[Music] We'll be we're right at 5:30. I'm going to call tonight's meeting to order. And Abby, do you want to take a roll call? Commissioner Roberts here. Commissioner Lnes present. Commissioner Lorge here. Um, I'll note for the record, Commissioners Grindall, Hoy, and Wright are absent. Commissioner or Uh, President Ericson present. And let's rise and say the pledge of allegiance. I pledge to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. All right. We have an agenda before us. Any would like to make a motion to approve the agenda? I'll move we approve the agenda. We have a motion. Is there a second? Second. Any further discussion? All those in favor signal by saying I. I. I. Opposed. We have an agenda. All right. Open forum. This is a time for anybody who would like to speak before this body a chance to do that. See, we have one who would like to. Please come to the podium and state your name and address for the record. Good evening. My name is Susan Young. I'm at 9950 199th Street North in Forest Lake. Um, so yes, a resident. Um, I have a couple of questions that as you go through your discussion of your loan program that I would like to hear your consideration of. Um, on your parking eligibility, it's a little bit unclear. Eligible is additional parking and reconstruction, but ineligible is resurfacing, which can often look like if you're doing a mill and overlay reconstruction. So, I would just like to better understand your definition. I'd also like to understand the definitions of tier one, tier two, and tier three. Um, are those just the dollars or are there specific projects that you're looking for? and and what are your definitions of tier one and two tier tier three? And if if they're really sort of blended, then I'm not sure that complexity is needed. The um the way that you're going to be providing these loans, forgivable loans, is on a first come, first serve basis. And so what I'd like to know is how are you going to publicize these? If I'm I know that Nette's going to do a really good job of saying to chamber members, hey, this is available, but not every business uh who might be eligible or interested in this in the community is a chamber member. So, since it is first come, first served, how do you make sure to publicize this widely so that all of our businesses have an opportunity to come in first? And finally, um the forgivable loan. Um basically the conditions to be forgiven are you have to have completed the project and paid your contractors. And I am wondering if there shouldn't be an additional um you get your money uh as long as you're here a year as the business is in place a year. Um because you have said it needs to be a a locally owned business and not a um a national company. If someone were to say, "Okay, I'm going to do the loan and I'm going to um get this particular thing done and that's going to make me more marketable so that I can sell to a large multi-state gardening corporation. Um, you know, is that something that you are comfortable with?" Um, I' I'd like to see whether or not it's um there there might be additional conditions so that if the city is investing in this company that we know that they're going to be around for a while. And I'd also like to make sure that within 12 to 24 months that same company doesn't have any unpaid taxes that they continue to have paid that they continue to pay their taxes that they not be in violation. So it's not just at the end of their construction period, but to make sure that they remain a valued member of the community. Thank you all very much. Thank you. Anyone else? Seeing none, we'll move on to our consent agenda and ask if anybody would like to make a motion or make a change to our consent agenda. Motion to approve. Have a motion. Is there a second? Second. Any further discussion? All those in favor signify by saying I. I opposed. And it approves. All right. Regular agenda items. Item 7 A. And I see that we've got another commissioner coming in. Let's let them get seated and we'll get going. Hello. All right. Hey, Abby, are you going to introduce us and walk us through uh the commercial improvement incentive program? Sure will. Awesome. Thank you. So, um in November, I presented to you draft uh commercial incentive impro improvement incentive program uh parameters. As a reminder, this came before the EDA um in staff pointing out that we do have an existing program of a 10% forgivable loan up to a maximum of $5,000, but the program really hasn't been utilized. Um, and when we when staff anal an analyzed the program, we really found that it's choppy, overly burdensome, and kind of what we were asking of applicants, property owners, businesses to kind of go through to get $5,000 was a little cumbersome. And so I came to you and I said, "Hey, let's let's retool this a little. Are there other ways you wanted to change it?" And at the time you said, "Let's expand this out to have two different uh funding categories to try to touch as many people as possible." Um, increasing the amount for small projects, also increasing the amount for larger projects. From that meeting, I had some conversations about parking and parking was not contemplated in the program. So, as you see in what's before you is um the kind of three tier uh type of projects. It's in the packet um on on the laptop. Um so what you see are uh three what I called tiers but there's you could call it program ABC. I mean you could it was just three different funding mechanis mechanisms for different types of projects. Um so for the the number one and the number three those were really any kind of projects. The number two was for specific for parking. Um so that should I think help um uh Susan's ask at least just about what is the difference for these. The only difference is there's one that's pulled apart specifically for parking um improvements with some maximums in there. Um so before you tonight is essentially the consideration of the improvement program as you had directed me and as conversations had come up after the meeting to address some of the concerns when it came to the parking improvement. Generally, it was if there was going to be reconstruction, the idea would be just a typical resurfacing wouldn't be I think I would consider a mill and overlay a reconstruction even though I know it's not full reconstruction of a parking lot. I definitely can include better um if the EDA is favorable to that funding category, I think we can fine-tune those words a little bit. Um, additionally, when it comes to how we would market this, it is a first come, first- serve, and Susan was right. Annette is promoting it, um, not just to the chamber, but to any businesses in the community. We do actually have a trifold brochure that we do send out or give out throughout the community that has chamber information, city EDA information, and county EDA information that's provided to any business. Additionally, once um the program is up and running in its new form, uh we would market it on our website and any sort of newsletters. Um there are some challenges with first come first- serve programs in just there's only that much pool of money and when it's gone, it's gone. We can look at things like dividing it up quarterly or twice a year. applicant processes um isn't something that I've explored quite yet just frankly because we're a little understaffed at city hall and I just haven't had the ability to kind of think outside that box right now. Um when it comes to some of the conditions uh things like businesses need to be here a year or continue to pay property tax, I'd have to consult with our legal on the clawback provisions of these funds. We've talked about clawback provisions with purchase agreements. Um those are legal documents that we do enter into with applicants and we record them across the deed on the property. These forgivable loans aren't going to be recorded against properties. They're just an application form and agreement between this body and them. They are housed at city hall. It all goes away or you know it gets archived when