We're right at 6 o'clock, so I will call the meeting to order. And Amanda, can we have a roll call? I'd be happy to help. Okay, thanks. Let's council member Miller >> here. >> Council member Ericson >> here. >> Council member Laren >> here. >> Acting Mayor Valento. >> Yes. And note for the record that Mayor Roberts is absent this evening. >> And for all those in attendance and for all those who can stand, please join us for the pledge of allegiance. I allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands nation with liberty and justice for all. >> Next, I'll be looking for a motion to approve the agenda or any changes. >> Make a motion to approve. >> Second. >> There's a motion and a second. Any discussion? All those in favor? >> I >> I motion passes. Next, there's nothing for awards and presentations. So, then we'll go to open forum. Looks like there's one in attendance. If you want to come up, you can just please state your name and your address. We'll do >> I hope you can hear me. All right. Cool. Yep. >> Uh, acting Mayor Valento, uh, Forest Lake Council, city staff, those in the audience, my name is John Wagner. I live on Woodland Drive in Forest Lake. I'm here to talk about an event that's being held this coming Thursday, February 26th. It is a free event. It is sponsored by the St. Corey Valley Alliance branch of Braver Angels. The event is called Skills for Disagreeing Better. Uh it's a nonpartisan workshop where those who attend will learn and practice skills for effective listening and sharing with people who hold different views. The event will be held at the North Branch Library from 5 to 7:30 p.m. And again, that's this coming Thursday, February 26th. The event is free. Uh donations to a local food shelf are welcome. Uh registration is required I believe. I'm not certain of that but I believe it is required. Uh to register you can go to their website which is found at stroy valley oneword.b braverangels1word.org backevents. Uh I have a flyer for the event that I'd like to leave behind if that's if anyone happens to be interested in attending. Sorry I only brought one. I feel guilty about that. I should have brought a bunch. My bad. Uh if you have a QR reader, there is a QR code on the flyer that will allow you to register. Um other than that, uh thank you for allowing me to share the information on this event. If uh you or anyone in the audience has any questions, I I'd be happy to stand and answer. >> Thank you for your questions. >> Maybe you can leave that behind for us. >> I will. Who should I leave the clerk? Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Moving on to the consent agenda. Looking for a motion or any changes. >> I'll make a motion to approve uh agenda item 7 A through 7M. >> There's a motion. Is there a second? >> I'll second it. >> Motion and a second. Any discussion? All those in favor? I I >> Any opposed? Motion carries. Moving on to the regular agenda. It looks like it is item A, Forest Lake North, garage condos final PUD and Platt and Abby. >> Thank you. Uh at your last meeting, you tabled to this evening a public hearing for Forest Road North, the garage condo project. We're not quite ready with those final approvals and the applicant has requested that you table that one more time. So tonight, uh, staff is recommending you motion to table the Forest Road North garage final PUB and Plat hearing to March 9th. >> So moved. >> I'll second it. >> Motion in a second. Any discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor? I >> I >> I >> hearing none for being opposed and that motion is that is tabled. >> Moving on to the second item, police chief appointment recommendation and it will be council members Larson and Miller. >> Thank you, mayor. Uh council members, as you know, police chief Rick Peterson announced his retirement effective April 3rd of 2026. in December 2025. Chief Peterson has served the city with distinction and integrity since 2011, and the city of Forest Lake is deeply appreciative of his leadership and dedicated service. In anticipation of Chief Peterson's retirement, and with authorization from the city council, the city's personnel committee initiated an internal recruitment process to fill the upcoming vacancy for the chief of police. The city received one application from a qualified internal candidate, Captain Luke Hanigraph. Captain Hanigraph brings more than two decades of progressive law enforcement experience at the city, county, and state levels. He began his career in 2003 as a sheriff's deputy with Chicago County before joining the city of Forest Lake as a patrol officer, where he served from 2004 to 2011. In 2011, he accepted a position as a special agent with the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension, the BCA, serving in that capacity until 2019. He then returned to the city of Forest Lake Police Department where he has advanced through the ranks from police officer to patrol sergeant to captain. Captain Hanigraph holds a bachelor's degree in cim criminology with a minor in psychology and a master of police administration degree. He is also a graduate of Northwestern University School of Police Staff and Command, a nationally recognized executive level law enforcement