extremely high for for a city in in Minnesota. We need to somehow pay off the debt, which is lar in large part due to the the money that was spent to fix fix the water problems. If that land were to sit there or become a park, that doesn't bring bring in any money. So, uh it would help everybody. And and I you can't say it's going to lower taxes cuz the taxes never get lower. But, uh definitely the reason for selling it off and the reason for needing to sell it off is part of the purpose why we received the land. >> Just quick question for us >> for discussion, but just those are the kind of things that I'm thinking of. You're saying, you know, we want to we want to sell this land to lower debt that the city had. >> And to increase the tax that comes from it cuz they're not paying any tax now. >> Okay, but again, I'll I'll look at the information that supposedly is is there now, but from from a numbers perspective a lot of that just doesn't make sense. I mean there are ways to refinance it. There are there are other things you can do that will will perhaps lower the city's expenditure to to service the debt. >> Okay, well I would like to I'd like to invite you to come and have a have a one-on-one discussion because we don't want to take the because we still have some agenda items we have to cover. But thank you for your comments. Are we ready to move on to the next agenda item? Yeah. Okay. The next agenda item is new business and communication. We'd like to ask Director Stopper to give a report here. Under old city hall update. >> I'll just run through the these items. Um, old city hall update we have a workshop in July to talk about that. So we are engaged a broker just to do a quick broker price opinion, look at rental prices for the site. Um Just kind of what kind of uses could go there and what makes sense. And then we also engaged our landscape architect to draw, you know, a new plan for the site. Basically adding a parking lot if we want to keep the old city hall and then also the other idea was to demolish the city hall and do a parking lot, right? So we're going to bring that to the workshop and go from there with the city council in July. That's the next step on on that project. The next item here is the sale of the old fire station parks property. We are just waiting on a on a counter offer. We have a 714 closed session for that site. So we'll just continue to work on getting an agreement signed. Uh, the solar landfill update. I will just basically give in your packet a letter. It's not a letter, it's a memo that I created. It was requested the last meeting. I had emailed Michael Howland from Xcel. So, I I've been emailing him a few months ago to see if they would enter into a power purchase agreement on the site. And essentially, the way that works is um they basically only enter into power purchase agreements with other privately owned companies that build and own the solar site. So, they have an agreement to purchase the power from them. And they generally are looking for a couple hundred acres at the minimum. And this is only I believe 47 acres. So, it's a little too small. Um generally, they like the idea in general, but you know, it just doesn't really fit what they do at all. So, >> So, so, so what you're saying is that we'd have to use a different business model if we're going to put solar power there. It could might be uh community solar garden, or it might be some other legal way of setting it up, but it can't be direct power. >> Yeah, it's just in the memo direct cuz it was a question just uh I response, the comments I had from Mike emailing him just to put that on the record that Xcel this isn't a project for Xcel >> Okay, thanks for clarifying that. And the the other the other two questions on that were the financial and the discussion was the possibility of finding out whether the the legislature could do something for us in not this session, of course, but in the next session. >> So, >> And we wanted to talk with the our lobbying firm. And I'm I don't know when that would be. So, I'd like to make sure we get that on the agenda for the next meeting with the lobbying firm. And I I also heard back from Hans Nevius, who is the the director of closed landfill activities for the for the MPCA. And he basically said that after the legal and financial barriers are cleared, then he can this he gave an explanation of how they would get involved after that. So, then that is a third thing. The actual design and and permitting would come after the legal and financial are taken care of. So, thank you very much for your work on that. >> Thank you. >> And then Jason, before you go to the next I I I go back to the the status of the sale of fire station and park properties. You said something like July 14th, I think you What is the >> There's a closed session on July 14th scheduled and that's with the council. >> Yep. >> To discuss the offer. So, anytime we get an offer we go into closed session. It's just the council and staff. >> Now, I I think EDA next EDA meeting is August 18th. Will we be getting anything before the eight our next meeting after the closed session? >> You should have hopefully, I mean, we should have an answer on the fire station by August and we can have a report. >> Yeah, but okay. All right. >> I mean, the idea would be to have, you know, development agreement signed by that point. Like that's that'd be ideal. >> Okay, thank you. >> The only other last item is just that we were featured in Business View magazine. Uh they interviewed a few of us, interviewed the mayor, city administrator, and myself. Uh really highlighted why Lake Elmo is a great place to live. So, it's on our website if you want to check it out. Um you know, you can find that on our website. And we have next meeting August 18th and then October 20th. Any questions? >> Thank you very much. >> All right, thank you. >> Are Are there any other points that someone would like would like to make? >> I just want to reinforce again that survey and you asked about it, it's open till July 3rd for those watching, those in the audience. June 30th, 4:00 to 6:00 here for open forum discussion, chat, free pizza paid for by the mayor. >> [clears throat] >> I'll take that as a no. But, please please come. >> I