This partial payment is vastly made up of stored materials. These were the materials that the contractor has purchased and was not able to install during the construction season. So they are stored on site and we've documented the both the that all the materials are there and have receipts for the value of those materials.

We do have our flow meter that will be installed as the water enters in from Cottage Grove. We are hopeful that we get some above average temperatures to go run out and install that. Should take a day or two. We are waiting on an electrical service to be installed for the Cherrywood or adjacent Cherrywood development.

The big constraint here that they're dealing with is that we've got a requirement in the city code for driveways that are two, uh, two directions, one in one in each direction, one lane in each direction. Uh, those areas have to be 24 ft wide. And we also have a setback for for driveways from a property boundary of 5T. And so I'll show you kind of the image here is the um the drive that's being actually increased in width is is still not quite hitting 24 ft.

So, uh, the findings and conditions are found in resolution 202585. Well, I think this sounds like a good compromise.

Uh this should be familiar to the council as we've discussed at a recent workshop. Uh what might be proposed here. So the location we just talked about that the applicant SGS holdings. I I see Sally is in attendance. So welcome. Um, we have specifically got a requirement in code for cups in association with drive-throughs. This drive-thru would serve a coffee shop and wine bar. Uh, just to be very clear, the drive-through is for the coffee shop, not for the wine bar. Joe tells me it's illegal to do that for the wine bar.

The placement of that speaker though and that engagement and talking, no matter where you put that, it is going to be on the north side facing that neighbor, which is where I do come back. I I tend to agree um with with Tom on this, like I I do think some sort of mitigation there should be as part of this conditional approval in my opinion.

Um, so, uh, just to address a couple of the concerns that you guys have been talking about, uh, the what we thought after submitting this in terms of where the X should be was much closer to the existing garage on our property, so it would be farther away from the neighbor's house. Um, and in terms of a fence, I don't think that's a problem.

In terms of lot coverage, uh, the current site is somewhere, I don't know, I just eyeballed it and guessed it was above 90% and impervious. Uh, with the the city standard is 75% max. With the addition, you're looking at 83% impervious. So, the ratio of of lot coverage impervious surface is going down, but the property still would be above the maximum. So, that would be a flexibility that's requested through this process.

If the uh city does not uh uh obtain that rightaway through a permitting process, the city would be responsible for 100% of the rightway acquisition costs needed to construct that uh those improvements.

I just it it that doesn't make sense to me at all. It just we're an old community. these businesses were here long before, you know, 21st became what 21st is. And and I I just I would not be in favor of that should the county come in and decide that's the project they wanted to do.

We're very excited, you know, to continue their growth and development with and in the city of Newport. um you know looking at our site if you guys have seen now looking through the uh staff report that Nathan has put together along with the city engineer and public works um you know it is a difficult site to to find a way with all the city requirements but I think um given what we've heard tonight and at the planning commission um generally it feels like you guys are favorable and we appreciate that.

Uh, mayor, members of the council, I would describe this budget for 2026 as keeping the lights on budget.

So let's move over to the operating budget here real quick then. So yeah, and the mayor had actually um highlighted this question, but I'm going to drill in a little bit further. What is on the resolution for levy certification is a dollar figure for 4,26,300. In the budget presentation on page 111, the general fund budget has a revenue of 4,182 379, a variance of 23,921. I am curious which number are we using for our budget?

My entire point of asking these questions is if we're going to approve a tax increase and we're sitting on quite a lot of money and we're running profits across each of our enterprise funds in 2026 and we're approving an increase in taxes while running profits in those other accounts and we're sitting on a lot of what appears to be a lot of liquidity in my interpretation of this. I'm trying to understand exactly where we are running short and why we wouldn't fund balances down further before going back to the public and asking.

I think we need to be very careful about thinking of this like it's one big giant pot of money. A year ago, the NITA account had about $2 million in it. That money is designated for economic development. That is not money that can be used to draw down property taxes. It's got a designated fund and purpose and that's guided by state statute and how that money is spent.

This is approval of the nonUN salaries. Um we budgeted 3.25 for this adjustment uh which is the same um for as the collective bargaining agreement that we have approved already for 2026.

Uh I ask for approval of resolution number 2025-89. Make that so we can discuss. I'll second it.

So the city is going to pick up these costs uh just a percentage. It's broken out depending on the insurance that chosen. So and we've been doing that for a number of years. Correct. Correct. And this is in addition to the 3.25% increase in their salary, right?

Uh next item here, we do have utility bill certification. These are folks that have uh up until today. We just updated that uh list today. I think if it's uh you know, we we notify folks, give them a chance to um make a plan. Uh otherwise it does get certified each year. So uh I would ask that council approve resolution number 2025-90.

Says on it says in the resolution the council elected to charge a service charge of $25 $5 of which shall be remitted to Washington County an annual interest rate of 18%. Oh, there you go. So there is an interest rate. Yeah. Okay. So I just want people to know what they're signing up for by not paying these.