the whole project's been reimbursed. um that would really take some um discussion with our legal counsel on the us taking it back after that kind of reimbursement or that refund of the forgivable loan. So, I hope that helps answer at least some of the questions or the questions that Susan had had, but I am here to chat with you folks about your favorability to the program as it's written. Um really hoping that we can kind of get this finalized and start putting it out there. I do have um two maybe three um properties interested uh two of them in the downtown area, one in the in um out outside of the downtown area. So, I think it's definitely there's quite a bit of interest. So, it's really just trying to get because now they all know that we have the 10% program, but there's the 25 to 50 coming and they don't really want to submit under the existing program parameters. So, kind of sounds like what we were going for, more interest, right? Exactly. Member Le, I know you mentioned you had a couple questions. I'll pass it off to you if you're ready. I I do have a So, so broadly speaking, I I think it's well written and um a good policy changes. The um the items that I would suggest that should we decide to move forward, we modify as we go through here. Um, on page 11 under ineligible properties, it states properties owned by multi-state chains. And I would like to modify that to businesses owned by multi-state changes. Um, multi-state chains. I believe that was the intent. Um, not that we're holding property owners, but that we're not advocating to have fast food restaurant national chains eliminated versus LLC's that might have properties in Minnesota and Wisconsin. So, that was the first one. And then on page 13 uh 4.1 it says the EDA will review and either conditionally approve or deny the application. And then the the one says condition of approval shall be the loan shall not be dispersed unless the applicant remains eligible completes the project and it goes on. Um I would like to modify this from a shall be to shall include. So the the way the language is written currently it would mean that these are and only the conditions that we could put on and I would I would like this body to have the authority to add appropriate conditions as we see fit should we see them being necessary. And then on also on page 13 just shortly below that under indemnification it says recipients must indemnify the city and EDA. I would like to modify the word recipients to applicants so that it includes both applicants and those that receive it. Um and they they could fill out the indemnification clause right in the application. And I would assume that would be relatively easy for staff to to manage. All right. Those don't seem like they're changes to me. I would back those the first just a point of clarification um Eric. So that um on page 11 you want it to be businesses owned by the multi-state chains. Is that what you're saying in the second bullet? Correct. Just modify the word properties to businesses. And um Commissioner Lang to bring this up to me before the meeting and I do recall that direction being provided to staff to change it because it was kind of funky language before about maybe franchises or something. We wanted to allow local franchise owners. Um but yes, the intent was the business, not necessarily the land owners. Uh we definitely could write that it could be businesses and land owners, but we do run the risk then again of those local business owners if they don't own the underlying land could end up not being eligible if the land owner isn't eligible. All right. Any other questions or comments for Abby? question. Um, tier one versus tier two. So, both are designed to be smaller projects. One is, you know, non-p parking, the other parking. Could a business owner qualify for more than one tier or can they I think, um, definitely by separating out parking in this way, they could. Okay. Um, but I think that would be up to this body. I hadn't actually thought of that necessarily of the could their project include some building facade and parking. They definitely could be tapping into a larger pool. Um, I will say that I added the parking in as its own tier because those projects generally are fairly significantly can be fairly significantly sized. And having that kind of um onetoone share helps it incentivize people a lot more than that 25% in that funding category of us decreasing the percentage share when projects increase in size. Does that make sense? I know there's a number of parking lots throughout the community that some of you have brought up to me that need help. And um I don't think that the intent of the program was for parking repair. I do think it was maybe more for buildings um beautifification, but there is some argument to be made that parking lot repair um definitely beautifies a property. And often we can all acknowledge often those are overlooked or kind of last thought of things. I guess I'll just make a comment related to um Miss Young's question around the loan requirement length of time. I guess I would hesitate to put any that sort of clawback language in for a couple of reasons. One being a business owner may be out of business in less than a year, you know, and so we create all kinds of caveats for this. Um, at the end of the day, the goal, as I kind of think about this program, is to help increase the attractiveness of Forest Lake, our business district, kind of partner with um those people who invest so much in our community. Um, the dollars we're talking about5 to$10,000 isn't that much in the grand scheme of things. And so to put more burden and expense on staff and legal and the possibility that you know we might have a somebody with ill intent taking advantage of the program. I just I don't personally feel like it's necessary but I'm open to other people's opinions. I I would suggest that um should we take the the language modifications that I suggested that the shall include would allow us to add such a clause if we desired upon receiving an application to say payment will be made six months after completion and determination the business is still in existence. I mean we could very easily add that in. I don't think we need it necessarily in the policy itself. I've got a quick question. If we fund somebody like a parking lot, could they come back next year for something else on the exterior? I did write it that there would be ineligible for a 12-month revolving period. So, if like this year in June they were awarded, they would have to wait until July of next year. Um, the idea again I heard from all of you is you wanted to spread this out. you want to touch as many properties as possible. I didn't want to necessarily I don't want to say penalize, you know, for five years or anything, but I thought a little bit of a gap. Um, one of the people that have inquired about the program or one of the businesses has used it in the past. It's was I don't know maybe 2017. It's been quite a number of years um maybe even 10 years. But it seemed to me that we should be pe encouraging people to use these funds, invest in the community, and if they're eligible again in a year and nobody else is there asking, like, why not? Um, it in my time here, we haven't used these funds. The best I can tell going back, I don't think we've maybe even used them since pre-COVID. So, um, so I think, you know, letting people come back again next year, why not? if it's a whole new project and adds value to the property and I think we can always review it too. I'm sorry if I missed it, but how are they communicated to the local businesses in the past to know that these loans are there? Um, we have done it through the chamber. We've done it through our website. Uh, you know, the city with a capital C, um, who helps you in your marketing efforts, isn't the greatest at marketing. Um, so I would say that a big part of that is probably just a lack of really wondering if they if there was an awareness issue. I don't think I don't think there was as much awareness. Um we are also like