Right. [music] With it being right at six o'clock, we'll call the meeting to order. And I guess Abby, tonight you're doing roll call. >> Sure. Um, Council Councelor Miller, >> I am present. >> Councelor Valento, >> here. >> Councelor Ericson, >> here. Councelor Larson >> here. >> Mayor Roberts >> here. And if you're able to please stand for the pledge of allegiance 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. Um I am going to make a motion to approve the agenda with adding 8E administrative citation agreement. >> I'll second a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion? >> All in favor? >> I opposed. We have our agenda. >> Number five, uh awards and presentations. Tonight we have Ryan from the county and we have uh thank you for uh Commissioner Mirron for joining us to present about the proposed project down at County Road 50 and Highway 61. >> Thank you mayor and council members staff. Appreciate the opportunity to come before you tonight. U I think this is an exciting project that's been within our CIP for a number of years. um uh you know as well as I the uh the accident that occurred there with a couple of high school runners um a couple years ago and and fortunately um you know there were no deaths in that situation but it's been a concern of ours for some time. Um you have a leg within that intersection. We have a county road and it's a state highway. Uh Washington County has a good relationship working with the state of Minnesota and doing projects like this and leading projects um like this. A good example is some of the improvement work that was done in Hugo uh this past year. If you drove through there, all of that work was done on Highway 61 within State Rightway. Uh but it was a county-led project that the state worked with us on and paid us for leading. So um this is a similar uh project. Ryan has a history of working up here. We appreciate the relationship he has with your engineer, Ryan Goodman. Um I think we've worked together in the past very very well and and um you know hope that this project will address some of the safety issues that we have concerns about and I know you as a council have concerns about as well here. Uh Ryan has worked on other projects. He's been doing some of the design work and the the public open houses on this project, but also Forest Road and and um you know potentially scheduling that um out out there. Um we've been working on financing trying to work with the city to and and working with Congressman Stabber on that project. Um and then um the county road by Menards and the work uh that was done there. Ryan was working a lot on that and I drove that just the other day again and you know that's an improvement, a beautiful improvement in my mind to the city. Um adding to the the trail and the walkability of u the community here and so we're excited to be back before you and I'm going to let Ryan come up here and talk about this project. Um you know there's no pressure tonight. Um I think Ryan's going to lay out some different options. Um we certainly want you to consider those. um uh and consider the potential impacts to the to the city. Obviously, you have a special interest in the U property in the southeast quadrant of of that intersection and you know how the different proposals here that were developed through public input um you know might um uh might impact the city and and your property there. So Ryan's ready to go. >> Thank you, Commissioner. Yeah, good evening, mayor, members of the council. Um, as mentioned, I'm Ryan Haves. I'm the project manager um for this County Road 50 and trunk highway 61 improvements project for Washington County. Um, and as Commissioner May pointed out, I'm just here this evening to give an update um and gather any feedback um city council may have regarding the intersection project. So, real quick, I'll just give a quick project background tonight. uh review what we heard from the public through our um two prior open or um open houses. Um discuss some alternatives and touch on what we learned from the traffic study. And lastly, uh review the project schedule. Uh for those unfamiliar, the map on the right shows the intersection location um which is located um just north of the new environmental center and just north of that new city owned property on the east side of trunk highway 61. So, Trunk Highway 61 um is the main north south highway here with a 50 mph speed limit and high traffic volumes. The intersection currently operates as a side street side street stop control uh which can make access onto trunk highway 61 very difficult, especially those vehicles turning left. Uh there's an existing rectangular rapid flashing beacon at the intersection to help us facilitate pedestrian crossings. Um though there has been a history of crashes involving both pedestrians and vehicles when those lights are activated. And of course, the Hardwood Creek Regional Trail, which is Washington Countyy's most visited regional trail, runs along the west side of Highway 61 and is certainly a destination to those Forest Lake residents living east of the intersection. So, with some of the known issues at the intersection, uh, Washington County, City of Forest Lake, and the Minnesota Department of Transportation have kind of come together to look to deliver an intersection improvement project that addresses the needs of the community and is supported by, um, our agency partners. So, Washington County has been seeking outside funding opportunities to complete the intersection. Um, and I'm happy to share tonight that we have secured two grants for construction of this project. First was a regional solicitation grant for just over $1.6 million. And the second is a Minnesota Department of Transportation local partnership program grant um for another million dollars which totals just over $2.6 million. And that just to point out that local partnership program is the same program that was used to fund those Hugo improvements that Commissioner Ren pointed out. Um, so project goals include reducing the frequency and severity of crashes, provide safe, clear, and accessible crossings for multimmoal users, and maintain acceptable vehicular