[Music] All right, with it being right at 7 o'clock, uh, let's get the meeting here. Jolene, if you would take role. Council member Ericson here. Council member Miller here. Council member Valento here. Council member Larson is absent. And Mayor Roberts here. If you're able, please stand for the pledge. ledge to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. All right, council. We have an agenda in front of us. Is anyone interested in making a motion to approve? Also move. I'll second. We have a first and a second. Is there any further discussion? Um, sorry, Mr. Mayor. Uh, just to be clear, the additional item that was added this afternoon, um, the hiring updates and changes, item 8G. Ah, yeah. G, sorry. Um, just to make sure that that was part of the approval of the agenda. Okay. Do you friendly amendment then? All right. All in favor? I opposed. Motion carries. All right. Item five. Uh as many people know, we uh have been short on our planning commission. Uh that was the result of um election of uh council member Larson and the appointment of council member Miller. So uh we've been short for a couple months here. Uh over back on May 9th, our lesson uh Larson and um chair Gerard did some interviews. Uh they founded that uh they interviewed a a Mark Huerman uh Martins, sorry, Martin Huerman. Um as part of that process, we still are short one member. Uh so we would like to get that fully uh fully filled. So with that, I make a motion that we appoint Mr. Martin Huerman to the planning commission. I'd second that. Motion to second. Any discussion? All in favor? I I opposed. Motion carries. Right. Uh we have an open forum uh each meeting here. That's opportunity for three minutes. Anyone to speak of any city issues? Uh please state your name and address and uh come to the podium. Doesn't look like we have anyone this evening. All right. So, we're on to the consent agenda. Uh, is anyone uh interested in making a motion on the consent agenda? Uh, Mr. Mayor, I want to pull item 7B from the consent agenda so we can make an adjustment to it. Otherwise, I would make a motion to approve or make a motion to approve items 7 A and C through M. All right, we have a motion. Is there a second? I'll second that. All right, any further discussion? All in favor? I oppose. Well, you have approved consent consent agenda. Uh then 7B out of the consent agenda. Yeah. I just want to I want to see that adjusted. It's item 7 B I believe it is. Oops. Yep. 7B on the meeting notes. Uh we want to update the the motion in the second. Uh I made the motion to close that public hearing, but it was council member Larson who closed it or made the second, excuse me. And then also updating the public hearing uh was closed at 7:22. The notes currently read that it was opened at 7:22. Okay. So, we have motion. Is there a second? I'll second that. All right. Any further discussion? All in favor? I opposed. Motion carries. Onto our regular agenda. 8A approved plan specs and authorized bids for airport runway taxiway extension. and we have Silus from Bolton and Mink here this evening. Good evening, mayor and council. Thank you for the opportunity to present to you today. So, if you recall about this time last year, um I presented a proposal to the council for a design and bid administration grant that MIDOT Office of Aeronautics had offered to complete a 300 foot extension of runway 1331 at the airport and an associated extension of taxiway A. So currently the runway length at the airport is 2,700 feet long and a master plan update kind of completed to study the entire airport kind of identified a recommended runway length of 3,000 ft. So an additional 300 foot runway um extension would just add to the operational safety of pilots operating at the airport. As the airport gets busier, aircraft uh are coming and going more frequently and just any additional runway length is going to aid in their safety of pilots landing and taking off. So that project was discussed with MDOT and they agreed it was a priority for Mindot to fund a project to complete that at the Forest Lake airport. So in discussions with Mindot, what the plan that uh they put forth was obtain a design grant in 2025 to cover the design and bid administration, which we're currently working through. And the funding percentage for that grant was 95% state and 5% local. Go forth bid the project out here, you know, next month and then request funding in state fiscal 26, which so this way MDOT could kind of break apart the funding for the project. So we've completed, you know, the plans and specs for the project. We're ready to authorize for bid. Um there's a schedule put forth here. Um, if council uh agrees to to approve the plans and specs and go out for bid, uh, we'd open the bids on June 18th and then bring the potential award back to the city council on June 23rd. But with that said, you know, we still need to wait for MDOT to actually award funding for the project. So they are going to make award for projects funded in state fiscal 26 towards the end of June. So our goal here was to kind of get the project bid ready, wait for Mindot to announce funding so that Forest Lake is in position then after July 1 when the state switches to their fiscal year 26 to obtain a grant and construction could occur sometime later this fall. And the the latest, you know, construction cost estimate for the project, you know, is 1.3 million. Another thing that's changed is that on May 1st, Mindot notified, you know, the entire state and US consultants that their funding participation rate um for state only airports, which Forest Lake is, unfortunately dropped from 95% to 90%. So what that means is the local share for this project went up from 5% to 10. And that's, you know, in conversations with administrators understandably is is a concern because, you know, the budget may not have reflected, you know, 10% share um according to five. So, I wanted to kind of present all that information, you know, to the council here um to see, you know, what uh what the recommended next steps are for the project. Mr. Mayor, if I may. Yes. Um, so as Silas and I talk through this uh project and and the timing of it and all this kind of thing um and the change in the mind participation level um and just remind the council that this is a project that was pushed forward on the from the CIP was a 2026 construction project. We kind of pushed it forward to see if we could um get it rolling this year. There's a little bit of confusion too about the fiscal years don't line up with our calendar year, right? And um but uh at any rate, we had sort of looked at maybe trying to take advantage of that 955 that was in place. That's why we kind of pushed this project forward a year or so and um we're, you know, fortunate enough to get the design grant to save some money there. Um but at this point, we're back to the 9010. Maybe not quite as much urgency to to push this project forward. It is still a a very good project. I think the airport commission really feels it's a a valuable project as well. Um but with the amount of funding that would need to be um on the city side, so that went from about 70,000 estimated to about 140,000 um it's it's really not in our within our budget to be able to afford that this year um that in the current sort of makeup of how we fund the airport. So, I think what what we'd recommend tonight is one of two things. One, just push pause on this alto together, send it back to the airport commission and ask them to re-evaluate whether or not this is still a a fundable project. And if so, how would they propose funding it um just before we even bid it out or maybe a second option would be to to go ahead with the bidding. At this point, it's not going to cost us a couple of nickels to get it bid. We've spent the majority of the money um and with this grant to uh design it and I think that probably it makes some sense to go forward the bidding just because of the design and bidding process was part of the grant. Um you get the bids, they are what they are. You can see what the price really is, not just an estimate. So we're working with a real number and then we can have the airport commission weigh in on that topic as as a with a real number. So, um I think that would be staff's recommendation at this point would be to go forward with the bidding, but then um ask the airport commission to re-examine a word of the contract and whether or not we would be able to afford that this year. Um I think it's probably part of a larger discussion we're going to want to have with the airport commission about their budget and the process, how we come about um that budget. um in just reviewing their finances, you know, for first time in depth here in my tenure, you know, there's a and just talking with staff and others about the history of how this is all put together. I think there's a lot of loose ends in terms of how we assign revenue to the airport uh budget, if you will, how we assign expenses and rectifying those two things to make sure we're getting a clear picture of what the ins and outs of that operation are and whether or not they're losing money, making money, what is the city's, you know, cost to operate that and that kind of thing. So, there's a lot of a lot that goes into that. Um there's a lot of gray area and I think we need to clear some of that up so we can really make a of um whether or not this is a a project that can be afforded, if you will, right now. You look at the books and you say this just doesn't work. We just don't have enough money. I think if we look at financing a little bit differently, we may decide the same. We may say, "Yep, you know, after further examination, we still feel that this isn't ready." We may feel differently. We may feel like, "No, this given the way we want to account for this, there is that money available." So, um again, I think that's the best to go ahead and um let folks get this bid out, see what the real price is. Go back to the airport commission which has just been um pushed to July that meeting for the reasons Silus laid out in terms of the timing of when Mindot announces the grant awards and that kind of thing. Um so it'll be good timing that we'll have bids. It'll be MDOT grant award time. We'll know all that and be able to present that full package to the airport commission. So thanks. Thank you for that. Any thoughts or additional questions for either Silus or Mark on this? Yeah, follow-up question. If we go forward with that recommendation of putting out, you