trying to catch building permits before they come in. Um definitely when a company might go through an site plan review process or we know we're making changes trying to get them aware of these beforehand are just some strategies that I will be employing with my team both on the planning and zoning side and building inspection side is just being a little more proactive. Um whereas kind of some of the disjointed nature of our departments before didn't you know building inspections department didn't even know this program existed. So all right any further questions or discussion otherwise I would be open to entertaining a motion and maybe Eric do you want to do that to incorporate your language? I would be happy to do so. I will move uh the policy changes as recommended by staff amending three specific items. Page 11 amending properties owned by to businesses owned by page 13 under 4.1 modifying shall be to shall include. And the third one also on page 13 under indemnification modifying recipients to applicants. Right. We have a motion. Do we have a second? Second. We have a motion to second. Any further discussion? Just wanted to make sure you got all that, Abby. It's um I just put as noted and and we'll make sure that we review the the actual words, but yes, I do have all of that well written and documented. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor signal by saying I. I. I. Opposed. Motion carries. All right. Regular agenda item B7B 2026 budget recommendation. All right. So on your dis before you uh and I apologize I didn't get this out beforehand um is at least a starting point for talking about the 2026 budget update um or budget proposal. So uh it's spring every year the city council asks departments and the EDA for its budget for inclusion into the the budget considerations. seems early, but this just is kind of the kickoff to the rest of the whole city council process for budget considerations. So, included in the packet on your dis is uh the city the EDA's current work plan and its statuses just to kind of remind you some of the things we said we're still going to work on this year. I acknowledge that the EDA and the council have indicated that they'd like to have greater conversation about work plan development and projects moving forward. And so this just kind of gets us what we said we'd do through this year, haven't done, know we need to do, but this is also probably going to amend through the second half of 25 for the subsequent following years. Um included in this packet for you is just a note about the EDA's fund 212. So this is a fund that um your budget is in. If you spend your budget dollars, no big deal. If you don't spend your budget dollars, they retain they're retained in the 212 fund. So you have a little bit of a fund balance um even after your budgeted funds this year. The EDA's fund balance. So, this is money that the EDA has. That isn't money that we planned to use this year. It's just sitting there for projects that the EDA might like to engage in in the future. It's about $256,000. Does that make sense to folks so far? So, your budget this year was 2039.89 and we've spent about a quarter of it. I can tell you that that's pretty much on par with where we were this time last year. We have a number of projects outstanding still. Um some contracted services that haven't submitted for their reimbursements yet. Um some of those things will come in through the next month or two and you'll see this kind of move quickly. Um included in your meteor reporting though are our operations. Those include just operating supplies, our investinforestlake.com website, seminars training dues, subscriptions and legal expenses. While our operations are still um in line overall, our legal expenses are higher than the projected budget this year. And that has directly related to the potential land sales of properties along Fenway, the 280 Broadway, and Headwaters 123. And so as the city continues and the EDA continue to market and potentially sell land, which I imagine that we're going to have more conversations about the end of this year in 26, those legal expenses are going to be higher than anticipated. So I do recommend a small increase for the EDA in uh operations for legal expenses. Contracted services, we budgeted $7,500. That is what was approved. But uh the chamber did ask and the EDA did approve an agreement which would increase those services from 7500 a year to 10,000 a year. So we do need to account for that increase in budgeting or that increase of $2,500 for each year. Planning um predominantly the funds are helped to cover costs associated with the EDA's work plan administration. So currently right now we're working on the Southwest Forest Lake infrastructure phasing project. Some of you might remember we received a grant to cover that. But that is a kind of a planning study for how we build the roadways and the infrastructure down in that south southwest corner of the city um to help spur some of the development through there. Also then through towards the, you know, now through the end of the year, we'll be looking at that Headarters 123 property a lot more in depth and using professional services there. Those funds aren't broke out. We have $22,500 that we said we're going to use each year and we try to capitalize on our grant program through the county to be able to help offset some of those things. I did include in your packet just some of the re kind of regurgitated information. Last year you had asked for information about capital projects and what the status was of some of the capital projects you've had helped plan for including Broadway Avenue, the Veterans Memorial Shoreline enhancements and boat launch relocation. I just provided quick updates. Most of these are all in the city's current budget for 2025 or in the capital improvement plan for the next 10 years. So I indicate that we probably don't need to increase our planning dollars for more project costs uh related to planning studies because um we really do leave that 225 as kind of a it gives us the opportunity to flex that how we need to based on our work plan if that makes sense. Staff is not recommending that you ask for additional dollars from the council for planning. Um again you we do have a fund balance and if we do want to exceed that 225 we can uh dip into those reserves if needed. And then program funds that's that commercial incentive pro improvement program that you just modified this evening that $50,000. Right now I don't again don't ask I don't recommend that we just ask for more money. We haven't been using that money. We've been putting it in our fund balance. there's the opportunity to dip into our fund balance if we receive more applicants than the $50,000 this year. So, in this report, and I recognize that I'm just providing it to you now, but really what this is is to really taking a look at the 2025 budget and the 2026 EDA draft proposed budget. You'll see on the very on page four, the last uh page of the staff report. Um currently the total right now that we know of is $90,000 because the wage information has not been provided by finance. Wage information is just based on a number of different factors including cost of living adjustments, unions, insurance. That information just hasn't been plugged in yet into this. But for the operations, contracted services planning program funds, staff is recommending that the EDA consider a 4.5% increase to accommodate in for the increase in contracted services and those operational costs, predominantly the legal fees needed to kind of help facilitate some of these um land sales. So, this is up for your discussion tonight. You don't have to make any decisions. Uh the intent was to get you thinking and discussing this and helping provide some direction to me as we prepare the budget for the council. The b the council has asked their department heads to have budgets um completed by the end of the month, but with the EDA, I know that we do have another meeting that we could use to finalize the budget if we're needed. So, more