operations for both today and future traffic volumes. So, we held our first open house in July of this year at the Headarters Parkway Service Center um adjacent to the intersection. Um, to notify the public, we sent out 1,600 postcards, um, handd delivered flyers to the adjacent apartments, and used social media to notify the public regarding the open house. Uh we also hosted an online um option for those who couldn't attend in person. Um so we had a pretty good turnout at the the inerson openhouse and received received some good feedback both in person and online. Um what we heard was trunk highway 61 is a barrier u for both vehicles and pedestrians. The existing rectangular rapid flashing beacon can be hard to see during certain hours of the day and oftentime drivers fail to yield to flashing lights. We also heard a lot about the high speed of travel which can obviously lead to high consequences um for all users. We've heard at this first open house support for both a signalized option as well as a roundabout at this intersection. Um and one of the other comments that we heard frequently was that this project should be expedited. So the word map on the right reflects the online engagement um of some of the key words that we heard. Um in total we received 35 online comments and 10 in-person comments. So from there uh the project team collected traffic counts and we formulated a traffic forecast that accounted for future growth in the surrounding area. This traffic forecasting effort allowed the team to model each intersection type to analyze their performance and ability to handle that future traffic demand. Both the signalized intersection as well as the roundabout are able to handle future traffic um with the roundabout offering less side street delays for users during those off peak hours and lower speeds for all vehicles at the intersection. Uh one item council to consider tonight is the project team did look at um what would the intersection look like if we remove that west leg. Um and in this scenario, all traffic would then use Headwaters Parkway to the south to access kind of that um development area. From that, both intersection types would continue to function um acceptably in this three-legged configuration. So, in September of this year, we took our traffic study findings and the two project alternatives, the signal and the roundabout option um forward for public comment. We use the same approach not to notify the public as we did for the first open house. Um, and really what we heard was pretty strong support for the roundabout option as it maintains access to Highway 61, minimizes that delay and keeps the vehicle speeds as low as possible, which supports multimotal travel. Um, we heard a strong desire for improved lighting um, with either option. Um, and there was support for signalized option as well. Um, and some feedback was pretty indecisive on whether the the community felt the intersection should be a four-legg or three-legged intersection. So in total on the second open house we received 11 online comments and 15 written um responses. So with that um kind of our next steps are going to be to determine the preferred project alternative and return to this council for a formal resolution of support for the project. Uh we would then move to develop a mindot approved layout detailing improvements which would finalize the design of the elements and um for approval by MDOT as the kind of the lead agency with the most skin in the game. Um, the project team would then work through 2026 and 2027 to develop final plans and specifications as well as prepare a detailed environmental investigation document to comply with our regional solicitation requirements. Um, at this time, project construction is planned for 2028. So, that's all I've prepared for you this evening. Um, just to remind council, I'm just here to gather your feedback um on the project, answer any questions. Um, and after this, I'll any feedback will be brought back to the project group um for further discussions. So, I'll open it up for any questions or conversations. >> Council, questions, comments? >> Yeah, I guess one question. Thank you for the the presentation. It was very informative. I appreciate that. As we think about heading towards the east, um, as a part of this reconfiguration, regardless of which, whether it's lights or roundabout, what is that anticipation for median barrier? I mean, um, you know, are we going to have full access to that north end of that corner lot? I guess what does that look like? >> Yeah. So, through some of that development, um, concept, we've worked with the developer there on the north side, and we're pretty clear that that's likely going to be right in right out in the future via median. Um, really in either option, um, it's just too close to that main intersection for a configuring turn lanes in and out, but also it's just really congest the area. >> Thank you. Um, does does staff have a, you know, between the the signal and the the roundabout, is there preferred choice at this point from staff's perspective? >> Well, we're still uh reviewing the proposed improvements at the intersection. Obviously, staff supports both the roundabouts and the signal. Uh there's pros and cons of both of them. And uh with some recent applications that have come in with the improvements along Forest Road just north of the airport hangar area, those will help us steer some of the decisions because of the traffic um to access use in the area that's developing as this project's being developed too. >> I think the one major difference between the roundabout and the signal is that you saw one of the cons or one of the pros and cons is high speed high consequence. the traffic signal. Uh with the traffic volumes being mostly on 61 and smaller volumes on the side streets, you're going to have this be a green light for a good chunk of the time and that means people are going to continue to be at highway speeds through that intersection. Um signals don't protect pedestrians any better than roundabouts do. Um there's emerging research to say which one is protects them better. But uh what we do know is that speed