leadership program. On February 13, 2026, the city conducted formal interviews with Captain Hanigraph. Two interview panels were convened. The first panel consisted of Wyoming Police Chief Neil Bower, former Forest Lake Area School District Superintendent and Community Member Dr. Linda Madson, EDA member and former police officer Chris Hoy, and Washington County Emergency Management Director Doug Berglin. The second panel included all members of the city's personnel committee and fire chief Al Newman. Each panel met with Captain Hanigraph for approximately one hour. Both panels provided unanimous and strong recommendations supporting his appointment as the city of Forest Lakes next police chief. If approved, Captain Hanigraph is anticipated to be sworn in on April 3rd, 2026, then further recognized and sworn by the Forest Lake City Council on Monday, April 13, 2026. Recommendation. The personal personnel committee recommends that the city council approve the appointment of Luke Hanograph as chief of police effective April 3rd, 2026 and then establish his compensation at grade 150 step four of the city's adopted compensation plan in accordance with the applicable pay schedule and personnel policies. The personnel committee further recommends that the city council authorize staff to initiate an internal and recruitment proper, excuse me, internal recruitment process to fill the resulting captain vacancy ahead of the April 3rd formal appointment. Um at this time I'd like to make the recommendation uh to city council based upon those uh two committees to council for the recommendation uh for the hiring is chief police as chief of police captain Luke Canraph and I would second that >> motion and a second >> please. >> Any discussion? I would just say you've done it. You've been you've been an amazing part of the of the team in Forest Lake and I'm excited to see this come before this council. >> Congratulations. >> We haven't voted yet. >> We haven't voted. >> Congratulations. Ahead of time. >> Uh motion in a second. All in favor? >> I. >> Any opposed? Motion passes. Congratulations. >> Congratulations. >> Uh, moving on to item C, meeting refresh phase two, award recommendation, Dave Adams. as part of that last u was that part of the motion to authorize staff to do the internal >> okay was it technically >> maybe your motion >> is it the recommending of the police chief or did you include the whole internal candidate as well >> I can add that to be clear on the record if you'd like >> please makeotion Sure. >> So, a recommendation uh to initiate an internal recruitment process to fill the resulting captain's vacancy ahead of the April 3rd formal appointment. >> Motion. >> I have a second. >> There's a second. Any discussion? All those in favor? >> I. >> All those oppos or any opposed? Motion passes. Good catch. Thank you. really >> goodbye. >> Now, moving on to item C, median refresh phase uh two, award recommendation, tape. >> Yep. Uh November, we city council approved professional services with MWI to start putting phase two of the median uh refresh project in the works. As you recall, phase two is from I35 going east to 12th Street Southwest by that Walgreens intersection there. Uh they went out for bid in January and we received a total of six bids uh kind of ranging from the low bid of 245 up to um over $300,000. U the consultant MWI did a background check basically of of this consult or of this uh this vendor. They've done work like this before in high traffic. Um, and it's very confident that this this contractor will do a great job in this project. Uh, low bid did come in at 245 to 525 and if you add that to the professional service, it comes in about $5,000 under the $290,000 uh funded for this project for 2026. Uh, important timeline, project timeline that the bid would give the contractor start date of April 15th or whenever frost comes out of the ground and then with a substantial completion and final completion well before the 4th of July. So the the hope would be to get everything in and cleaned up before Fourth of July happened also help for the plans for a full season of growth. So if you any other questions for me I'd be happy to answer them at this time. >> Any questions discussion? Um I don't remember was this something we had already discussed? Have we got in have we had conversations regarding this? I think >> yeah I mean we discussed it. It was a phase program when we budgeted. >> Yep. >> So >> no I have no questions on >> I'm looking for a motion. >> Yeah. Madame Mayor, I'll make a motion to award the meeting refresh project phase 2 construction project to Clearcate Outdoor LLC for the amount of $245. $245,525. >> There's a motion. Is there a second? >> I'll second it. >> Motion and a second. Any discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor? >> I. >> Any opposed? Motion passes. Moving on to item D, utility and street construction standard specifications. Abby, >> thank you. Acting mayor Valento, members of the council. Um, the city code requires that public infrastructure is designed by the city engineer, but does have a provision in the city code that the city can allow another qualified licensed engineer by the developer to develop