than anything tonight, um it's up for discussion. But if you're favorable to the increase of that 4.5 to operations and contracted services and you're comfortable not having that wage information in, which we are not proposing any staffing changes, so there's no changes to the it be customary increases in wages, um staff would recommend that you would recommend if you're favorable and ready that you'd move to submit the EDA's proposed budget to the city council. Any questions? Questions for Abby? I should know this, but on these land sales, those dollars for those land sales, they go into the EDA's budget. So, that is something that I'm going to talk about at the council's next workshop. Um, with the land sale that we did this year, uh, thus far, the 280 Broadway, we did put it in the EDA's fund balance. Um, I need to talk about that with the city council. I'd imagine this EDA's recommendation is to put it into the EDA's um coffers. Uh, but ultimately we need to talk with the council. Council transfers the land to the EDA. So, technically it is EDA proceeds, but it is land that the count the city the council has been holding. So, I think we need the direction from the council to see if all or portion of that should remain within the EDA. To answer your question, the sale proceeds thus far have been going into the EDA while I've been here. The council may direct me to do otherwise though. So the reason I asked then is you know with these additional costs based on land sales that you know why if it's not going to go into the EDA then why is it you know legal being of charge to the EDA fund? I agree and I think the only reason is is because I'm the one that's working through it and then all of a sudden, you know, but I think that that is on my agenda to talk about with the council at their upcoming workshop because, you know, all of a sudden we got a check for almost $7,000 and thought what what do we do with this? We don't really have a policy quite yet. So, I have a question, Abby. Yeah. And I may be wrong, but and I'm trying to remember from some other document or something that I saw, but Wasn't there a request for additional staffing? So wages would be impacted and I know you're saying finance hasn't provided anything, but yeah. So wages were impacted this year because we're hiring that staff this year. Okay. So the 2025 budget accounted for that wage increase for that new staff. And the EDAs would only be covering a quarter of that staff person's time. The EDA pays for half my time and then that would only account for a quarter of that secondary staff because we're not fully dedicated to you guys. Though I would love to be. If you could figure that out, that would be awesome. We could really do a lot of fun things. Yep. Any other questions for Abby? Any other discussion points? Is anybody interested in making a motion to adopt this or do we want to table it till we know what the wage numbers are? What do you I would love if you would adopt it. We're very, you know, that one of the reasons with that 225 with the planning dollars. Um I've we've been flexible. We haven't been spending them all. It gives us the ability to kind of pivot when a new project comes up. Um, beyond that, the only changes aside from what you see that isn't like concrete is that wage information. And so I think moving forward now gives me the opportunity to finalize it and submit it. I can always bring this back to you in July at least just as an FYI. This was what the final proposal would be. Um, but the numbers for your program funds, projects, all of that would be exactly as you see it here. knowing that we don't have any staffing changes planned and we don't as a body we two of these gentlemen do but we don't have the authority to change wages benefits um actually impact that number. I'm quite comfortable approving um this to to go to councel as is knowing that the wage piece will be filled in um and that's ultimately their discretion anyhow. Was that a motion? I I can't I I'm looking to see if others agree or not because if if people want to table it, I'm not opposed to that, but I'd rather see us approve it. If somebody wants to make a motion. Sure. I I make a mo a motion to go ahead and agree the proposed um 2026 EDA draft budget. There's a motion. Is there a second? Second. Any further discussion? Just to clarify, uh and maybe I missed this. What is the current fund balance right now? 256. What was that? Two. Where did that go? At the the very first paragraph of the second page, page two, the EDA's fund balance is 256. So 628 um without not having that staffing person, that fund balance probably is going to grow. That fund balance will probably increase this year. I'm having a little bit of a hard time of four and a half% increase when we have that fund balance that we know likely will increase regardless of these additional costs for land sales. So, just to it is it is a great uh point that um Commissioner Roberts brings up is that you do have that fund balance to account for those changes in programming, in needs. It definitely is one of those things you can hold your budget exactly as it was this year. Um just knowing though that we will likely have an increase in legal costs that would dip into that fund balance in the future uh legal and and that operate contracted services. I think one thing that maybe uh this board would like to know that you know staff currently is recommending about 18% increase in property taxes as it sits right now. So um that's a hard number and this council is trying to work to get that down. So anywhere there's ability kind of help that would would be good. So, I'm just, you know, if if if we want to look at this later and form, I'm going to do something here, but I'll have the ability to adjust it and al ultimately I guess the council can do that, but I'd rather get it from the itself. Um, what are you proposing? Would you change these figures then? So the I just do want to clarify when I do indicate that 4.5% increase that's an increase to operations, contracted services, planning and program funds, not including the wages. So know that that number would come down when wages are put in. And the actual dollar change is like $4,500. I do see uh Commissioner Robert's point though, we haven't been using all of our program funds. we haven't been using all of our funds pretty consistently and frankly until we get some more staffing in the development department um my time and ability to keep kind of working on a lot of these things gets pulled away. And so it's unlikely that even in 26 we're going to use all of our dollars just because of the staffing constraints we have. Yes. I I guess I have a question and and um I apologize. I didn't have a lot of time to read this before the meeting. No, I didn't release it before the meeting and that and and it really was intended to be a discussion. I am a I am really comfortable bringing this back. I think the council the staff and council will completely understand if the EDA doesn't have its budget ready till July. And I'm I'm hearing um member Robert's concern and I I'm seeking clarity. So the numbers that are on the the back for the proposed budget, I was reading those as expenditures, like our planned expenditures for next year. And so I'm very comfortable setting that as our planned expenditures. Is this also suggesting that that is planned revenue coming in out of city council coffers? Yeah, that would be your budget usually is from the tax levy renewed each year. So on that page four where you see the 203989 that is tax levy dollars budgeted for 2025 to be used in 2025. Same would be then in 26. So perhaps what I might suggest and and this might require this coming back in a future meeting. Um, I I'm very okay with this as our planned budget for our planned expenditures as an EDA, but perhaps we have a second column for revenue and we maybe balance that out to to be the same as the 2025 numbers um and and allow council to basically zero balance us on on their records. Um perhaps we can even take a a negative