and pedestrians don't mix and whether they're um you know there's a physical uh necessity to slow down when you have a roundabout that need isn't there with a signal. And if the pros to a signal don't outweigh that particular item, you know, I think that roundabout will end up rising to the top of the list there. Um, I know we're we're already roundabout heavy in this town and I'm sure there are people that are pro roundabout and people who are anti- roundabout, but there are are reasons do tend to use in a lot of situations like this. My one concern of the roundabout is just we know how tough it is to see pedestrians, you know, trying to cross any of the the roundabouts we already have in town is taking life in your own hands. So, I'd almost rather see a light that's knowing that that development is that's happening on the east side and their desire to get to the west side to enjoy the trail. I almost think a a light would be safer in many respects if that car's coming to a complete stop at a red light. >> Is there forgive me if this isn't here? There like Hawk crossing lights at the the round if it we go forward the roundabout. >> Yeah, Mr. Mayor, council members. So, I should have guys clarified. So, the roundabout we're going to be looking at is just a single lane roundabout. It's not a multi-lane roundabout like that's out here on 97. Um, so from the county's perspective, we wouldn't propose to put rectangular epic collection beacons on all the crossings. Um, there's just some they're kind of like a double-edged thing. So, if they're there, vehicles abide by them. But if the pedestrians aren't pushing them, those vehicles aren't abiding. You know, they're not obeying the common practices. Um, so they're kind of a double-edged sword. And so, in this situation, from the county's perspective, um, we wouldn't be proposing them. But knowing it's a multi- agency project, we would certainly, you know, look into it and evaluate it if it was, you know, desired. >> Those are certainly good comments and questions both from both of you there. That would be great topics for discussion as we go forward on further public input. We got a little ways to go here yet. Um I I think if I may ask another follow-up question, I I noticed one of the um word puzzle things there. Uh talked about expediting the project. Um we have a 2028 construction plan is seems like two years to do the plans and environmental review on a project of this nature might be packed into one year. Is there a possibility of 2027 construction? >> Yeah, mayor, members of the council. So the regional solicitation funding that we got for one point call it $7 million was actually funding for 2029. Um so we've already advanced construction from there to 2028 and any further advancing just would mean that the agencies would need to front the money um until we can be reimbursed in 2029. Um, it's certainly I agree with administrative stats that it's it it is a timeline, but within environmental process, there's also, you know, six-month reviews for the DNR and heritage societies and things like that that we need to consider. That being said, I it could be expedited if there was a strong desire and we could come up with some kind of partnership on funding that. >> Yeah, that was kind of my same same thought or question was if it's expedited, but but learning that if it was program for 29, I guess that is moving it up a year. So that that's better than than 29, but any any way that could be moved up, it'd be ideal obviously. Um on another just another question or comment on that on the roundabout or either one where that the it just be a three intersection. I think as it currently sits that would probably be okay. But with that large garage condo business that's coming in on that on that west side, I think access from there would be important because I don't think there'll be access to Forest Road to 97 or will there still be >> that'll be a right in right out onto Forest Road. But you are correct. They the right in right out at Forest Road or going all the way back over by the headwater service center would be those two outs. Um, I have talked with land owners in that area and developer in that area that I concerned about the potential loss of access at the Highway 61. >> That's huge. >> Any other thoughts or questions from council? >> Well, just back to the roundabout versus the traffic light. With the roundabout, you're definitely going to be slowing the traffic down. Um, and I don't know if there's any way to still keep that pedestrian crossing flashing beacon thing. I think they can set that to make it a little more easy to see people since that roundabout situation does uh supposed to be a problem especially like what we have up here. We don't have a beacon here at Broadway but sometimes when you get in that roundabout it's too late to see the pedestrian there but I think that'd be very useful. Yeah, Mayor member, council member Larson, we as a project team, we can certainly visit it. Um, if we go down that roundabout avenue, happy to discuss that with city staff and just come up with the best game plan that all agencies can be supportive of. >> Perfect. Thank you, >> Mayor. City Council, one more comment. Maybe we flip back to page six. I think that was the one. Yeah, right there. So, this is a good example of something we're reviewing with this intersection and the uses that are going on and future uses for this intersection. You look at a roundabout, you see how kind of streamlined where traffic will be going. You know, it's pretty easy to determine where you're going. [clears throat] If the project does move forward with a signal, you'll have a um many more turning movements within that intersection, which might be confusing to a pedestrian use in that area as well. So, these are other things that we have ongoing discussions with. So, [clears throat] >> you also see that there, you know, level of service is kind of an interesting metric, but You see the roundabout performs better. It's got level service A at three of the four legs where the signal has B's and C's. It's much like a letter grade in school. A's are good, these are bad, and it just has