those plans. And in more recent years, the city has been favorable to allowing other engineers to develop those. However, one of the things that we've identified is that if we're going to continue to allow other engineering firms to develop construction plans, we must have an updated standard specifications for utilities and roadways and street constructions. Um, enclosed in your packet tonight for your consideration is a proposal from Bolton and Mink to update the city's standard specifications. So, as I note in my U memo and included in the proposal from uh city engineer Ryan Goodman, um the reason we've required the city engineer to develop these plans and specifications is to make sure that they meet the city's the city's specifications. However, there's argument that this can be cost uh prohibitive, duplicative, and take additional time in our development community. A lot of times too, it takes a significant amount of time for our city engineering team to look through those specifications to see if they conform to the city standards and then requesting changes can be cumbersome. Some of these documents I just about threw a standard specbook in for you that's been recently proposed. Some of these are are hundreds of pages. Um, so the standard specifications address a range of things from project management and coordination to traffic signs to pavement markings, everything in between. Um, as Ryan noted, uh, the standard specifications ensure consistency, improve construction quality, streamline bidding, and reduce ambiguity during design and field operations. Having clear specifications can make the development process much more efficient and reduce reduce review times. It's going to not only assist the development community but also the city in the long run as we continue to grow. So Bolton is proposing to update these standard specifications at a cost of $21,900. Um to pay for these standard specifications, city staff would be proposing 43 thou 43,4380 come out of each the community development general the general fund, the street fund and each utility fund equally sharing amongst those five funds to ensure that because there's a benefit to each of these five operations. Um, so staff is asking that you consider this tonight and we would recommend the city council move to approve the Bolton Bank standard specifications for utility and street construction proposal to cost not to exceed 21,900. I do want to note um that you have not heard of this before. This is something that's coming to the council as a a new thing. Each of our budgets do have line items for professional services for these types of things that come up mid year. We do have quite often times where there's we need to engage with services for updates to different documents or new studies. This is coming up now because we're getting more and more requests from the development community for them to develop the engineered plans and specifications. Um, and we believe that qualified engineering firms can do this, but we do want to put some parameters that at least one component of it we've done and we just hand off to them. So, it ideally will help them save money and um time in the long run. I you know, Ryan is here to answer any questions you have. Same with Dave. Um happy to answer any you might have regarding this. >> Thank you, Abby. Any questions? >> Yeah, Ryan. Um so, I do know what Aby's saying is we have a lot of developers that have their own engineering firms that they like to work with and want to use them. So Balden and Mink's job would be to put together more of a basic guideline of our city ordinances and rules and regul whatever it might be regarding the construction and development and then they would basically put have their engineers work off of those guidelines and then I'm assuming it would come back to our engineers to review. Is that kind of what the process would be? >> So so basically we're creating a standard specifications for street utility work. So when a private development comes into town and does the residential developments, they prepare all their stuff on the backside too. So we have to review it, go through it, making sure that all the material specified is what city code, what's uh aggregate material, piping and all that off all the time there's the copy and pasting that's going on, you know, so that's not the right material. And then worst case scenario, you get to an actual construction project and then when you're going through shop drawing reviews. Now we're going to have this document completed and it's going to be referenced that the they would have to conform to those requirements within. Now we can always add future sections as things evolve or modifications to this. So it would be something you might want to adopt annually with minimum work after this first step here. That's it's something also like the uh fresh median project could have specified some of the stuff within it too that instead of having their own specifications. You got a downtown project potentially coming maybe who know they would reference this too for all the public infrastructure. Uh so it's going to be using a combination of that. It's going to now save a lot of time and money on the