know, get the bids, get the numbers, we bring it back to the airport commission. What is Mindot Aviation looking for from us as far as a commitment's concerned in terms of if yep, we're going to give you the one point whatever million? I mean, is there a time frame that we are operating under? or is it going to be just a another one of those cascades of like, oh gosh, now we can't let this million dollars go and we got to, you know, find the money in the in the couch somewhere. I mean, what how far what does that look like? So, the funding is for state fiscal year 26. So, anytime between July 1 and June 30, 2026, sometime in that period, council would need to make a decision to move forward with a project or to turn back the funds. Okay. All right. So we would have till next year which was the original plan if I recall. Yeah. Yeah. And again there's a little bit of what's what's fiscal 26 and what's calendar 26. But yes, I think that was the thought of the plan. And you know I I think I I see where you're where you're going council and that there is that sort of feeling that there's also pressure that we got a grant. We should really take advantage of that. But I think sometimes the word grant in the airport world is thrown around a bit, you know, and most projects are funded by grants, right? So, it's not a special thing that only comes around once in a while and you really ought to take advantage of it. It not to say that funding is unlimited, but a good chunk of projects each year are funded by grant. And so, um, if you had to wait right another year or two, historically for the last teen years, it 9010 has been the rule. Would you say that, Silus? So it used to be it used to be 8020 and then it it got raised to 9010 and then it's just been over the last 3 years where that rate went up to 95%. And then now unfortunately it went back down. So what what Mindot's faced with is they get the same amount of development funds for all the airports each year. That amount hasn't changed from 3.5 million. Well, there's a lot of needs in the entire system. So they're trying to balance that in terms of awarding the most amount of projects. So, you know, it was great when it was 955. I wish it would continue at that at that rate, but now they've they've dropped it to 9010 just to kind of support more airports across the state. And they they evaluate that annually. So, you know, as much as we we hedged on 955, you know, and 9010, you know, it could change next year as well. Any questions at all? So, I think it's important um you know, we talk about budget of of the airport commission and and where that money is coming from. This project from all accounts that I've talked to is very important to extend this runway for safety and just for just more traffic coming into the airport. Um, and it's a it's a longer bigger picture question as to if there isn't funds that the airport's self-sufficient whether we want to consider using general funds to support this airport to moving forward. So, that's a bigger question and something that we'll entertain at the um plan at the airport commission, but I I think it'd be prudent just to hold off, go with Mark's suggestion and and um uh get at least get the bid so we know exactly where we're at. So, I don't know if that's really a motion or if someone wants to make a motion on that. Do you need a motion or you just I think we would like a motion to um authorize advertising for bids. I'll make a motion that we authorize to go out for bids on this project. I'll second. All right, we have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? All in favor? I I opposed. Motion carries. Thanks. Y next item 8B Northshore Trail 2025 street proven pavement maintenance project change order. Ryan, uh, mayor, city council, uh, tonight we're here with change order one that would in, uh, add additional roads to the project based on the favorable bids that were received. Those roads identified would be Irish Avenue, uh, Jupiter Avenue and Jupiter Court, a little branch that's comes off a Northshore trailer. Uh, the roads that are going to be added to this project are funded by fund 211, so they're not tied to the bond money at all. So that's totally separate. We were also able to lower the bond amount, you know, through the bids that were received. So, that's all taken care of in part of just Northshore Trail. This is fund 211 and uh the bids came in, you know, $300,000 lower than the estimate, but we also were very conservative on the amount that we were bidding in here. Uh but when we combined the two street projects, then a lot of the soft costs went to Northshore Trail. So there was hardly any engineering costs or surveying or permitting in the local street project here. And basically we're left with $750,000 from the CIP budget money that already is there. Uh but to add in roads, we're looking at just under $115,000 with the pricing that uh we've obtained with the project. So, working with public works, uh, tonight, uh, we bring forth change order number one and, uh, recommend approval for that amount to add the roads of Irish Avenue, Jupiter Avenue, and Jupiter Court in the amount of $114,000, and $765. Just a couple comments, if I may, Mr. Mayor. Yeah. Um, you know, first of all, I just want everyone to understand, you know, the word change order gets a a dirty name sometimes and people start to grumble and, you know, you see the memes on social media about the the yacht and his name change order and a little dingy that goes around with as the base bid, right? Um, this is not that. This is not a contractor pulling a fast one on us. This is us adding scope to the project. This is something we've asked for. Um, I just want to make sure everyone understands that uh the public tends to hear the word change order and assume something fishy is going on. Um, so the reason we've again added these roads is because we got such great bids. It's good to kind of double down on that and take advantage of that good pricing. Um, and then these roads are roads which we'd have to drive across the brand new pavement to come do later, you know, and it just seems like a a prudent thing to do to pave them. Now, um these roads are not ones that are, you know, brand new and we're just doing it for the fun of it. These are ones that are up on the CIP in the coming what maybe five years, Ryan. Um so, you know, it it's within that c certainly um time frame where it's certainly prudent to pave them and best to do it when we have a project there and we're not um you know, having to wreck the old the brand new pavement to one little culdeac or something like that. So, these are roads that were carefully chosen and as you can see, we've been conservative. Um, we've got, as Brian mentioned, several hundred,000 here room in the CIP, but we're still being conservative because we have a lot of budget issues to talk through here coming up and we're only choosing the roads that really made the most sense here to us. So, thank thank you for that. Any additional questions or thoughts? I just I have one. Did we ever hear back from the resident on Inman and 224th about the possibility of doing something there? We we did, Mr. Mayor, and um we had conversations with him and about the the ballpark pricing there. We were able to supply him with enough information to get in the rough ballpark of what it would cost on a per lot basis there. He brought that back to the folks that had had signed that petition and and his neighbors. They all felt like even if we could get that number down a little bit, it just wasn't going to be in the realm of possibility for a number of the people on that block. And the neighbors, to their credit, just didn't want some of the ones who felt like they could, they didn't want to do that to their neighbors that couldn't afford that. And so, um, the decision was made on their part to not bring that forward again. um just because they felt like even getting 30% that that number down 30% just wasn't going to be unless they could cut it in half maybe it just wasn't going to happen for them. So okay Mark could you elaborate a little bit on that? Could you give us an idea rough idea on cost for that road that you guys talked about and what it would have meant in terms of cost to the homeowners? Yeah, we were looking at almost $30,000 per lot. um that gets a little cloudy because lots are different sizes and you may end up assessing one of the larger lots two or three times that um to account for the fact that they could subdivide at some point. Um so it gets a little sticky but uh on that order. So and and you know we thought after you go through all that and look at equivalent lots and that kind of thing maybe it would be 25,000 per lot or 20,000 per lot even but at that number. Um, you know, that was just a lot for some of those folks to be able to come up with, right? Is there a practice that the city has or doesn't have in uh participating in that cost to reduce some of that cost since we've have extra money here? Rand, you could maybe speak to our assessment policy. your your assessment policy calls out if it is existing gravel road and you take it to an improved road or a brand new road that is 100% accessible to the property owner or new development development pays for its way. So that's been the assessment policy uh forever that I even before I became city engineer that I I'm aware of and uh it's been since I've been the city engineer the only thing that's changed as on reconstruction projects you used to assess 70% and uh would participate at 30% level and now it's uh you assess 20% and participate at 80% on a full reconstruction project. Last re full reconstruction project that was completed was 15th Street Southwest. It's a it's a it's a difficult policy um in the sense that it is a high burden to get a gravel road paid. The tough part is if you were to dip your toe into that water and say like let's see if we can participate at 20% 30% even in this case you can see again if we added 20% and this still probably isn't in the realm of possibilities for some of those folks. If we were to go to the 50% mark, it might work. But then you've really opened up a can of worms in terms of how many gravel roads you have and the people that might come knocking on your door and say, "Well, we'd like that 50% deal, too." And at some point, it just isn't going to be sustainable for you to invest in those those roads. Um what what generally happens is as areas mature, the density of homes along them gets to a point where then all of a sudden you're dividing up that cost by more more and more homeowners. And that's what the the difficult thing is in that area, especially to the north and east of the lakes where you have large lots. It becomes very difficult to you know essentially if you think about what an assessment is, you're paying for your your chunk of the street in front of you, right? And if your chunk of the street is 300 ft long, That's a lot of street to pay for. If your chunk is only 80 feet, that's a lot less. And if there's someone on both sides of the road, that makes a difference, too, right? And so, um, in this case, we we just have some lots that are, you know, several hundred feet wide and some that are a little bit narrower, some that run along the side of, you know, a really deep lot. Um, there's a lot of footage of street there and not many people to share in their piece of the pie. the math just the denominator and numerator just aren't favorable. Right. All right. With that, anyone interested in making a motion? I'll make a motion to approve the change order for Northshore Trail and the 2025 street pavement maintenance project. Motion. Is there a second? Second. Any further discussion? All in favor? I opposed. Motion carries. 