to do with sort of the overall congestion of the intersection. >> Anything else? >> Uh, thank you, Ryan, and Commissioner Min. Thank you. Always happy to see you're in attendance. So, thanks for coming this evening. >> Awesome. Thank you guys. >> Next item, open forum. This an opportunity for anyone to speak of any city business. Uh, take a couple minutes of your just limited to a couple minutes. State your name, address when you come forward. >> There was nobody signed up this evening. >> All right. With that, we'll go to the consent agenda. I am going to make a motion to approve consent agenda A through M and O. I'll second. >> Okay. Motion second. Any further discussion? All in favor? I opposed. We have a consent agenda approved. Uh with that, I am going to move then we we'll move the consent agenda item N to uh the first regular agenda item. Uh if if you read your packet, you saw that we had a very generous donation. Uh just let me pull it up here real quick. Apologize. Um by the Lakes Area, Lakes Area Asphalt Company and Community Co. Church. Uh they came and donated their time uh efforts and that to uh redo the parking lot at the senior center. Um, this was to the tune of $15,000 or so and then additional with all the extra volunteer time. So, I just wanted to pull that from the consent agenda and and just highlight that and thank the people for that type of commitment. It's stuff like that that makes this committee so great. I mean, that clearly is a 15 plus thousand dollars that doesn't the taxpayers don't have to pay for right now. So, we really greatly appreciate that. Um, so with that, I will make a motion uh to uh approve resolution 111.10.25.03, the accepting donation to the senior center. >> Second. >> We have a motion, a second. Any further discussion? All in favor? >> I opposed. Motion carries. Next item 8A, descertification of TIFF districts, Cherrywood and Centennial. And looks like Ellie's gonna walk us through that. >> Yes. So, um, prior to getting to the descertification portion of this agenda item, we are going to give a brief overview of TIFF districts and what they are and how they impact the city. Next slide, please. Our agenda will be tiff cash flows, use of tiff, impact of tiff, and then tiff districts as it relates to the city of Forest Lake. Next slide. TIFF or tax increment financing is a public accounting tool that we can use to help foster economic development, um, redevelopment, and housing development that would not otherwise be able to be used without additional assistance. In order for something to be qualified for a TIFF district, they need to pass what is called a but for test, which requires them to meet a bunch of thresholds. So then we know it will be a worthwhile for the city to partake in. The most important thing about tiff is it is not truly a tax reduction. When we look at a tiff district and we go to evaluate it, we look at what the current property tax basis is. This is what's used moving through the life of the tiff cycle and that's what we use for all taxing jurisdictions. So that is what is factored in for county tax, city tax, and then any levies that would be brought on by the school. And it is also important to note that um when we do look to then descertify a TIFF, we're not putting any of that additional funding back on our citizens. It's really just using that additional value ad from the tax increment finance district expanding our current property tax base. So Abby, you can go to the next slide. When you sit in any tax uh tiff district presentation, you are going to see this value. And so as I referring to in the previous slide we talk about the baseline property value. So that is at the creation [clears throat] of the tip district and so that is that nice gray bar and you can see that expense expands for the entire duration of the project and then as the project continues to go on we get that increased captured value and that increased captured value continues to grow and expand as the dis tiff district comes to um maturity and then once we hit that termination or that final uh descertification process then we hit that full value and that full value of termination is what then is brought back to our current neck net tax capacity. Next slide. The uses of TIFF can be used for anything from land to site improvements to adjacent infrastructure. And within each of those, you can do acquisition to funding additional parking to then also supporting land and other utility improvements. So, as TIFF districts relates to the city of Forest Lake, we are looking for the council to approve to the descertification of two district tics. TIFF districts, Cherrywood and Centennial. Um, this brings an additional net tax capacity of roughly 217K to the city. And so we worked within um Ellers who provided us the 10-year plan to factor in what would the outcome of descertifying these look like. And so when the general primary levy was brought in front of the council back in September, the descertification of these tiffs were already reflected. And what the reflection of these tiff districts allow us to do as a city is it allows us to expand the future of our property taxes that are currently collected without then putting that back onto the citizens and without having to increase that additional tax rate. Does anybody have any questions with just basic overview of what a tiff district is or how the descertification process relates to the current 2026 levy. >> Just to confirm, we've already factored into our budget discussions that this that these tax dollars are coming back on the rolls. >> Correct. So, after reporting was done, we realized early in 2025 prior to me coming that we hit all of our states pay as you go obligations. One important factor to remember is that regardless of whether or not a tip district comes or is descertified, um the number that gets talked about a lot during budget time is the the increase in the levy. That increase in the levy is not affected by whether or not a district is descertified or not because you're the increase in the levy is brought on by real spending and choices that we make in terms of adding staff, doing projects, and those