development reviews. We're not going to have to go through all this stuff. It's going to be documented in here. Uh and then you know you're still going to have the development agreement or a site improvement agreement on that type of work to govern some of the other requirements that are going to be special to that project. Uh but this will be just a way to standardize and ensure that things are being built with the right materials and specifications and moving forward and a lot more efficiency through the development review process >> and yeah so um I get all that. So, uh, someone comes in, wants to develop a project in our in our community, which obviously we want everybody to develop projects in our community. Um, we would send them this packet of specifications. >> They may request it. They would do all their engineering and then we have someone and review it, which I assume would be bolted and mink. >> Yep. Unless you use city staff for the reviews on the back side. Do you think it's possible to use city staff to review those type of detailed plans or not? >> You would still probably be using a consultant because there's a lot of data that's like storm water. You're looking at stuff that's spit out with software. So, you got to be able to know what you're reading and you know how it all integrates and stuff like that. Especially if it gets into uh street designs in a particular area. you know, a payment design is going to be the the materials of what gots has to go into the street are going to be all laid out in here. >> Okay. >> So, >> so ultimately it should save the developer or should save our review staff, whoever it is time, which would then hopefully save us money. >> Yep. Instead of them having to write that standard specifications for the street utility projects that they're proposing on during the development process, you know, through preliminary plan and final plot review, that'll already be done. and they'll just reference that. Now, if for some reason there's something really special out there that's not going to be in here as a a standard specification, then he would just add to it as with a special provision part of the con the specification manual. >> So, what would be something uh maybe it's some art wall or something? I don't know. I'm just trying to come up something really weird that you'd have something that's not going to be covered in here with 99% of your projects. >> Council member If I might be able to elaborate, I know we've used the phrase standards a lot. This is these are the technical specifications of the how things are built, right? Our public infrastructure and 99% of the developments all need will follow the same rules. And so the idea is on the upfront developing those technical specifications that we can just hand over so they don't have to develop them upfront and then we don't also have to review them later. saving time for both time and money for both the city and the development community. >> Yeah, makes sense. >> So like community I Well, I just bring these communities up because I actually have Cottage Groves in my car right now. So big >> big manual uh Woodbury, Cottage Grove, Apple Valley. I mean all those communities have a standard specifications that they're referencing to to be incorporated to be used in the project uh approvals of conditions. So, makes sense. >> Any other questions? >> Then I will be looking for a motion. >> Madame Mayor, I'll move to approve the Bolton Mink standard specifications for utility and street construction proposal for costs not to not to exceed $21,900. >> There is a motion. Is there a second? >> I'll second it. >> Any discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor >> I >> I any opposed? Motion passes. >> Moving on to item 8E, the last one on the regular agenda, which is outdoor facilities study. Dave. >> Yeah. Back mayor and council. Uh, city staff, myself and Kyle have been meeting with the school district over last since June, July. Uh, meeting with them with a key objective of trying to figure out what athletic facilities we have and what athletic facilities they have, how they underlap, how we're doing maintenance. Um, just a whole bunch of things and trying to figure out a way to either share maintenance costs or to quit duplicating things or are we building too many fields? Are we building too many soccer fields? Do we not have enough baseball fields? The whole gamut of looking through that on top of trying to figure out the users of community ed on top of FLA on top of other schools that are not in the district. So, we've been working through that. coming up with a lot of information, but we just really don't know how to organize that very well and and how to what's the difference between a premier field and a practice field. What is my definition versus the schools? A lot of stuff going on. And it's kind of brought up that maybe we need a little help here to to help put this all into place to take all this data that we have, look at what we have, put it up against a lot of other metrics, um just households about uh the trends of sports, which ones are catching on, which ones are falling apart, and looking at what the city asked for land, what the school asked for