would never do so. So, those those are And then after um Director Stover, after that June 30 day and after the survey, what can we expect? Or what can the public expect into July and August in terms of additional steps down the road? >> All right, so contracting with a broker, that would be a next step. And then also having a report out of all the everything that we've heard from the open house community engagement, um public hearing. Putting that in a small report and bringing that to the council. And then from there, I mean, I think what the questions are the same questions we've had from the beginning. It's kind of locking in land use, and it's talking about buffers, it's talking about really the specifics. Cuz we need to give the broker clear guidance when they go to move forward with this, what the expectations are, design guidelines, and things like that, so. >> Thank you. >> I have I have one item. I was I was a present at the last meeting. Don, you raised the comments, and it was a good discussion about the the Fury property. I don't know if there's been any updates on there, any further thinking on movement to that property within the city or uh the city uh procuring that property. Do you have any updates there, any further thinking there? >> I haven't heard anything myself. >> Okay. >> I am not aware of any changes, any knowledge. I know nothing on that one. I I mean, the last I knew is that the owner was looking at potential sales to various people, but I also I don't believe any of that happened. Um I don't believe Fury has had any additional conversations with the community center group, either. At least not that they've made anyone aware of. >> [clears throat] >> it. Unless staff is aware of >> The the update on on the Fury site specifically, some people have called about it trying to figure out if it would work for them for their project. And sometimes things just don't work out based on the questions. Um So, I haven't heard anything in terms of of the site or anybody moving. We haven't had concept plans or anything like that in terms of people trying to move forward to purchase it. So. >> Yeah, I would just voice like I think that idea it's maybe worth exploring purchasing that as a city. Like I don't know if if I'm super hot, I'm not super cold on the idea, but I think it's interesting. And it's it I would be curious what that looks like and if there's a vision. I can't remember if it's on our work plan for this year or into next, you know, thinking about interesting properties in the city. I'm thinking about the future residents, thinking about the future tax base, everything all the good discussion we just had we just held. That's my comments for the record. >> So, there has been no contact between us, city staff, council, whatever, and the Fury ownership. Is that true? >> I talked to I've talked to the broker. I haven't talked to the owner. So, they are continuing to market the site and still list it. >> Can you tell us approximately what they would charge for that site? >> I think it's listed >> It's listed. >> around 5 million. >> 5 million. >> Thank you. >> Which is not too far different from the proposed agreement for the community center to buy the school, which I believe is 4.7. Including the playground. >> It is something if you want to ask and consider the council to take it up in a workshop or to explore it. See if anybody >> Yeah, can I make that recommendation now? Like to >> Yeah. >> Okay. Yeah, I would like the I would like to make the recommendation of the council to explore the purchase of the Fury property for sale, the viability of it to benefit the city and all the residents within. I think that'd be a good use of time and and and brainpower, especially with the NEDA meeting not until August 18th. >> And to clarify your recommendation and for those watching, your recommendation isn't for the city to own and operate a dealership. Your recommendation is for >> for uh purchasing it and and looking at what what is the best benefit and and use. You know, taking in public comments for that space, but to redevelop not into a storage facility or a car dealership. >> And we'll cast that as a motion. You move to ask city council to >> Yes, I I would like to request some to motion that the city council explores the purchase of the Dodge Fury property not as a car dealership, but something there. >> I'll second I'll second >> Thank you. >> All in favor? Well, I I I guess there's we could actually have a little bit of discussion. We have a few more minutes. Would Would it Would it be necessary to to float a bond issue or have a referendum to spend that kind of >> That would be in the council discussion. >> It would be in the council discussion. Okay. >> Yeah. And uh be part of what staff would review uh as what would be needed to make that what could happen. Uh timelines that it would take. Uh those sorts of things. I mean, I think you got to do the homework before you can jump to a yay nay situation, but I tend to agree that um exploring the idea is is uh is a good idea. >> I think if we look back 30 years from now to have not at least looked into it. Again, not whether it's right or wrong to do it. That's a whole other but at least to do the due diligence. I mean, there was a plan in 2008 where that entire site was a road and Lake Alamo Avenue essentially did a slight northwest turn. >> The one The one thing I'll just throw caution at is that, you know, as a city and with staff and with some people in the commissions, we do have some strategic initiatives that the city is going in this this would be not necessarily in line with those strategic initiatives. So, we would need to consider staff's time and availability to put the effort uh that's probably required for that. Um so not saying you know, that that would be a discussion for council to make with staff. Yeah. Seeing how much can be taken on. >> Yeah. >> It's an interesting wild card. >> Is there further discussion on this motion? >> I don't have any. >> Okay, I'll call for a vote then. All in favor? >> I. >> I. >> Okay, the motion passes to ask council to look into this possibility. >> All right. >> Okay, if there are no other comments, I'm going to adjourn the meeting at 6:54. >> Thank you, Tony.