8C, judicial ditch for grant agreement. Mark, Mr. Mayor and councel, um we have a couple of folks that'll want to weigh in tonight. Tim from Bolton Make is here to give us a little overview of um what this project is all about. I know some of you weren't necessarily here when we first initiated this um agreement and um nor was I. And so it's taken a few months to this in front of me because I wanted to make sure that I had a solid understanding of the project and what the intent was and how this was all going to work and then Amanda will speak to the particulars of the grant agreement. Um but just to kick this off um judicial ditch 4 um is a a waterway that runs through our our city and is sort of at the headarters which is why we have headarters Parkway uh of the Rice Creek chain of lakes and in cooperation with the Rice Creek wershed district we applied for a um a grant through the legislature and were given that special appropriation and um the appropriation in general will would cover the cost of purchasing land along this corridor and the design of that um corridor. The purpose of the project is to acquire that land for the construction of future construction as development occurs of um some floodway um sort of flood plane kind of area. So areas to have water surge and it's also to be able to do our normal um storm water treatment. So all the development storm water would be funneled to these areas which it's already going to naturally, right? That's the general idea is that this is where the storm water wants to get to in in the first place. And so we'll just we're going to just do a little bit better job of inviting it there and being having a more connected and um systemic way of of utilizing that area for storm water treatment rather than having each phase of the development have its own little pond and you end up with as you can imagine along this corridor you might have a dozen little ponds. Instead of that, let's have a nice greenway corridor that can have some amenities built in with it and um something that won't look as much like nerf ponds as we call them, you know, little storm water ponds. And it'll look much more natural and it'll also serve this purpose of holding back flood waters in much larger events. And so with that, I think I'll turn it over to Tim to go through the little presentation here. Jolene's gonna pull it up on the screen for you. Yes. Good evening, Mayor and Council. Thank you, Mark, for that introduction. Uh, my name is Tim Olsson with Boltman Bank Water Resources Engineer. Um, some of this will be a little bit of a repeat, but uh, you know, the as as Mark had mentioned, you know, the this drainage system that's out there right now in combination of open channel and tile uh really does define the the natural drainage way even before agriculture, you know, came into the area. Uh now, you know, those open channels and drain tiles do support agricultural drainage. Um there are some private field connections that are out there and currently Rice Creek is is really the ditch authority. Um over time, as development has occurred around the the drainage systems, um portions of the ditch have been transferred to the city. So the most recent um with Hidden Creek and and around the Headarters Parkway area, portions of that main branch have actually been um partially transferred over to the city. So, I just I want to make sure that that I mention that part of it because as this tile system evolves and development occurs around it, um that systemic transfer of the of the ditch will have to happen. Um and and really then at at the end of the day, all of those tile systems define how fast the city of Forest Lake can can discharge water into the adjacent communities downstream. So all of that really sets up for, you know, what what could be uh a greenway system. Um as Mark had mentioned, you know, those tile systems define those natural drainage patterns. Um we can build facilities at the regional level that comply with local storm water management. That could be the city's MS4, that could be watershed district, um you know, other county requirements. um and then use those spaces to integrate um you know park spaces around the storm water features, protect downstream systems from flooding. The Rice Creek chain of lakes in particular has had issues with flooding. Um so Forest Lake being at the top of the watershed um you know it's a great opportunity to help work with Rice Creek and and Washington County to reduce those rates. Uh and then of course improve water quality all to that, you know, to that that regulatory compliance mechanism. So in 2023, the city was uh was successful in securing $5.7 million that was in part for property acquisition and for uh advancing the design of these systems. Um if you can see in this map, it was really broken into three areas uh from highest priority in the north to lowest priority in the south. Um in the the northernmost areas, we have seen development over the last handful of years. Um there's even some, you know, new plotting that's happening there. This is just an example of of some some line work. You can kind of see in the background there on the northern part um of of what those development concepts look like. Um you know, since that area is under under development, it's a little bit more challenging to build regional features. So, we're really focusing in that middle area. uh the next potential spot to develop if we move south and then future concepts even further south along, you know, what is the the southern part of JD4 and JD2. This is just zooming in on um on that focus area right now. Um we're identifying land around the existing tile just to leverage that that topograph topographic area um and the and the drainage conveyances that are out there now. Um, but this in concept is what, you know, what these systems could look like, uh, as far as greenways go. That larger wetland area with the boardwalks that you see on the on the right hand side of the of the image, um, you know, that area stands out because there's a there's what I call a closed contour. So, the the area really does want to trap water. It's probably a historic wetland, but um, since farming has been out here for a 100 plus years, it's difficult to see what the extents of that wetland might have been. Um and so it it has since been farmed but could be converted back to a wetland for um things like flood storage and habitat improvement and so on. Um on top of potential for for additional parks integration. And then as the you know as the as the ditch moves downstream, we reexpose that tiled area to more open water features. Um use those for storm water management and flood control. Meet the regulatory compliance for the areas draining to it. Um and then build park spaces around them. And then just kind of in cross-section, this is what something could look like here too when you have residential development adjacent to the ditch area. Um, you can see that there's flood plane and habitat here. There's there's storm water management, integrated park spaces. And with that, we can either open it up to further discussion or just a couple comments that came to mind as as Tim was presenting here is that, you know, the sketches here and stuff show things like paths and boardwalks and, you know, pavilions and that kind of thing. Um, those are all things that are not funded by this grant, right? The grant is to purchase the property. Um, and Amanda is going to go into the particulars of that in a minute here. Um, but I just want to make that clear that this is for the design of this, doing all the storm water and figuring out the layout of this thing and then to actually uh purchase this property and um the construction of it would we would um we would need to set some policies around the development of this area in terms of okay adjacent land owners who we're going to be purchasing some of this property from. We've done this work for you in terms of finding places for you to pond your storm water. Um and so normally that would require you to take up space in your development so you are given that advantage that you have a much more efficient use of your land. Um and part of that is going to be that we're going to expect um you know you to construct some of these things um in terms of the connections to this area and building a pond in this area um maybe building trails and park amenities along the way. But it it does want to be sort of a passive park mostly. I think this is going to be playgrounds and stuff all over the place. You got a little concept of that here, but for the most part, this is going to be sort of natural greenway corridor type of of stuff. Um, so with that, uh, maybe I'll just turn it over to Amanda to explain kind of the particulars of the grant agreement and where we're headed with that. Thank you, your council. So the grant agreement is with through the DNR and that governs essentially uh how we get to spend the money and probably the most important thing is if or how they could take the money back. Uh so the the 5.7 million has been broken out into I think as uh as was shown um a portion for purchasing the property and then a purchase a portion for engineering. We can toggle those numbers. So the numbers that are provided in the grant