type of things. It what it does do is it lowers the tax rate. That unfortunately doesn't often get talked about. You know, as we talked before, Hugo does a nice job of making sure that everyone understands that. Maybe we should do a little bit more of that, but um it keeps that tax rate. So, if you were to say, you know, look at what our preliminary uh levy increase is and then you look at what our tax rate increase is, the tax rate increase is much less than our levy increase because we are expanding continue to expand tax base not just through this descertification but all the new construction that went on in the last two years it's slowly coming on the tax roles here so I always talk about it in terms of the numerator and the denominator remember that this is an increase in the denominator go back to fifth grade math bottom number denominator right uh so it's important just as important as controlling the numerator or our spending It's also important to increase the denominator as well. That's that's what this is doing tonight and that's what growth in general does for you. >> Question are these in May if this was in the packet somewhere. This are these coming descertifying earlier than scheduled. >> Correct. >> Both of them are >> correct. They hit their obligations within the contract prior to desert the desertation. And do you know what was where in 2000 when was that you know like are we a couple years three years >> I believe do not quote me they one was three years and one was five years >> and that's you know very typical when we we do tiff districts we are a bit conservative in how we model them so that we don't and the people engaging in the development want to have it see conservative as well because they want to make sure before the timeline runs out that they get the full value of that tip in person. In the city's perspective, we we like to get to that full value and make sure that we're not running up against that timeline, but um it's always nice to finish early, get that back on the tax roll earlier than expected. So, [clears throat] [snorts] >> we're moving forward then. Does any council have any other questions on on how tiff works? All right. The next steps is >> so we would seek uh approval of resolution 11102501. And within that resolution, it also talks about some financial things that we have to do on the background just to get it cleaned up at the state level. So if you do have any questions along what those mean, I'm happy to answer those. But the most important part is we are able to then put this back into our tax capacity. >> Right. Um just a a couple comments. This this is a great tool. Uh we hope to be able to use this in the future. We've got some uh potential project downtown that this would be perfect for TIFF. And so uh it's great to get get on, you know, get the district earlier, get the tax dollars coming in quicker. And so this is great. Thank you for taking that time to explain TIFF in general. So that is anyone interested to make a motion? >> Sure. I'll make a motion to approve the attach resolution 11102501 descertification and the transfer of TIF funds to pay the intraund loan, thus increasing the city's tax capacity by an estimated $217,729 for pay 2026. >> Motion. Is there a second? >> I'll second it. >> Any further discussion? All in favor? >> I >> I opposed. Motion carries. >> 8B, franchise fee. And Ellie, >> you're out again. >> So, I'm actually going to let Mark take this one. I was supposed to update the agenda, but um it got printed prior to me doing that. So, Mark, >> I'll take it away here. Yes. Um and in the audience tonight is Mike Wilhelm from Excel Energy. He's here to answer any questions you may have um regarding this. But uh as as you know uh in 2013 the city adopted franchise fees and for the first time and um put a small fee on each energy bill that people get. So that's gas and electric and those fees are dedicated to support of our roads and our uh program that supports um our reconstruction of roads. And uh since 2013 we have not revisited those fees and and that those rates. And so um it seemed like an appropo time to to do that. We looked at inflationary factors since 2013 and um did some math and came up with a appropriate amount to increase those fees. And um generally speaking, the public utilities commission that administers this likes to see that done in 25 cent increments. And so we've rounded to the nearest 25 cent increment in in both cases uh for both the gas and electric. Um so we would be looking tonight to uh approve these this increase. Um in your current budget proposal, a very small increase was uh projected. Um, if you are to uh approve the increase tonight, um, there's an opportunity to reduce that preliminary levy, if you should choose to do that with the additional revenue here. There's nothing saying you have to do that. You could simply add to the road fund and do more roads, but there would be an opportunity to use this revenue to offset property tax and levy and reduce that amount. I would take any questions on that. [clears throat] >> Questions council? >> No questions. Just just a comment. I mean, this is something as this council has been working through the budget process trying to think in in conversations with Mark. What are some different ways that we can increase, you know, badly needed revenue u to provide the level of service including things like infrastructure that the city uh should be doing? And so I appreciate Mark you bringing this forward as something to consider. Um especially given the fact that we haven't had any inflationary changes. Um and just we've talked about we know that a fee is a tax and a tax is a fee. But this you know as you've included in the packet and and through conversation this gives us an opportunity to share these road construction costs with every user in the city not just the taxpayers. And so I think this is you I give my full support because I think this is an important step forward. >> Any other thoughts? >> I would echo that saying those same comments. Um you know we we realize that at the end of the day this is this is really a tax but we've not increased this since