land, and and put it all into one one big study. And it's it's kind of in a piggyback off the parks master plan where the parks master plan doesn't really get an athletic facility so much. It's more about parks and parklands and playgrounds and walking trails and I think just how highly used sports is that it really needs to be studied and make sure we're not duplicating things. I think a big example is in our park CIP there's about $7.5 million just listed in the 10ear CIP not planned for not budgeted but that's just on athletic facilities alone four and a half million to Fenway Fields another you know million to cooling camp and another believe a million to tower so there's a lot of investment that from the old 10-year plans that were going to be put into athletic facilities and We really want to make sure and the school district, you know, with with their bonding to make sure that we're putting these dollars in the right spots and we'll hear from user groups that we need another quad out at Fenway Fields. There's just not enough fields. Do we really need another quad out there? Maybe we would be more opposed to having more beneficial to put lights or maybe more beneficial to take some practice fields and make them game fields or vice versa. Maybe maintenance should be cut back on some of those fields. school district has a lot of fields that they're just currently letting go, you know, that just letting them grass over. Does it make more sense to put money into one that they're letting go versus, you know, designing another complex somewhere else? It's just a lot of moving parts on top of all the um just the user groups and the school and the city feel that it'd be helpful to have a third party kind of analyze all that on top of our fee structure which would be a part of the study as well to say are we charging enough for our fields you know and all that. The one thing that the school district would like to add in is an aquatic center. I I know this the city's not a doesn't want to be part of an aquatic center, but they would really like to look at that study tied in there. So, they want to be, you know, part of that and add that on to, you know, the study as well to get those metrics for that as well. A lot of things I just said right there, but that's the the gist of the study would be to to work with this um vendor, Ballard King, and give them all the data they need and they pilot would do what they do and and and spit us back out. Basically, a feasibility study of what we have and what the recommendations are, what we should be doing, what we should be spending time on, maintenance, all that. You have any questions? Like I said, it's I said a lot there, but um any questions you have, I'd be more than happy to answer. >> The aquatic center, they want to add that in. Is that an a cost in addition to the $30,000 quote? that's included in that in that cost. So, they would be a good chunk of it inside the aquatic center and some of the information we'd like to get out of the study, they don't care so much about. Um, so they kind of we did the map and about a third of what we're getting out of that is what they figured be beneficial for the school district. >> Um, how do you anticipate that user group that you have or that the group that's been meeting for months will utilize this information? My concern is that we spend money on studies more than I care to think about. Um, some of them gather dust on the shelf. Now, you made a great point that we've got a lot of planned investment in in this space. And so, that in part answers my question, but how do you see if this study's done in the next three months, whatever the time frame is, how will that group that's been meeting utilize it over the next 12 to 24 months? >> 12 to 24 months. And long term it's it's to your point exactly is where should we where should we be spending the money? I mean we have a lot of parks that are coming up just on our our annual park um refresh projects. Do we need to put a little kids baseball field in here? Do we need to put a volleyball court? Do we you know this is all going to be helpful information annually plus the 10-year plan. I think it'll be beneficial for the the school that same way. But I mean really I could just using just as much as we're going to use the park master plan. We've kind of thrown together a 10-year CIP with the biggest stuff on there is probably the playgrounds because we had a metric for that before was every 25 years we want to try to change the mode and then the rest of it was just kind of big ideas and things we've been told. I mean, since I've been here, we're building a quad at Fenway. So, it's always just kind of stayed in in this. I'm hoping that steady either says yes, we need to build another quad and that was, you know, that that should stay in your 10-year plan and maybe the metrics would say you're going to probably need one in 2034 once you have these users. Or the study may say you have more than enough more than enough fields. You don't need to spend that that you know that money at Fenway, but it would be nice to have a lot more game fields scattered throughout the community. Well, then when we're doing these when we're getting a new development