number um to help city council. I don't think our our budget's going to move that 18% a whole lot, but um maybe we can be a small part of it knowing that we're not going to have as many expenditures this year and we're going to have fun balance to be able to me it's much more clear to me and it you know right it's not a large amount but it tells a better story of how we've been able to at least move things you know help offset some of that. I do have the question that's great great discussion um and this is presented to everyone. So there are a number of projects that are in our current budgets and our capital improvement plans that this body has wanted to see specifically things like in the downtown area um landscape beautifification the median project. Do you want to discuss utilizing any of the fund balance to help offset some of those project costs or is it intended more to not increase? You know, there's twofold, right? Can you help the city by reducing some of their project costs for projects that definitely are of an EDA interest or is it really, hey, we still want to preserve as much of our fund balance as we can. We really just want to show the council that we're we're not increasing our costs. That make sense? Yes. Although I would be hesitant to in this meeting look at largecale projects that would reduce fund balance significantly in the next budget cycle. Sure. Um I I would without question want to look at that in advance of a meeting and and really think about it. Yep. Um, if it's if it's standard operational stuff like what's written on here, I'm very comfortable saying yes, these these numbers are fine with me as kind of a a guideline knowing that legal stuff can change and be twice as much as this or half as much as this next year. Um, but I' I'd rather those things come off to us. Um, they would totally have to. I wouldn't have even they will have to come back. I would not have proposed it without proposing that to the EDA, right? I think we do have two counselors on the on the EDA that can say, "Oh, that's actually, you know, we've got some projects. You guys said we want to do these projects. We're looking for money. Hey, ED, do you want to chip some of your fund balance?" And the council, we'd have to look to see if that's even an opportunity for those cashier and bring that back to you. But that gives me if the EDA was like, "Well, we'd take a look, we'd maybe chip in a little. It gives me the opportunity then to go back to public works finance administration and say, "Okay, is there a way that we can help offset that a little?" I don't know that there is. 250,000 that you're sitting on really isn't a lot in terms of some of these capital projects. We just But maybe there is something in there that we can say, "Oh, the EDA could cover something." I don't know. Does that make sense? So, I'm going to ask another question if Yeah. Um, so on the page two, you demonstrated approximately a quarter of planned budget has been spent. Was that through the end of last month or uh I do believe it's through uh May. I would have to double check. Roughly through May. So the number will increase. Um so and I would I'll provide you with a little bit more update, but that Southwest infrastructure project has incred this spring that probably haven't registered. Additionally, those you're going to have some savings from your salaries. Well, we can say that. But so if we if we push this out in best estimate for what 2025 will end at, are we I can do that. I can do a projected. I can definitely provide you with the the projected. I'm not the greatest at finance, but we can figure that out. I think that's really helpful. Like whenever I've done a budget, it's like you're always working against your latest estimate, right? Or are you projecting for the year? Then we know like, hey, we might have another whatever. And I know these are smaller numbers compared to everything else, but it's like we have some to give back or move or whatever. That's I think the wild you shuffle around. Besides wages, your biggest expense is your program funds, which is our incentive program that have been dormant for years. So unless in the next six months that really catches fire. I mean, we're going to I would I would guess we'll have Yeah. I mean, 20 30,000 of fund balance. the wages uh for the position that hasn't been filled I think are probably for sure less than $50,000 for the entire year, maybe even 25. So, but yes, so I'm hearing a lot of hey, great conversation. I should say great conversation. I'm hearing a lot of maybe we shouldn't move forward and that is just fine. What I think I can do at least and I don't need a motion for this is to table this. Well, I guess you can motion to table if you want, but essentially coming back to you once we have the wage information. Um, analyzing how we can budget this with a no tax levy increase. Um, including some of that projected 2025 year end stuff to see how it is we might be able to kind of keep 2026 low by using some of that fund balance. That I see a lot of I I would go a little further. So I I could tell you I would be comfortable actually. So So I I would prefer that our budget when we ultimately pass it has two two columns. One for planned expenditures and one for revenues. And on the revenue side, I would be comfortable reducing that by the amount down to the amount of what we're projected to spend this year. So if if we're projected to spend uh 50,000 under, I would be okay allowing council to give us 50,000 less. knowing that that's ending up in our budget this year and get it be in our fund balance. My only concern is I have seen I know that the long-term piece is that it's not obligated in 27 to give you that money and they're they're not either way. Yep. Well, I said just be careful not to I mean we got to keep wages in there. So, we got to think about where we're if we're going to reduce by 50,000 on the revenue side, which line items we're going to pull that from and and perhaps maybe then setting setting um an extra line item on revenue of unspent 2025 revenue and have a negative offset so that it it establishes that precedent um is not built in. I'm hearing Yep. I'm hearing exactly what you visually want to see and I we can provide that completely for future discussion in January or Judge January. President um so that knowing that's really a challenge just on both in this body and on council is that it's great that staff were you know we need to get these numbers sooner but there's just so many unknowns here we are June 1st basically talking about this stuff so if we can get more projected number of what the end of this year I mean because I mean it wouldn't be that much of a stretch with what's not spent that fund balance is up north of 300,00 000 by the end of the year. So depending Yeah. depending on our wages and whether or not that improvement program you you got to think the improvement program is a reimbursement program too. So the projects that we fund this year might not actually be reimbursed until 2026. So I don't know if the the ability to you look at some of these things this Broadway Avenue the Veterans Memorial Short like does this body know much about the median refresh and Broadway? Probably not. Probably not. Is there ability to use some EDA funds to to do that? I've also uh talked to administrators about potentially some welcome to Force Lake or downtown and utilizing we've been talking about monument signs in the city for 15 20 years, but utilizing in conversation with the county utilizing hardwood creek trail bridges to have that some of that signage there to keep that cost down so you don't have the expense of a a big monument. And so I don't know as a as a body if there's anything here on top of this or want to move some of this stuff forward in 26 that would also reflect on what you think our budget should be for bigger picture than what we're talking about now. But I just I just want to I have a question as far as a four and a half% increase. I worry that if we don't take that when we have the opportunity