we first put this in place over over 10 years ago 12 whatever it is. And so, um, I think it although percentage-wise it is a a pretty good jump, um, it does help us to fund roads and which we know we're lacking in doing that. We've been told by our our staff that we need to be spending probably $4 million a year in roads and we're only spending a little over $2 million. So, this is a way to get us a little closer and um, it it it really dedicates this dollars to roads and it can't be used for anything else and so that makes me comfortable with it as well. All right. Any So, how do we We need to do a couple different motions. It looks like here the two ordinances and then and then >> we would ask you for a motion to approve ordinance 760 and 761 allowing adjustment to the city's gas and electric franchise fees and then approving resolution 11102502 authorizing summary publication. >> So, we can do those this the two ordinances at the same time in the same motion. You're saying okay. All right. Uh anyone willing to make a motion? will approve ordinances 760 and 761 allow an adjustment to the city's gas and electric franchise fees. >> Motions are second. >> I'll second it. >> Any further discussion? All in favor? >> Opposed? Motion carries. >> Right. Looking for a motion to approve to make a motion for the resolution on this. I'll make a motion to approve resolution 11-10-25-02 authorizing summary publication of ordinance 760 and 762. >> Point of clarification. Is it 762 or 761? >> That should be 761. >> I'd like to amend that to ordinance 760 and 761. >> I'll second. All right. We have a motion second. Any further discussion? All in favor? I opposed. Motion carries. Right. And uh HC fee schedule update. Every year finance under chapter 35 of Minnesota state law is required to bring forward to the city council a fee schedule that reflects what our current fees are. And we are required to post that online. Every time a fee schedule is updated, we have to go through the and updating the ordinance that is associated with this. And so what is in front of you today is ordinance 762 and this includes an update to the fee schedule to include the final plan development review for $10,000. And I'm going to let Abby talk a little bit more about what that fee is and why we are updating the fee schedule. >> Thank you, Ellie. Um, so in the city code, it the city code requires that the city engineer develop all final plans and specifications for a development project. The code does allow for the city administrator to authorize another city engineer to do it. And in those circumstances, our city engineer reviews the plans. So, what this would be um would be allowing for another engineer to develop the plans and our city engineer to review it. The I should note just for the record that what we'd be putting in isn't the fee. It'd be an escrow. Remember, many some of you were here when the city added in escros into its fee schedule a few years ago. Um we were always kind of operating on a charge account system where we were billing developers for our consultant engineering legal time. Um but we've been moving to an escrowbased a debate based system so that we have that lump sum up front to cover those costs. So, the plan final plan re review fee review final plan review would be an escrow of $10,000 to cover our engineering engineers review of those final plans. Um, we did discuss whether or not we wanted to wait until the fee schedule amendment comes in next month. However, um we could potentially get a final plat in that time frame and we wanted to see that we could cover those costs associated with our review of those final plans and specifications. Any questions? >> Is this a new line item in our fee schedule? >> It is a new line item in our fee schedule. >> What have we been doing up to this point to cover those costs? We've uh we do take an escrow um but part of it has been just a accumulation from the preliminary plat and billing those out at your meeting. I'm hoping next week we'll have a conversation about these escros and increasing them to match some of the neighboring properties or neighboring uh city um development fees and escros to just help cover those costs up front as opposed to kind of having these charge accounts sitting in finance. >> Does that make sense? Did that answer your question, Le? >> No. >> No. Essentially, we were keeping a a credit account. >> Okay. So, we were still recouping our costs for this, but more on an after the fact basis. >> At the time of development agreement. >> Got it. >> Um signing. Yep. >> Thank you. >> Okay. So, so no add really. I mean, it's just a change uh on how we're doing it, but no additional fees to the developers. They would bear this cost. They're doing it now and going. >> Exactly. They're paying up front as opposed to paying it in the back end. >> Okay. Any other questions of either Ellie or Abby? >> Right. Anyone will make a motion? >> I'll make more a motion to approve ordinance number 762, an ordinance amending city code chapter 35 fees and service charges. >> Motion. Is there a second? Second it. >> Any further discussion? All in favor? >> I >> opposed. Motion carries. >> 8D Eureka Avenue improvements bid results and award recommendation. Ryan >> uh mayor, city council, tonight before you we have the bid uh results and award recommendation for Eureka Avenue. On October 7th, uh bids were publicly opened. Five bids were received for slight contracting incorporated was the low bidder u with base bid and alternate three and alternate four is what we' be discussing tonight for award. Alternate one and alternate two were related to Columbus work within their city limits. Uh they have declined to um award their portions of this project just uh due to funding gap. Uh and if they did include their portion with this Forest Lake project, they would be ineligible to apply for the local road improvement program grant that's uh they are applying for to hopefully fund their segments. Uh so tonight's we're talking about the base bid, alternate one, alternate three, and alternate four. Uh the bids above do not uh include any potential street lighting at this time. Uh we're