agreement right now are flexible. Uh the most important thing to understand from this agreement approving this agreement is that whatever we propose for our scope of project we must complete that project. If we do not complete that project the state can take back the $5.7 million. The way that it works is obviously there's already been uh time and money and energy spent on this project uh both by Bolton and M frankly by myself on this agreement and and other uh various actual real expenses that the city has incurred. We are able to submit invoices to the state and get re you know reimbursed for the work that's already been done and then obviously work moving forward um including all of the acquisition costs of of purchasing the property. So again, that's that's going to be my time. If there's a realtor involved, that would be their time. Um the closing, all you know, all of those costs are all reimburseable through this grant. But the most important thing is that whatever we've scoped for our project is uh flexible enough that we can say we have completed our project. Thank you very much. Um and be able to close out the grant agreement with the state without risking a clawback. To that end, this agreement um has been we have done that to the degree that we are able to do that. The DNR and the state offer us uh Minnesota uh bud office of budget and management, management and budget, whatever those words go, whatever order they are in. Um they offer very little flexibility in terms of this agreement. So the vast majority of the flexibility is in the exhibits that we've included in addition to many many emails that I have with the DNR and office of management and budget um to confirm that if we need to adjust the p the properties that we're going to purchase, we have the ability to do that. If we uh want to spend a significant more, you know, amount of money on the engineering versus the acquisition, we can do that. And I have been told time and time again, yes, you do have the ability to to be flexible, but whatever you say you're going to complete, you must complete. Um, we do have until 2028, July of 2028, June, June of 2028 to sort of complete the project and provide sort of our certification to the DNR that we are in fact done. That would include the acquisition of the property. The property that we are purchasing does um is obviously owned by private property owners right now, right? Uh that will have a restriction on the deed that requires that it must be used for this project and it cannot be used for something else. That is important to note because it will probably drive the what we purchase. So, for example, if we are looking at somebody's property and they have a full 40 acres, but we think we maybe only need 30, we might need to do some sort of a uh property split, uh, you know, like a a a lot, a subdivision, minor subdivision, and only purchase the property that we know that we need because we are encumbering the property for a minimum of 33 and a half years. um with this you use youth restriction that we have no ability to change that is set in stone we can't change that and I did talk to the DNR about that as well if we could trade like let's say a pro you know we think we need to shift this 50 feet south 50 feet north whatever that is also not an option so staff is aware that we have to be very precise about what we're purchasing I I'm available for questions on the grant agreement you have any I I think that's a a good description, Amanda, and I think um laid out all the the key issues, and that's why we're being very conservative in what we're showing and very as broad as we can in our description of what the project scope is. Um, and Amanda has gone to great lengths to ensure that we have that flexibility and staff is very comfortable with what we have in front of us and that we can complete that work. Questions? First of all, do we feel like the the money that we've been given is going to be enough to buy the land that we need to buy? Yeah, we've, you know, if you looked at the original scope, um, it was sort of imagined there was three different I think in the one figure. Maybe Tim, you want to toggle back to that one? There's sort of the north, middle, and south there. The original scope had a sort of I don't I don't know that it imagined we would be able to buy all of it, but I think it imagined that we could at least pick and choose from those things. And with Amanda's discovery that no, they're going to make you complete the project and we're going to get all we we shrunk that down to the to the middle section there which we think we can, you know, acquire all of that property um within our budget. And I think what we are looking to do too and and that we got some guidance from the DNR folks was that it's easier to have a big scope and then it's easier to do the opposite of having a big scope and saying, "Oh, we were only able to purchase so much of it as opposed to having a small scope coming back to them and saying, "Hey, we have additional funds. Could we add the purchase of this property or the purchase of that property and there would be that flexibility um to can't do that." Yeah, that sounded like um you know a much better way to approach it than the than the opposite way. I think, you know, at the end of the day, if we purchase what's in this initial agreement and we're we have money left over, um, we'll have that choice to just give the rest of that back or see if we can work a deal with them. And I think they'll be amendable is what we discovered from them that they'll be amendable to additions as opposed to subtractions. Have we had any preliminary conversations with the land owners? Ryan, going back, have we talked with these folks? Do you know Abby or um I believe uh the former zoning administrator did have and former city administrator Patrick Casey did have conversations with some of the land owners. Um primary land owner where the large pond would be and I have been in conversations. They're eager to continue those conversations, re-engage in those conversations. Also, as part of our southwest um infrastructure phasing project, we've had communication with each of these land owners. So, it's I think pretty easy for us to get them into a room and restart those conversations. They know what's coming. So, they kind of agreeable to to this. Um, I think I can't say that all of them we have necessarily acknowledgement that they are agreeable. They know that there's been a project in the mix. There are some that are more eager than others. Okay. How many acres are we talking about here? That's a good question. That is a good question. I don't have that number off the top of my head. I can figure that out though. And how about how about individual property owners? Do we know approximately what that No, in this middle section, what did that count? There's like four, six, maybe. I think there's a couple. I mean, there's a number of different properties, but the the land owners themselves, I think, are only three or four. Might be six, eight parcels, but only four owners. Yeah. Okay. So, you know, as a city, I don't know that we necessarily want to be in the development business, right? Um, and so moving this from just raw land and then ultimately bringing it from a tile to actual channels and such. I mean, there's some real money involved. So, are we going to set it up in such a way that that is on the developer just like if it was they're putting in a new road like, hey, you need to do this part of the project to make sure that we have a final design that looks like what we've envisioned. Yeah, I think it's an excellent question, Mr. Eric. I think what would look to do is to include in the design work of this project some the setting of some policies um in terms of what we're expecting developers to do in exchange for what we've done for them which is to purchase land on their behalf to accommodate their facilities right um again that that increase in efficiency of the the remaining land that they have um and and quite frankly too the purchase of some land that would be marginal develment otherwise, right? So, you might have some areas that would be tough to develop given all the wetlands that break it up. Um, you know, I think those exchanges of those um benefits should be um easy enough to make those policies work for us that yeah, the developer would have to complete this um part of the improvement. The other thing we've looked at um is that there are grants available to stack on top of this grant. um in terms of you've got a plan, you've got the property, now let's implement that that grant. And I I know that Rice Creek is going to be a partner in that because that's ultimately remember ultimately this came from Rice Creek, which is they want to store water as far upstream as possible at the headarters is the best spot because everybody downstream benefits. If you put if you put this um in the middle of the chain, right, everybody upstream doesn't get the benefit. But if you put at the top, everyone downstream benefits from this flood control. So Rice Creek is going to be eager to find ways to get this project built. Um I don't know, Tim, do you have anything else you want to chat about those grant opportunities or Yeah, the I mean the MPCA has resiliency grants right now too for implementation. So getting, you know, the project all the way so it's ready to be constructed. You know, there's there's money through um through uh the the MPCA. Um, you know, Bowser has clean water funds too here for for uh water quality improvements that go above and beyond. Habitat restoration with a with a large-scale wetland uh project. You know, there's money out there for that too from a habitat perspective. Um, even, you know, folks like Ducks Unlimited would be interested in potentially, you know, partnering on projects like these. So, yeah. Tim, is there a an example somewhere else relatively close that where this has happened and it's successful and what that looks like today? Fargo is not very close, but uh the city of Fargo, you know, with all the flooding that they have, they have these greenway corridors all over the place. I think you see a lot more of these storm water management corridors along like um overhead utilities, you know, a lot uh electrical lines, you know, that run. They they they tend to build um storm water features underneath them. You don't really have that case here, but those do those are very successful. Um, I've designed some projects out in the city of