and we push off for another year or maybe we do it for two years in a row and all of a sudden things start to take off and there's a lot of need for our funds and we're behind and instead of asking for four and a half we start asking for 15 to make up the lost time that almost looks in my mind that that seems worse. We can always collect the money and then just hand it out dole it out as needed for different projects and whatnot. I I hate not do anything because we just don't need it right now. I don't know. It's just an idea. One thing I'll say just to um Commissioner Roberts brings up is this idea about some of these other city projects. Um I definitely think some of this stuff is work plan update discussion. So even if the EDA submits this, the council approves the the budget, we can always come back and amend the EDA's budget using those fund balance if we need. Um, you know, middle of 26, there's always the ability to dip into those reserves as we need. So I think what I'm hearing at least is you want more information, which I think is great. It's understandable. Some of that information is year-end projections looking to see are there ways that the EDA's dollars and 20 current fund balance and 26 budget can help keep the EDA level with 25 budget. um potentially help with some other types of projects that might have been identified as the EDA, but in a nominal way that doesn't significantly reduce the fund balance, knowing that by the end of this year before our budget's going to be adopted, but that we're going to have a work plan conversation and we might want some of that fund balance for 26, 27, 28 projects. Does that high level encompass I think I think it does. Um, we do have a motion that was seconded to move forward. Is there a second? I did second it. I'll withdraw my second. I guess I'm not sure Robert's rules will mean to. So, withdrawing my second, somebody else would have to either second it or or it just dies or she can withdraw the original motion as well. I'll withdraw the original motion to um adopt the 2026 proposed budget for the EDA committee. All right. Do you need a motion to table until our future till our next meeting? Um yeah, sure. If you want to just say it for a future meeting when we have a little bit more detailed information as discussed. There's a motion to table. Do we have a second? Second. All those in favor sign I. Okay. All right. All right. Under discussion, Fenway needs assessment. Um, so I think um the EDA may have discussed this in a closed session related to um or this may have come up in a closed session related to city EDA and city sale of the Fenway Airport Business Park. Um, but I can say things a little bit more publicly now in that earlier this year, beginning of the year, Forestlake Area School District. Oh, shoot. Sorry guys, my display settings are a little off. Um, Forest Lake Area School District. This is just, you know, how like you just get to know it and then they change it on you. You just got an updated system. And isn't it wish was there. But that's just a stock photo, folks. Well, we won't have um a visual tonight. Um in um beginning of this year, Forest Lake Area School District was donated two pieces of property that the city had sold to the private market a number of years ago. Um, in earlier this year, uh, new administrator Stoz and I met with Forestlake Area School District to talk about those parcels and their needs for in the area. As many of you know, the area was kind of designed to be an industrial park, but it was developed with a lot of recreational uses. And so, we've kind of got some competing uses in the area. And our meeting with the school district was really intended to talk about what do you guys hope to achieve with your vacant parcels. Share what we hope to achieve with our vacant parcels and start the discussion about maybe we need to do some planning together to make sure that we don't have conflicts with the land uses because generally speaking manufacturing and industrial and youth recreation sports don't really mix. school district was very favorable to kind of sitting down and working together as two organizations on kind of what is everyone's needs here to see if we can't maximize the developable acreage in the area while also meeting the recreational needs in the area. They were very favorable. bringing this to you tonight to one just introduce it to you publicly. The idea that the school district would like to work with us and we believe that we need to probably put together some sort of a needs assessment between what the school district needs, what the city needs, the city, the EDA need, and how we might be able to kind of design the rest of the vacant land in those areas to meet everyone's needs appropriately. And so I'm bringing this to you today to introduce it to you to have you discuss whether or not the EDA wants to explore costs associated with this and whether the EDA would be favorable to using some of the EDA dollars, some of those potentially unspent planning dollars that we have um in in helping develop this kind of needs assessment for the remainder of that kind of Fenway Business Park, now partially recreational area. Does that make sense? At this time, we haven't looked at costs. Um, frankly, it is one of those things. It's the midyear project, right? We we do have funds to use that because we were able to secure a grant this year for the Southwest infrastructure. So, we will have some extra planning dollars. I didn't really move forward with even trying to figure out what this would scoping the project out, figuring out what this would cost if the EDA wasn't favorable to favorable to it because the rest of the community development and city council budget doesn't ha hasn't accounted for this in any way. Question, what would that involve? What does that look like? that involve hiring somebody outside to look at it like we did for downtown planning or working with a coalition of school and city. I think we would probably have to hire a facilitator to help. I don't think that it would necessarily be somebody at the caliber of the downtown plan, but the idea would be that this outside person would kind of help just understand the needs of the school opportunities and constraints associated with school district needs and city needs and to maybe make recommendations for the maximum use of the vacant land there. The school district has indicated, now granted this hasn't gone to the board, it was Dr. Superintendent Massie um and their facilities folks, they have indicated that at least on a staff level, same with city staff, we're interested in collaborating to the point of cross um collaborative agreements that look at dual marketing um that we're kind of trying to almost master plan and and market the sites. But in order to kind of do that, we really need to kind of see what are their needs, our needs. And I think a third party working with each of these organizations, a small subset of each of these organizations to develop that high level structure is how I would envision it. It's going to take some scoping on my part. Obviously, there's a lot in my head. Um, but again, I haven't spent much time on it. But yes, we would hire someone to kind of help at least facilitate those conversations. So, would the EDA pay for the total amount for that person? I don't know that the EDA would pay the the total amount. I'm just curious, at least at the moment, would you be interested in at least partnering on this? I would then need to go out and figure out what is that project scope, how much is this going to cost, who could do that for us, and then what we'd do is probably come back to you, to the council, to the school, any other interested parties in the area, and say, "Okay, who how do we how do we cooperatively get this done?" I imagine that the the staff has some potential ideas of what could potentially go there. I can't imagine building another school while they're closing one and just redrawn the lines is in the card. So, are we looking at potentially expanded athletic