still waiting on the federal funding review of the DNR roadway easement to reconstruct approximately 1500 feet of Eureka Avenue that is located on the DNR property along Clear Lake. Uh that easements review has been ongoing since August 30th, 2024. And the last feedback we've received from the DNR is approximately another four to six weeks. Uh and further impact may occur because of government shutdown. So tonight's award, we're um looking at doing a limited notice to proceed of the area that's outside of that area. And with discussions with city staff and the contractor, uh we've come to review that what work could be completed in 26, which is outside the DNR easements. And the reason that being said is because if awarded tonight, the areas that are outside of the DNR easement, they would go out and still this year placed the search charge that is anticipated to have to sit for 9 months. Uh and the ground can't be frozen. So this would be the that window right to do that area on the north end of the project in the south end which would help for uh construction stage in between the county road projects and just the time that the project would be done down in 2027 to finish that area within the easement area of the DNR. Uh but without having that search charge put now, we would just assume that we're not going to be able to have enough time for that to do what it needs to do in that area within that 1500 foot DNR land. Uh the search charge could potentially be less than nine months. Uh monitor if monitoring shows no additional settlements, but even if it were six or seven months, that's still going to lose that probably 2026 construction season and that area in between. Uh with the bid results, force lake contracting at a base bid and alternate three and four combined total amount 3,387,743.50, which is $479,120 lower than our engineers estimate, but they're also $578,826 lower than the second bid. So over a half a million dollars lower than second place. Upon review of the bids with city staff, uh we feel that's it's best to proceed with a limited notice and do that work that's outside of the DNR easement so we can uh capture the 2000 or the pricing that we got to complete that work in 2026. We've had some preliminary discussions with the contractor on what some uh additional costs might occur with 2027 work delaying it to there. Approximately we're around 265,000 that would include increased cost with materials, labor, fuel, and trucking. But we still feel that if we went out to rebid this uh we would still uh and then having 27 everything done in 27, we'd be significantly higher, especially with the bid that we did receive to date. So therefore, staff recommends that the city award the contract to Forest Lake Contracting to perform the work included in base bid alternate three, alternate 4 in the amount of $3,387,743.50 with the following conditions. A limited notice to proceed will be issued to complete the soil search charge placement outside of the DNR portion in 2025 and completion of the remainder of the work after the DNR easement is obtained. The city reserves the right to execute a change order to remove the work proposed on the DNR property from the project at no additional cost if we needed to do that too. So with that, I guess I'll just open up with any questions you may have. I'm assuming there's going to be a few. [clears throat] council or council any you want anything right now? >> Um, yeah, it's a complex situation here. We wish we were in a different spot, but no fault of anybody here at this table. We're at the mercy of this ement which has a lot of tentacles because it has federal ties. And uh right now the Minnesota DNR is waiting for the US Fish and Wildlife Service to um decouple themselves from this easement. Um and that's just not there's nothing we can do to we've tried um you know working with Congressman Stabber on it and to no avail. We've pushed all the buttons we can. We've pulled all the levers. We just can't get it any faster. Um without that in place, we really can't do uh the middle portion of the project. And um so what what we're saying here tonight is that we're got a bid in hand to do the project. Um, and we think it's a lower risk to award this project um, at the current cost and um, knowing that there will probably be some increased cost to do a portion of it uh, a year later versus if we don't get any work done next year and we rebid this, we will essentially be paying for all of the work to be done the next year. Um, so we think that if we can get some of this work done this year at the good cost we've got here, we're steps ahead of where we would be if we had to push this a whole another year. Um, there's a small risk here that you don't ever get that easement. I don't know how that [snorts] would be possible there. There's a road there now. You know, would that change if we couldn't get that ement? I suppose um we have to call it off or something like that, but we still need access to the road on the north and to some of our infrastructure on the south there as well. So, um again, we feel like this particular option is the lowest risk and offers us the opportunity to get the job done at the price that we have the funding to complete. >> Mayor, city council, a couple other things just to add just to uh give you some more information. This is the same contractor that's the low bid being recommended for award that's on the highway 97 project. And with that, we've had a lot of conversations on regards to scheduling and staging between the two projects. Uh if the search charge goes on, you know, upon award tonight and in a couple weeks, that work's done. We're probably looking at July or August when we would actually be able to start some of the work and have any major construction shutdowns within the RA project. But with that being said, we've also coordinated with the contractor who has started and will finish the force main relocation at the intersection of Fenway and Highway 97, which is going to allow us to get up and through Fenway faster next construction season. So, there's more, you know, a lot more going on to it than just this project and how we can