Marshall, Minnesota, too, and industrial parks where, um, those those regional storm water facilities are constructed ahead of development. It's used to to help incentivize and catalyze development. Um, and so I I think that this this is, you know, in a lot of ways very similar to that city of prior. Go ahead. One of the other ones I'm aware of is that um, the Ford plant in St. Paul did a very similar but more urban version of this. They sort of mapped out this corridor for the storm water features and so all the development of that site doesn't each each phase again doesn't have to build their own storm water. It's all collected in one. They use it as a an amenity to the to the development itself, right? There's very much um a shared use of that that that water feature and it's they use walking paths and that kind of stuff or are amenity to the the development itself. was um I don't know if you know this but the the lakes development in Blaine was that part of this because they used I mean there's well actually can boat on these but bigger scale I don't know if that familiar enough with the project but I I know what you're talking about it seems I know LAR's development too in line near Centerville they're up right up in 35 very similar to that there's a a winding storm water feature throughout the whole thing and there aren't aren't those little ponds everywhere and I think that's the biggest benefit here and at the end of the day what I ask myself is you know what's in this for a city it's great to store water for the rest of Rice Creek downstream which includes some of Forest Lake you know let's not lose that sight of that but you know what's in it for us even though there's not not money out of our pocket here are we losing good developable land that was one of the first things that jumped out at me like oh we're going to buy up a bunch of land and build no homes on it doesn't seem like a good idea except that you start to look and you go, "Well, this is marginal land in the first place because it's along these areas that are going to have wetlands. It's area that someplace in the development is going to need a storm pond and is, you know, why not consolidate that into one?" I think when it comes to maintenance and things of that nature for long-term storm water um type maintenance, this is what you want, right? You want one easily accessible place for public works to be able to go in maint maintain those ponds as opposed to fighting people's fences and sheds trying to get to a backyard storm water pond. Um those things just get really problematic. I know in tiny town of Centerville we had over 110 storm water ponds in that town 4,000 people. That's an awful big burden on the city to maintain all those, right? And the more we can do this kind of sensible putting things in one spot, the better off we are, I think. And and this doesn't go against our moratorum on wetland banking, does it? We're not necessarily constructing any wetland bank with this. Okay? You know, again, we're not constructing anything at this point in time. We're we're just purchasing the property. I mean, I think it's nothing in here is requiring us to do a wetland bank of any sort. That ing being part of the discussion at some point um as a viable something to do here. But right now, no, that's not part of the I guess the only other concern is I would hate to get in a situation where we're in domain type thing where we're taking property. That would be the last thing I'd want to do. And so if long as we've had these conversations or at least initial ones, I'd feel I feel better about with property owners about their willingness to engage, I feel better about that. So that probably is a good thing to to just chat about a little bit. Uh I'm not sure if we could not acquire any property and say that we've completed our project here. So at a minimum we would need to find one willing seller to sell us their property. Uh the alternative to that is eminent domain. And so just to confirm what I am hearing is that the council does not have the interest in taking and obviously paying for but but sort of forcibly taking property. It is 100% uh cooperative negotiation style. That was just my point. I don't know how everyone else feels on that. I'll make a comment on that. Um, how so, as I'm thinking about this and as you guys are all talking and now we've brought up a couple other things, who's who's valuing this property and and who's to keep us from uh someone holding out for the most money if we don't have at least the option for eminent domain? I mean, if we get into this project, right, and all of a sudden we've got maybe two of the parcels or three of the parcels agreed to, but two are holding out, thinking, "Well, I want an extra million or I want an extra half a million." Is this land right now buildable as it sits? Um, are they or are they all wet lands and they're it's really not buildable land? Some of it is certainly buildable. Um, Council Member Miller, some of it is is not. Um but yes, it is it is buildable land. Um I think the one of the things to keep in mind is that um even if there's a hold out somewhere in the middle here, it doesn't necessarily require that the greenway portion of this, the continuity of it is not as important as finding places to do this along the way. And so even though this a nice pretty picture that flows and nice throughout the land here and it be great for habitat and that kind of thing to have this greenway corridor if we had to have a section that was piped and a little bit less green um that wouldn't be the end of the project. I mean we could still do that. So we in the fact that the the water has to go through that area anyway um and so any developer would have to convey the water through there through a pipe or something of that nature. I don't think that having a hole out in the middle Again, it's it's not quite as pretty of a picture and it wouldn't be as ideal, but it could be done without having, you know, by skipping over, so to speak. Also, just note that branch that goes out to the west, the skinnier portion, you know, they're going to have to maintain that drainage in that drain tile, whether it's whether it's a drain tile or it's an open ditch or what storm feature that they put there, just like they did up in Hidden Creek to the north. You see the splits in between the development? Well, there's that drainage that's been maintained through that area and there's a trail through there, too. So, it kind of looks like it all kind of fits like a planned development, right? So, that kind of be same scenario here. They're going to have to maintain that drainage of that drain tile. really probably what the the answer to your question council member Miller is that if there was a hold out we had purchased everybody on either side and then we they came to develop we would look at them and say it's time to incorporate this greenway into your design of your plan and by the way you're going to own you you own that land and so it's just land that's going to go unutilized by you for homes right and so wouldn't you have rather had us purchase that from you as to you donating that with the development. Obviously, there's it gets complicated with park dedication and what would be allowed as far as a credit and what wouldn't be, but in the end, I think this is going to be a much more efficient way for land owners to develop in that they'll have the land that's sort of usually a part of your development plan um some of that paid for and purchased off them in the first place. Ryan, when you say they, you mean the city maintain or who who's they? Well, let's just say the big square was developable land, but most of it's wetland. Let's say a development comes in there, right? That drain tile that comes through that south southern portion of their property. Uh you can see it goes way to the southeast too and then way out to the west where it eventually'll daylight and drain. Long long story short, it finally gets to Mississippi someday, you know. But that portion of that drain tile on that southern portion of their that big square, they're going to have to maintain that drainage whether it's replacing uh with a new storm water pipe or converting it to an open channel flow. and some of the renderings that you just saw. They're not going to be able to just put a house there. The developer may ask when you say maintain like continue it, not keep it up, right? Okay. Eventually, we'd be in charge of keeping up. That's what I It'll become public infrastructure when the development comes in, but the drain tile will be removed and replaced with either new storm sewer pipe or open channel flow. and it could be rerouted, but the drainage on the east side has to somehow still get through that box to the west side. In in any interim condition, the the tile or the open channel has to be maintained for farmer access. It's really about the the production land um and their their prescriptive right to the to the tile. There's no tile there now, though. There is there is tile there. Yes, there is. Yes. So, you can't put storm water ponds in. you'd have to do something like this. You'd have to phase it appropriately um to make sure that the that the agricultural land still remains in production in the in that interim condition. Um that would be part of the phasing and the and that early design piece. Um I'd also throw in that it would be prudent to um to do some wetland delineations out here too, so we know exactly where those wetlands are. All of that could be upfront work too. um you know that can be done ahead of the development. But but yes, the that tile has to stay in operation until the whole area is developed um to ensure that the the productive land um still has access to it. It it could be converted to an open channel, but there still has to be that tile that that additional private tile connection. So going back to my first question, I guess about the valuation, how is that done? I think we'll we'll certainly do some appraisals um on on things as we um look at purchasing this. Um you know, I think that uh through the design, we'll be able to have a better idea too as to what sort of efficiencies that are gained through this. Um so that'll all kind of weigh into it. Um Amanda, do you want to speak to the process there? I'm assuming we would have um close sessions to discuss offers and that kind of thing just like any other purchase of land. Yeah. Yes. We would definitely need to have some sort of appraisal. And I I should just share