in, we can plan out to put a a back stop and a and a field there for a practice. But I I I think it's it is a steady rate, but I I think it's going to be very beneficial. And just the fee structure we're we're looking at another, you know, a lot of it you're looking at another person's website and say, what do they charge for field rates? I mean, that's how you justify your field rate. If you have a a third party that's analyzing a whole bunch of different, you know, rate structures and you have that information, you know, you'll gain re revenue back that way as well. I think it's helpful and I think, you know, this will go hand in hand. I would hope with the parks master plan and that in 10 years when you redo up your parks master plan, you'd reup this to to take another look at your facilities. I mean, the heavy lifting would be done on this first step step, but what have you put in? How's the, you know, the city depending at this point in time what you could do for the next 10 years. >> All right. Thank you. >> Will the study also look at whether or not we should put lights at Funway? I know that's >> that's that's one of the studies of the the Premier Fields and and game parameters. So part of that study is you might have enough fields but you just need more time. You know where lights would add you know you're kind of gauging game time is between five and nine. Well if you could extend every night 10:00 or 10:30 or weekends all the way to night. You know, the investment in lights may be cheaper than building four more fields. You know, it's going to do all that kind of math through that. Or you might, you know, for the school district as well, maybe one of their complexes should get lights versus, you know, adding additional fields. I think that's where it's helpful. It's going to help you figure out what you have a lot of, what you don't have enough of, and how you can put it all together without duplicating things. Any other questions? If not, then I'm looking for a motion. I'll make a motion to approve the completing of the outdoor athletic facility study with Ballard and King in the amount of $30,15 with a cost participation of $10,000 by the Forest Lake School District. There's a >> motion. Is there a second? I'll second motion in a second. Any discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor? >> Any opposed? Motion passes. Moving on to discussion. Item A, 2027 budget schedule. I assume Ellie is taking that one. >> Yes. >> Good evening, council. In front of you within your packet is the 2027 budget preparation schedule. Um, instead of me just reading all the dates, um, the primary dates are September 14th. We will bring the preliminary budget in front of the council for review. And just as a reminder, that preliminary levy meeting, we can set it at anything we want and we can go down. We just can't go higher than that after that prelim is set. And then on December 14th, we have the truth and taxation meeting scheduled. That is where the final levy will be set and those documents will then go to Washington County. Another important thing to note along with the schedule, it provides nine opportunities for citizens to come in and speak on what they see those priorities being and what their recommendation is or thoughts on the budget. And then with that, there will also be a survey scheduled. Any questions on the schedule? >> I have one question. Um for the survey, it says it's August 4th through the 8th. Is that a survey just internal like staff and council or is that for the public as well? >> That is for the public. >> Okay. Because I'm wondering is 4 days long enough. >> So we really push it hard those four days but then it won't actually close until the preliminary levy meeting. >> Oh, okay. Got it. Any other comments, questions? Not seeing any >> No, I was just going to say I'd like that um We called out that there's nine opportunities for folks to weigh in and you know in addition to the online survey. I think that's important. Um hopefully that gets bold in the newspaper that people have lots of opportunity and we want to hear that feedback. That's critically important. Um we're trying to make the best decisions we can with a lot of competing uh or seeming feels like competing um demands. And so having that public input early and often is valuable to this council >> not seeing anything else then we can move into staff updates and we'll just go in our normal rotation. So Ellie, >> along with this budget schedule, we are going to do some budget workshop fund accounting activities where we look at the way we're recognizing revenues across all capital funds and all operating funds and determining if it's the most effective way to recognize it and present it. And so we're going to do a lot of deep diving into the fun accounting world in the next couple workshops to talk just about recog recognizing revenue and laying out expenses to try to make things more transparent and clear so that when you are looking at that 200page Forest Lake budget, it makes the most sense to everyone. >> Any questions for Ellen? >> I'm looking forward to seeing deep dive fund and accounting um unfold. That'll be good. Ryan >> Forest Lake Council. Just a couple things to bring