facilities because the ice rink is next door or are they potentially considering um relocation of their their maintenance or or bus facilities or No, they would be looking um the school district's most immediate needs are recreational expansion uh and parking expan expansion. um their recreational expansion. They acknowledge they have and parking they have no capital budget for and so they acknowledge that if they're going to do this, they're going to have to work with their community partners. Um we have a number of parcels on that pro in that area that we believe city staff believe could accommodate their needs in a way that are never going to be able to accommodate the some sort of tax base revenue. And so it's really looking at how can we design that space to I don't want to say separate the uses entirely but maximize the vacant land for everybody's benefit. We have talked about even I think it's come up here Buffalo Wild Wings, right Commissioner Hoy? I don't think Buffalo Wild Wings would be interested, but the idea of how could we potentially market some of the land to complimentary uses that are providing commercial private parking but that could be used by the public including people that are there visiting that using the hockey center. So, those are the sorts of things that we really want to kind of vet through and see if we can figure out a plan that both groups can can work towards and then find somebody that can market that and make it go. Does that answer your question? Yes. Okay, good. Very very very good. Um, one other question and I'm kind of going off memory. Is is it roughly half the land right in that spot is ours and half the land is theirs that approximately um uh when it's north of the hockey center roughly land areas 50/50. We also have land area to the south of the hockey they do as well actually. There's both there but there's a little bit more public land south of the hockey center than they have public land. Sorry to say public land. It's all public land. So I I would be quite comfortable going in like 50/50 with the school district and and at any cost portions um from the EDA perspective if if there's a piece in that. It seems quite reasonable to me to facilitate those discussions to benefit both parties. I saw a lot of heads nodding that you're at least in support of me mo moving forward of figuring out what those costs are going to be scoping out that project. So I'm figuring out those costs. Go ahead. Have we have you heard back anything from Gan? They have that option and they have first right on that land. Any conversations there about what so far? Very nominal. Um Gan has not signed the agreement, so I can't tell you whether or not they are marketing the property or not. I do know that there has been some conversations up that north parcel about continued um kind of that industrial led industrial office use which I think we contemplated during the land sale. We we said we really still wanted to maintain some tax base on that northern parcel but I haven't had more I haven't had conversations most recently since I asked for an executed copy of the agreement because he he was interested in that partial the north one of our triangle, right? Y Okay. So, that's the area we're talking about. I was trying to envision in my head, too. Yes. So, Okay. Um Yeah. Um I'm I'm in favor of having conversations. I love that collaborative work with the school district. Um whatever the percentage is, I don't know yet. We have to have discussions. So, but guess my question is is I think you and Mr. That's probably why invited the school district into a conversation moving this project forward, moving this collaboration forward. Is that going to land on the city staff's shoulders, i.e. you, or is the school district carrying some water on it? Um, I think that it would probably fall on the city's shoulders given the fact that um we approached the school district with the premise that we would like to maximize the tax base revenue through here. Um the school district holds two parcels right now. All the parcels are taxfree, right? And we'd like to maximize those and that does come at a a p could come at a threat of loss to the school district and I think we would probably want to take the lead to show our partners that we want to work together to achieve their goals and our goals. Um ideally that's where though back to Commissioner Lur's question of who would kind of do this. we would have to help hire somebody to facilitate this. It would take some t staff time kind of keeping track of that consultant or that agent for us. Um, but at the moment, yes, it would probably be a city or an EDA lead. All those particulars would be worked out in some sort of agreement with the school district, though. Is there any perceived preferred timeline for this project? Um, it I mean the school district is like, "Hey, let's get that done now, right?" But we all know their organization doesn't move any bit quicker than ours. So I can't we just we just don't move quick. We've got a lot of things. It'd be my hope that we would get something done this quarter, next quarter, you know, but certainly before the end of the year. Um we're marketing land out there. They're sitting on land. They're not in any hurry. Um so I think we want to make sure that we do it in a timely fashion, but in a responsible way. I would be open to having someone facilitate it, but a a full-scale plan, I mean, between this board, the park commission, uh, council, school board, this is our community. I think if we can all come to the table and figure out how this would work best for all of us. Oh, yeah. So, maybe someone facilitating that, but let us drive the plan. 100%. I do I don't I I don't intend this to be a facilitator uh based like they're they're drafting a plan. There's going to have to be collaboration with these other with all organizations and if that's a working committee of some sort. I'm not sure yet. Um I have to kind of put some thoughts onto paper and kind of scope it out to see who we'd even find to kind of do this for us. But yes, it's got to be organization, goals, mission led to get what we'd want through here. It's a bit, you know, there's a great opportunity there that that was generous donation. You know, we have two sheets of ice in Forest Lake here. There should be some at some point there'll be five sheets of ice probably and more parking, all that. So this is really important decision to make and make sure it's planned out thoughtfully and u as much input flaw whatever they can get on this I think the better. I agree and I think you know to that point too um you know there were some businesses involved in that naming rights and things like that you know probably too early to say but but but you know I mean That's how the discussion goes. But there might be some of our other local businesses that, you know, want to have naming rights and have, you know, be represented there as a community member or something. Um, like we did, I know they're gone now, but, you know, like that playground equipment place that used to be in Wyoming and, you know, that put playground equipment at all the elementary schools and things like that. Um, I I love that collaborative you know, that's just a great community feel. So, it'd be awesome to have something like that as part of the community. And there's got to be other communities that have done this. I mean, yeah. I mean, it's this this is this is just the sort of thing that a lot of communities do. I mean, frankly, cities cannot do it all, right? And we have goals and I mean, the public sector cannot do it all, right? And we've got two public agencies here that own a lot of land that we're not getting any tax revenue on. And the benefit to all of us is let's improve our wreck facilities while also increasing our tax base. How do we do that here? And so I think I so I I'm hearing that yeah, you're you're cool with me spending some time at least getting some, you know, scope of work, cost estimates, bringing that back to the EDA and maybe trying to