that the reality is even if we are doing an agreement with the property owner where we're we're both agree and we're we're shaking hands and we're happy technically it's still sort of considered under the umbrella of eminent domain. It's just we're not condemning it to take it. But because we are the government, um the courts in Minnesota have found that we always have the um stick uh the threat of taking your property. And so because of that, they the the uh the current opinion by by the court is that we're not exactly equal parties in a in a negotiation. And um does that matter? not exactly in this situation because unless you're willing to actually pull the trigger and you know have me file documents in a court that says we're condemning we're we're really not in a in a controver or you know conflict posture but it is I think important to understand especially for the council you are sort of already in the eminent domain world when you're when you're doing this um there are some some very complicated legal things but I don't see any of those becoming issues here because we don't have anybody that would be needing to relocate, right? There isn't any housing here that's or people who live here that have to move. If that were the case, it would be a completely different conversation. So, that said, uh yes, we would do appraisals depending upon what we wanted, you know, how we wanted to do it. Um there are people called rightway agents. They're generally used to go acquire property um for you know road projects, but they can be used for projects like this and they their job is to go out and explain the project and get the person hopefully interested in you know selling their property. Um in the alternative certainly that could be something that city staff does. All negotiations would come before the council under you know close sessions to talk about what the numbers are. you'd be able to see the appraisals and see you know what the proposed um final amounts are as well. So we if we enter if we execute this grant agreement what are we committing to? If we execute this grant agreement, we are committing to a project where uh we undertake design work for this storm water management system and that we acquire property to further that project. It does not require any construction. The property that we have identified is the property that is on the screen right now. Uh that does not mean that we need to acquire every single piece of property that we see on the screen, but that is sort of the the most amount of property that we've proposed we would purchase. Okay. if if we um didn't do anything and didn't take this money and developers came through in the future and wanted to let's just say start uh on the very far east side and start developing coming down from the north where the current um I see some drawings for lots up on top there um and they and let's say the farmstead there sold and and they sold their property and and the developer wanted to build Couldn't they just start developing that land and put it in holding ponds like they've always done? Absolutely they could. Yes. Um what what becomes problematic is the the broken up nature of that development and the phased nature of it. It's difficult to, especially if it's multiple developers along the way or multiple property owners, to get them all to build a contiguous and um fluent project that might look anything like what we see in front of us, right? You end up you'll end up with much more broken up landscape that will have smaller storm water features. Um it'll be much more difficult to make contiguous trail connections, greenway connections, and those type of things. This is a this is really is a a grant to um you know the win-win here is that we get a lot of good things for the environment. We're we're holding back flooding, nice habitat and and water quality features, but in the end what we really have is a a better planned development system um that we often try to do. If you, you know, if you look back at your headarters, um, 123 master plan, it was a very wellthoughtout master plan for 123 acres of of headarters. And, um, that is what you're sort of getting here. So, you're getting the groundwork for a well planned out development pattern for this chunk of property here. And if I remember right, sorry, if I remember right, uh, what this develop to be able to develop this area, I mean, this was still a few years down the road, wasn't it? Yeah, Abby, I don't know if you've had interest in development concepts here. Um, no, not necessarily because this is uh outside of the not urban growth boundary, the municipal service area for this decade. So the property farthest north is our 2030 mus line development couldn't occur without a comp plan amendment until after 2030 or beyond. So which isn't that far away. Um but generally speaking it's development in south of that kind of blue hash line is too premature right now. So there's not a demand a high demand for developing currently for this property. Uh no there is not. There will be as the development just to the north of that blue dotted line um continues though. If we go forward with this project, do you think developers would be more interested in developing in the future? That's certainly the hope is this this will become an attractive place to do development because you've got a plan in place, a vision. You know, I think developers will usually tell you, you know, I want to go someplace with a a vision for the whole neighborhood, right? Because they want to know, okay, if I'm going to develop this 40 acres, what's going to be on the east and west and north and south of me, right? They don't want junk around them, right? they want to be a part of a bigger larger concept that they know is going to have some, you know, has a again a a mapped out vision that they can share to with people. Obviously, you know, you look at that picture right there and if you can imagine a developer showing that to a a potential homeowner, right? Saying, "Wouldn't you love to live in this area that has this greenway corridor and a nice natural feature along the whole southern border of what we're doing?" I think that's going to be a selling feature and that's it's going to increase the the viability of their project. Yeah. Yeah. No, I think it's a I think it's a good project. Um I guess I I wish kind of knew what some of those assessed or not assessed, but you know, market rate values are, you know, we uh we just closed on a piece of property and uh sold it for half what we paid for it. So, I don't know. Just makes me nervous when we start buying land because we're track record. But Mr. Mr. May, I'll make a motion to authorize the execution of the grant agreement for the judicial ditch for regional drainage system project. We have a motion. Is there a second? I'll second. Any further discussion? All in favor? I opposed. Motion carries. Right. Eight 8D assistant city administrator appointment. Mark. Hi, Mr. Mayor and councel. I'm happy to bring this uh item forward to you. Um, as you know, you know, staffing has been a a big focus of mine in the first few months I've been here. Um, we're, I think, nine positions down of our 62. And, um, one of the key positions of our leadership team is the assistant city administrator position. It's been called a few different things in a few different iterations of our our plan over the last few years. I think at one point it was called a um, a administrative services director. And um in in my iteration of the the management plan here um we're we're calling it the assistant city administrator. And um you know typically we may open up a position like this to outside candidates and go through a process. Um but what we're finding right now is that the market is is very tight and um you know in combination with that fact and the fact that we just have an excellent excellent candidate in our midst here um the decision was made to bring this forward to the council for consideration which is to appoint uh Jolene uh to the position of assistant city administrator. Um the proposal would be to have her retain her title as the city clerk um in the interim until we can either find a city clerk or hire a deputy clerk that works into that position as city clerk over the course of a year or so. Um and have have Jolene help mentor that person. Um and then what this also does is it accelerates our um key hires in the area of HR um and and a few other um the deputy clerk position and just sort of filling out that administrative wing of the of the staff here. So um with with that I would take any any questions about the the position or the process. Um but that is uh my my recommendation to you tonight. Great. Any questions or comments? I think it's a it's an excellent idea and excited assuming the motion passes uh excited to have Julian in that role. She's certainly highly qualified and did a incredible job uh serving as interim and so glad to glad to have her stepping up from this position. Any other thoughts? I agree. Just thought Jolene has been fantastic to work with and in the interim we I don't know where we would be without her. So I'm all in favor. I agree. Yeah, I I would just add um you know, it's been a tough couple months here at the city with administration. Uh department heads have stepped up. Jolene, you certainly have stepped up. I don't know where we would be uh with without you. And so with that appreciation and welldeserved, I would make a motion that we um promote Jolene Chika to assistant city administrator. Second. Motion second. Any further discussion? All in favor? I I opposed. Motion carries. Congratulations and thank you. Thank you, council, mayor. [Applause] All right. Uh we're going to put you right to work here. Looks like 8 F uh amended 2025 regular uh meeting calendar. No, OE, sorry. Feed schedule ordinance 758 fee schedule updates. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um Jessica's put together an amended fee schedule for council's consideration this evening. This fee schedule amendment includes uh some adjustments and additions to the building inspections portion of the fee schedule based on the conversation that that council had last week around grading fees. So the fee schedule amendment does include those fees as discussed. Um it's important to note that the fees around grading do not apply to decks um just general additions onto a house swimming pools. These are for new construction as was the direction of council. Additionally, exhibit A in the building construction and fee inspection fees portion of the fee schedule, um staff has recommended an addition of a plan review fee, which allows for a $55 per hour fee to be assessed when plans need to be resubmitted. So, it's essentially a resubmitt fee because that incurs additional staff time and work. Um, this is common in many cities to see these resubmitt fees. We've never had one in our fee schedule, but I think it just reflects that there's time and and staff value or staff, you know, work that's put in when we're going back to the folks who are submitting these plans that are not complete. So anyways, um the the ordinance before you is 756, an ordinance amending city code chapter 35 for fees and service charges. Um I'm happy to answer any questions. I think Abby can speak to the grading additions if necessary, but my understanding from Jessica's staff report and discussion with her is that the additions to the fee schedule are consistent with council direction from the meeting in May on May 12th. Any questions, council? Make a motion. I'll make a motion uh to approve the 2025 fee schedule, ordinance 756, an ordinance amending city code chapter 35, fees and service charges. We have a motion. Is there a second? I'll second. Any further discussion? All in favor? I opposed. Motion carries. Next item is the amended 2025 regular meeting calendar. Jolene. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um, council on the DAS, I provided you an updated copy of the feast or the the amended calendar. Um, I'm going to eat a little crow. In my staff report and on the calendar that was included in the packet, I had a couple errors. So, those have been corrected here. Um, essentially what this with this amendment, um, this would adjust our regular city meeting schedule. Um, EDA meetings would be moved to the first Monday of each month at 5:30 p.m. Currently, EDA precedes the first council meeting on the second Monday of the month. So, it's a fairly significant change. Council meetings would remain on the second and fourth Monday of each month, but would commence at 6 pm rather than 700 p.m. Council workshops would remain on the third Monday of each month, and those would commence at 6:00 p.m. as well. This would also move planning commission meetings from a start time of to a start time at 6 PM rather than 700 p.m. Meetings would remain on the 2nd and fourth Mondays of each month. Airport commission meetings would remain on the first Wednesday of every other month, but again would start at 6 pm. There'd be no change to the start time under this model for our our parks commission meeting that's currently on the third Wednesday of each month at 5:30. So, um for your consideration is this proposed amended meeting calendar. Um this is based on feedback provided by council at the April workshop. Uh we can certainly make amendments to this if if there's other changes that council would like. If council wants to talk about some different options or different meeting times, we certainly don't need to adopt this at this time. Um but if it's something that council wants to move forward with, I would recommend that council presents the or approves the amended calendar as presented this evening. Um and this would be effective starting in July. So would not be going forward in June. We'd have another month or so till we get going with this new schedule. Thank you. Any questions? Quick question. Did we get a chance to talk to many of the EDA members about moving that uh since that's the most significant change? Um I did hear uh from a few of them, not all of them. I did also didn't make personal phone calls, but I from the few of them that I heard from were not opposed to that change at all. I think we did reach out to all the committees and commissions and asked, you know, their opinion and got some feedback and the parks commission for one wanted to stick with where they were and didn't make sense to move them back maybe necessarily. So, uh, so this came up, you know, after being on council for two years and watching, you know, being involved in some late meetings and staff being here late. Um, I think the idea of a 7 o'clock meeting start was back when people were not as flexible with their work schedule. So, they would, you know, come home, have dinner, and then get up to city hall to be a part of a discussion. That I think we can all agree changed quite a bit. And so, the idea was to move these up and just just better for staff, better for council, uh, and still have the public be able to attend these meetings at at six o'clock. Uh the the only one that I um have a little bit of concern with is in the idea of trying to lessen the load of staff and and more meetings is that EDA meeting being uh that first Monday and then now we're adding an extra day for staff and for council. So now you're here part part of council I should say two members of council now you're here four Mondays a month. And so I don't know if there's any additional thought there. And I don't know how we would adjust that. Uh potentially maybe we go with this and once we're staffed up, maybe it's it's a 4:30 start on that third that third Monday when there's a workshop so that there's not such a load for staff to prepare for a regular uh council meeting. But just a thought there. Um, one of the challenges that we have with our EDU right now is they're really only have an hour and 15 minutes once a month. And I know that there used to be two meetings a month, but I really feel like this EDA may be struggling with feeling like there can really get into something and work on something with only an hour at a time. And I do think that as we grow the community and kind of that economic development component of the community development department that it's going to really give that body some better opportunity to work on some projects of substantial means. Um I've got a number of things right now that are kind of in holding. Part of it's our lack of staffing, but part of it too is just the getting it all ready and and together, but also getting it all ready together, but having to limit it to, you know, 70 minutes. And so I understand that it does present another meeting for some of the members of the council that sit on the EDA as well as myself. Um, but I do think that this is going to be better in the long run for the EDA's operations. I think that we should re-evaluate after we're fully staffed um to see for the EDA if even an evening meeting. I know some EDAs will meet earlier in the day inviting more members of the business community to be involved. And so those are things I think in time I'd like to explore with the EDA. Um, but right now to feel like we're kind of making progress, I think that we need some dedicated time where they're not backing right up to that council meeting, maybe rushing through things. Makes sense. Thank you. Right. Anyone interested in making a motion? I'll make a motion to approve the 2025 amended city meeting calendar. Second. All right. Motion is second. Any further discussion? All in favor? I opposed. Motion carries. 8G, hiring update and proposed changes. Mark, Mr. Mayor and Council, um had uh the planning manager position open for several weeks now and we've had a limited number of of applicants. Um as I mentioned, the job market out there is very volatile right now. Some positions were getting good number of applications, others were not. Um and in reviewing that position and then sort of parallel to that, we have a building official position we're looking to get out on the street and um you know just evaluating those salaries uh that we're proposing versus our comparable cities um data from the League of Minnesota's salary survey. Um we did notice that there was perhaps a a discrepancy where we're offering a bit lower salary than the average. Um and so we are recommending that uh we up the uh classification grade of those positions um based on you know again evaluating the overall um responsibilities of those positions and the job descriptions in lie of what other cities are are expecting out of these positions and what they're paying and are recommending that um both the building official and planning manager position move from a grade 12 to a grade 14 on the pay scale. Um the budget impact of those two positions would be in total would be about $22,000 a year. Um this year we don't have any issue with that being incorporated into the budget given all the absences. Uh we'll be fine on the budget and you know going into next year we're just going to need to put that in the projection and weigh it against all the other things we have to decide on. So that would be staff's recommendation is to to move those um forward to the grade 14 position and then um you know update the advertisement for those jobs to reflect that to attract more candidates. Any questions council or concerns or thoughts? We're still working on a what was that project that we working on as far as job classification? Yeah, classification of compensation study. Unfortunately, um that won't be done until midepptember. Um that's just kind of phase one of it and probably it'll drag into December. Um and actually, as I've been told by many people, many of times that's even an aggressive schedule for these type of studies. They really do take quite a an extended period of time to complete. So obviously, we just can't wait around for that. It doesn't mean that these things won't have recommendations out of coming out of that study that say maybe that should move up or down and we'll just have to adjust when we get there. But at this point, this is staff's best guess of um you know, and it's educated guess, right? We're doing our best we can research wise without getting into full on classification and compensation study type analysis. Um you know, looking at various cities that we know in the area that have similar positions and that kind of thing. So, I it's just the environment we're in right now and to find quality people uh pay a little bit more. That's what we have to do. We want the best possible people to serve the residents here. So, anyone interested in making a motion? I'll make a motion to adjust the job description for the city planning manager position as noted above and to adjust the job classification for both the city planning manager and building official positions from a grade 12 to grade 14. We have a motion. Is there a second? I'll second. Any further discussion? All in favor? I opposed. Motion carries. Number nine, staff updates administrators