up. Uh Washington County did release the RFP for the County Road 50 from Trunk Highway 61 to County State Highway 15 RFP that's due March 20th. That study then uh completion date is 2027. But there will be a lot of public engagements. We did submit a handful of comments to be included into that RFP and they uh they added all those comments other than one into that. So that'll be a benefit to what we were looking for with that all the development in that area too. And two friendly a reminder on the water efficiency grants. We got two quarters left with the existing grants. So end of June is when this grant goes out. U there hasn't been I can't talk right now. Geez. There has been some email coordination with a future uh water efficiency grant coming out again too from for 2026 to 2028. So keep you posted on that as well. That's all I got. >> Thanks. Any questions for Ryan? >> Amanda, >> no updates. >> Yeah, I just have a few updates. You might have seen in your weekly update that um community thread they uh operate a volunteer driver program for senior rides within the community. They are doing someformational sessions in March uh trying to recruit additional volunteer drivers. It's a flexible program, but we're trying to help get the word out um of just how we can maybe help expand that program. It sounds like they have more demand than drivers. Um it isn't a free service. The the people who need rides do pay um but the volunteers do do that on their at their own. Um so if you know of anybody please share that within your networks. I also wanted to let you know that earlier today we had an internal meeting. Staff met with our engineering water resources team to look at watershed district rules in both Rice Creek Wershed district and Comfort Lake Forest Lake District in anticipation of their regulatory changes they're going to contemplate this year. Tomorrow we will have representation at the Rice Creek Wershed District regulatory partners meeting who's going to advocate for some of the potential policy changes. But I anticipate that in your March workshop, we'll be having a discussion on some of those policy points and how we um continue to advocate for potential rural changes that help benefit the city of Forest Lake and our development community. And then lastly, um the planning commission this week will be holding a hearing on Hidden Creek South. That's a preliminary plat of new single family dwellings uh or new single family neighborhood extending from um the existing hidden creek will wrap back around to the parkway, a parkway extension and then new uh single family residential on the east side of the expanded parkway. You've seen the concept plan. Um we held a neighborhood meeting last week or the week before and there was one person other than the land owners that showed up. So, um, it sounds like or appears that the neighborhood might understand what's going on and be supportive, but there is that public hearing later this week on Wednesday. Any questions? Questions? >> Not about that, but you did mention the March workshop. Are we contemplating moving that date? >> That is being contemplated. I believe Jolene will have that on your next regular meeting agenda for formal action to move that. >> Thank you. Dave, >> uh just one update. Uh the parks master plan openhouse was held last uh tonight upstairs in the community room. Uh decent turnout. You also having a online survey that's closing in on 500 uh responses. So we're getting um some good feedback for the master plan. That is about 3/4 of the way through. Hopefully uh we'll be at the April parks commission for recommendation for approval and then be at the city council level probably at the beginning of May. >> That's all I have for tonight. >> Any questions for Dave? >> Soon to be sworn in police chief Hannah. >> Thank you madam mayor and councel. Um I just want to say I appreciate the support from the council for allowing us to for the additional staff. you could see in your con consent agenda that we gave five conditional offers. Um that's five out of six for this year. Uh we'll stagger start them and we'll hopefully have them all on board and off on their own by July 4th. That's very exciting. We also have our newly funded police administrative assistance started. Um that is working out very well. And then also uh Saturday we have the Rotary plunge and uh we have a team from the city that will be jumping and fortunately I'll get to jump twice with the city and with the Forest Lake High School softball team. Any questions? >> Are department heads jumping? >> Dave, >> uh Lucas, he's representing all department heads. >> That's the initiation. Yeah. Very exciting. Any questions? Hearing none, Amanda? >> No updates. >> Cool. Then we will go into mayor and city council updates and we'll start with council member. >> I have none. Thank you. >> Um I'll just go with myself since I'm only acting mayor. Um I don't have any. So then makes it easy. Council member Ericson. >> Uh nothing this evening. >> Council member Larson. I'd like to echo Aby's uh comment. There is a planning commission meeting on Wednesday at six o'clock. >> And then with that, there's nothing else on the agenda. So I will adjourn the meeting.