form some partnership to move forward on this. Awesome. Yeah. when you're getting cost estimates. Um, keep in mind that I think we'd really like to do the ground work, the city, the planning council, what Blake was talking about, and work with the the uh school district and have a lot of the groundwork done for them. So, they're not going to charge us a fortune to start from scratch. I understand that and I 100% agree. But I think it's the ability of staff to help at least do things like document the conversations. Frankly, Jenny, we don't have the human bodies to do it. And so that's where I think we can I can scope this out in a way that their services are specifically plugged in um to hone in on skills of of individuals and when to lean on the consultant on a consultant. Um, but our staff's ability to support a project like this is we don't have the capa. I don't have the capacity and administrator stats doesn't either. I'm just kind of cautious because we spent a lot of money on planners and we don't have money. The city doesn't have money. let the citizens and the school do a lot of the groundwork so that whoever this planner is is going to be gifted with questions answers all kinds of considerations and then they have to figure it all out. So when you say documented, are you talking about documented meetings with the city with the schools right off the bat or or we can't have meetings without documentation? But I think if we could I mean we're really looking for a facilitator, right? Yeah. Versus, you know, not so much like the downtown plan is the way I've understood Abby. That's capture the conversations. Make sure all you're talking about like a a civil planner or No, there would not be a I would not envision a physical plan from this, but rather more um what are some of the land uses, the needs, the um opportunities? There may be a sketch maybe associated with it, but it's facilitating the roundt conversations of what would be acceptable, what wouldn't be acceptable. A really good example right now is like the school district said, you know, if there's going to be a parking lot next door, we don't want drinking in it, right? They don't want they don't want drinking on their their property. Okay, well, how do we how do we keep that goal, but also potentially put a Buffalo Wild Wings where we could tailgate, you I mean, some of those conversations, those are local conversations. It's just the ability for staff to facilitate a project of that nature. It I understand we spend a lot of money on planners, but right now you are only spending your money on me and I I just we this is the kind of long range planning that you have in a lot bigger organizations that have more planning staff. All right. Anything else for Abby on this topic? All right. Let's move into verbal updates. Um I have two on the packet. One is the Southwest uh Forest Lake infrastructure phasing plan. Um that plan is uh I would say not even yet in draft format. They've just almost finalized all their wetland delineation. They're getting approval from the state on the delineations. Then they'll start kind of looking at those couple routes to bring back some routes for city consideration um and discussion. I believe at your next meeting we'll have something more to start looking at and providing feedback. Next update on here I had sent out an email um before this had happened. I had heard from several of you regarding meeting changes. Starting in July, our meeting date will change to the first Monday of the month. Same time at 5:30. But this is really intended to give the EDA a little bit more time because as I see many eyes right now, I'm just looking up at the clock like, are we getting close? Are we getting close? And are we going to get a break before council? Um the intent was to give the EDA more time to be able to do some focused. You got a lot going on, right? and to for us to get it done in the hour and 15 minutes before council. So the calendar is in there as your reminder. Your next meeting is Monday, July. Thank you. And then lastly, not on here, I do want to let you know um direction provided by this body and the city council was to kind of keep our conversations moving forward on the sale of Headarters 123 to a single user. um and if not then to move forward with kind of looking at scoping out that project or that parcel for multiple users. Um the single user has withdrawn in negotiations. So we'll start looking at kind of scoping out the planning phase for Headarters 123 development as well. So keeping you all posted on that. Do you have any questions for me of anything that's going on? Thank you, Nette for Chamber. Thank you for that. I am going to just give you It seems like it's been a really long time since Okay, good. Because I feel like we've It's It's been two months. We had two months off. All right. So, uh, back in April, I just wanted to let this body know that our members as well as our Forest Lake area schools, the high school educators did gather together. We had a mixer at the uh at the schools and that was hosted by Career Launch. Uh very effective. They're schoolboard members and um and it was just amazing to see the kinds of things that are going on within our school system as far as career uh the career programs that they do have. Uh so that was well uh well received by the business uh community that was in attendance. Um, we also recently came alongside the America uh the VFW, Force Lake VFW and the American Legion as well as city staff on the Memorial Day celebration. And so that was just a um that was actually propelled by uh Kyle with Parks and Wreck and we just wanted to get the word out and do more help them to have more publicity and I think it was well received. I believe there was um pretty close to 200 people at the park that day. Um we also had the opportunity we were invited by the US chamber to host um our US Congressman Pete Stabber and so we did do that in the month of May and brought together a small panel of business professionals uh who w were able to um it was a roundt conversation around the tax cut and jobs act and so um again something that was very effective. Uh currently we're working we are hosting again at the uh arts in the park along with the city of Forest Lake. Uh so that's been fun. We're we're looking for our second week tomorrow. And then moving forward, a couple things I just want to get on your radar. Um we've been asked to kind of do things a little bit differently. Just kind of kind of propelled by that um conversation with Pete Stabber. Uh and that and we and Jenny Jenny will love this because you always ask me for updates. And so, um, we've kind of done our for the month of June, our member meeting will be a little bit different and a little little leveled up where we'll be bringing in our schools. Uh, actually, Mayor Roberts will be giving us an update as well as bringing together a panel of large employers. And so, our member meeting will be open to all guests. It's free to attend. And of course, this body is welcome and encouraged to join us as well. So that'll be on uh June 26th from 7:30 to uh 9 and it's going to be at the Forest Lake area school the high school um media center. And then of course moving on from that, we have our Lakefest street dance coming up on July 19th. So um just continuing to make progress on that as well as our annual golf event which is for the chamber. That's our largest fundraising event of the year and that's on Monday, July 28th. Again, if you're a golfer, um we see if we can find you a team or talk to Leif. And then um and then we also welcome all of our new teachers to the area, all the new educators through our business education day and that is in August on the 21st. So summer is not a quiet time at the chamber. So is there any questions on any of that? All right. Thank you. That's it. Any other updates from this body? With no other business before us, I'll entertain a motion to adjourn the meeting. Some moved. Second. Second. All those in favor? Anybody saying I? I. I. And we're journed. [Music]