report. Yeah, for the uh second time now, we've produced this administrator's report that's in your packet. And um again, we just offer uh if there's any questions on the report or if anyone had any comments on it, we'd be glad to hear those comments or questions. And um you know, uh given um Jolene's new role, we'll be probably transitioning um some of those duties in terms of communication to that role over time here. And so we'll we'll see if there's um any adjustments, but I mean I know both of us would would love to hear any feedback on this format and and whether or not it's um something that could should move forward or if it should be adjusted in any in any way. Obviously, there's a a pretty good effort that goes into producing a ninepage report or whatever it is here. Um so again, any feedback you had would be appreciated. Any thoughts, questions? Looks great. I, you know, read through it, um, I was going through the packet before and I mean, there's a lot of, lot of great information in here, so appreciate it. I agree. Yeah, I think it's very helpful. Great. Thanks for everyone's work on on that. I know it takes some time. Um, so, but it's appreciated to get that in information out. All right. We have mayor and council updates. Council member Ericson, you have any staff first? Uh, we're we haven't we've kind of passed on staff, right? We're not doing staff updates. We're doing Yeah. Administrator. If there is anything the staff has wants to add though certainly welcome. Just Ryan, me, do you want to just comment on the detours coming up here? Yeah, I actually had that one. Highway 97 is coming starting uh Monday 5:00 a.m. June 2nd. Uh so highway 97 will be closed between Hornsby and Falcon Avenue and uh detours will be put up coordinated with Jolene today to start getting some information to her that we can put on the city's websites and uh on the Facebook page and then I'll get her some other stuff how we can get signed up for if you guys want to get signed up for email updates and stuff like that u moving forward with that project. So, and we're also have some inquiries in on Broadway uh to get an more current accurate update on their pro project schedule. So, obviously we want that thing to wrap up as soon as we can and so we're encouraging Washington County to be cognizant fact that we're going to be closing the two major east west corridors here down at the same time in the state obviously aware of that. Is there a way to they put that on hold or is that that's going regardless? It'll be going. Okay. All right. That's be a tough two weeks here. Broadway won't be shut down completely. They'll have, you know, still have one at least one lane in each direction, but that rain that we got for that week. Obviously, you can see a lot of stuff's been open and left for a long time, including the bike uh pathway on the south side of Broadway there, that was already planned to be done. So, some uh working through some weather. So, all right. Well, we Jolene, do you have anything to add tonight? Just like to thank you, council, for um for the promotion. I'm grateful. I'm excited to get started and and see what we can get moving here at the city and get some HR on board. I know all of our staff's really looking forward to that. Um continue to work with Ryan to get some updates out there. We've got some Facebook stuff scheduled. Um, so please do if you're following our Facebook page, share our updates, especially related to road construction because that's where we're getting a lot of phone calls. I'm getting a lot of phone calls. I don't know about the rest of staff, but we'll I think once 97 goes down next week, the phone calls are really going to start. So, um, please share our Facebook posts so that we can spread the word as much as possible. I got one more. Sorry. The water efficiency grant. This is our third one. we've been successful for, but we're starting to see a taper down on not a lot of rebates coming in. Remember, this is for uh high efficient washing machines, uh dishwashers, lowflow toilets, irrigation system. So, we have everything incorporated in this one. Uh so, spread the word on that. That's the rebate program, too. And maybe we need to do some uh blasts on social media too again, but that's still active and we still got a lot of dollars to get. Smart irrigation controllers I know uh are a very popular one and it's really really good for our water system in terms of usage. I mean that that just cuts so much down. You can save all the water you want by shutting off the water while you brush your teeth and stuff, but irrigation is what does it. I mean it's it's just it's Yeah. Even like the rain today, how many people you drive by and their locker. That's what those those controllers are meant to do is to shut off when it's raining or when it's going to rain. Um, so those are just so important to our water system. Abby, do you have anything this evening? Um, I don't necessarily, but I I will just state on the record that as staff it is really nice to have these impromptu staff updates the day of. Um the things that were announced in the administrator's report last week are not dated, but there's certain things like we learned today, the road construction and stuff that we really want to try to get out to the community. So, thank you for the opportunity. Yeah. Oh, and thank you for the staffing um hire and support tonight is definitely going to help us improve um filling these vacant positions. Yeah, I was going to ask um just maybe some background publicly on our new code enforcement person. That's exciting. We've been working on this for a number of years and pulling that trigger. So, a little bit of background on that maybe. Yeah, for sure. So, we had um a few handfuls of candidates um brought in three different candidates all with background in um law enforcement or corrections. a lot of development directors um so will will shy away from bringing in somebody with enforcement background of that nature or corrections nature. Um but I felt like those skills specifically with uh folks that have worked in the corrections world um have quite a bit of skills that can lend well to some of our more um problem enforcement cases. So Dan Pearson um spent, if I remember right, 20 years with the state department of corrections um most recently in the last 10 years working as a kind of a supervisor lead. It forgive me if I get that wrong. Um on kind of a work release program. So definitely is familiar with kind of running his own show and working with um people out in the community. um he uh is really really excited about the prospect of kind of helping take this program and to an kind of that next level that we really need. Um all applicants or all uh interview candidates uh were more than willing to increase the hours above the um I think we advertised 10 to 12. We've determined no more than 13 and a half to stay within union requirements. Um, but definitely excited at the prospect of having hearing council conversations for more hours. I do know that it will be hard to maintain the level of service we may have been having um, in the past with one person managing it all. So, both Don and I will continue to support where we can, but Dan is really excited. He actually starts at one o'clock tomorrow. So, stop on in and introduce yourselves and um look forward to getting him on board and getting him used to the community. He is uh from the area but from Center City or Chicago. I don't remember exactly which one. So, close enough. Great. Yeah, Chief Peterson. Yeah. Yeah, I also want to thank you very much for um approving last year for this year's budget, the CSO program and um u for the hire of the two uh applicants. I think they're going to do a great job. They're super excited to start and I believe they'll be starting in the next week or two. Great. Quick question for Chief. Yeah, sorry. How's the golf cart inspections going that program? I've seen run, you know, not not run around town, but I've seen a few vehicles around town. There's yeah, there's a few of them. And actually in the administrator's report, I saw that there are nine um permits that were um approved and they'll go through Jolene and then uh Captain Hanograph and so uh we'll see how many more, but uh we haven't had uh I don't think I've had any complaints whatsoever. Um so far so good. Just like to add on that, Mr. Mayor. So we did get our 10th application today. Um, but if you could remind folks as you're talking to them out in the community that golf carts can't be operated by children on public streets. I'm seeing that a lot. Um, I've actually I actually just saw it yesterday as I was coming back into town with a couple kiddos just ripping around my neighborhood on City Street. Um, but it's it and I've gotten a couple calls too from residents concerned about children driving golf carts on city street. So, just a reminder to folks, it's for folks who are 18 or older and all golf carts should be permitted. Thanks. Amanda, no updates available for questions. All right, Mark, you have anything else for this evening? Council member Miller. Um, quick update. I attended my first uh Forest Lake Comfort Lake Watershed meeting. Uh, Council Member Ericson was there and Mayor Roberts, you were there and and Mark was there and um, it was very interesting. They very long meetings actually. Uh, but they're good. Uh, but I do want to compliment uh, Mark, administrator Mark stats on getting as much money he could off of the requirements from the Comfort Lake Forest Lake watershed for questionable uh, erosion control, but he did save us a considerable amount of money. So, thank you, Council Member Palento. Um, just that my due date is tomorrow, so fingers crossed that he comes sooner rather than later. Um, and then just my um going forward once he's here, my thoughts is that I'll take four weeks off and then I'll be back. So, fingers crossed with that as well. Yeah, that's great. That's exciting. All right, back to you. Just two two quick things. Uh yeah, attend that wershed district to mark that. You did a fantastic job. Uh so thank you for your leadership in that and just noting uh for Jolene's sake or the staff that said I'll be out of town on June 23rd. Got it. Thank you. All right. I really don't have much. I attended that watershed district meeting and u the Memorial Day service down at the park which was nicely done by the the VFW and the Legion and it was a beautiful morning for that. So with no other business coming uh during the [Music]