try to coordinate and help traffic that way. Highway 97 could hopefully be open sooner all the way to Fenway. Uh and then you know by the time we really get into the weeds of this then 97 of Fenway is open right so that's other things that we've been doing on the back end of all this as well Mark from a funding standpoint if worst case scenario we don't get the DNR grant is there any risk of the monies that we receive from the state if this project isn't completed in its entirety to help me with that funs have beened And we're this is a project you don't have to wait till award to request reimbursement through the grant agreement we have. We've already done one reimbursement request. Another second one is actually in progress. Uh the funding just needs to be encumbered by December 31st, 2027. But the actual expiration dates of the the funding there is none. But if you didn't request the money before then and have it paid to the contractor, that's where you would risk some funding, right? But I don't foresee that going to be an issue, especially with the timeline that we're proposing here. Uh if we're able to do what we presented tonight, that would really only leave 1500 feet of roadway in 2027. So, so and I'm not going to get a guarantee out of this. You're saying that that Eureka would likely not be be still be passable until July and we would by then for the most part be able to get 97 open till Fenway. That's our plan and what we've been trying to [laughter] >> I think what we what we we can guarantee is that um it will be a shorter time frame when the two of those where there's the potential for the both of them to be closed at the same time if we get this work rolling. If we don't, there's a big potential that they're both closed at the same time. And I think that's where we're we're hoping to squeeze that timeline down to a week or two if we or nothing hopefully. But think that that timeline can get squeezed down to late July to early August. That's kind of a worst case scenario. >> I I learned this summer that how many uh traffic engineer we have living in the city of Forest Lake. And so if they were very critical about Broadway and 97, this is going to be tenfold. Um so I just I just want to make sure council was aware of that and ready for that feedback. >> [clears throat] >> for lack of a better word. Um, so that's just I guess for me that's the this is you know I guess the risk of for me the risk of not getting this approval um from the DNR or the feds or whatever whoever that's from. I'm less concerned about that than I am just this timeiness because if we weren't going to approve this tonight then likely construction on Eureka would be an all in 27. Correct. >> Yes. And and if I could say one more thing about the risk, what we're what we're going to be doing this fall is going to be a, you know, I'm talking when I say very low amount of money, but we're talking about $200,000 or so worth of search charge they're going to be putting on. The the risk to rebidding this is easily exceeds that. So we're, as Ryan mentioned, one of the conditions here is that we're issuing a limited notice to proceed. So we're awarding the contract and then Next step in the award the contract. There's very specific terms here in the contract. You award a project and then you give someone the notice to proceed. That notice to proceed allows them to spend money and encumber costs and that we that we would owe them. But we're giving them a limited notice to proceed to say you can only do these specific things. And so we're only giving them authorization to do some very specific things that we're not going to overextend ourselves into the millions of dollars here. we're going to be into the low hundreds of thousands that we could that we if in the worst worst case scenario we didn't get an ement we would be out that money but that we'd be out a lot more if we let this go into the next year that would be a for sure thing right I had one other follow question but I lost my lost it Um, anything else council? Um, so that do we have that's coming to back to me a little bit. If we did issue this and for some reason the feedback was very strong, can you we can still do the search charge? Can the search charge sit for a year or or is that not ideal or or what do we committing ourselves to construction? >> The search charge could sit as long as you wanted it to. uh once settlement occurs and things aren't moving anymore then that would be the time we would start getting gearing up for the actual project right all the estimates done by the geotechnical company are estimating that is around nine months >> yeah which if you wanted I think what you're getting at Mr. if you wanted to say don't start until we're done with 97 >> or or other opportunity for us to have a check in as council to see if we really want to move >> and we can we can have that conversation as we approach that and it would just be a matter of whether or not they felt like that was going to impact their costs, right? >> I I think it's obviously it's ideally the same contractor that's that's great and it puts you in a much better position than if you had two different contractors trying to get this work done. [clears throat] >> All right, anyone willing to make a motion here. >> I'll make a motion uh make a motion that the city award the contract of foresight contract and inc to perform the work included in the base bid alternate 3 and alternate 4 in the amount of 3,387,743.50 with the following conditions. A limited notice to proceed will be issued to complete the soil searchcharge placement outside of the DNR easement portion in 2025 and for completion of the remainder of the work after the DNR easement is obtained and the city reserves the right to execute a change order to remove the work proposed on DNR property from this from the project at no additional cost. >> Motion is there second? >> I'll second. >> All right. Any further discussion? >> All in favor? I opposed. Motion carries. 8E 554th Avenue Northwest administrative citation settlement agreement and admin. >> Thank you uh Mayor Roberts, members of the council. Earlier today, you received correspondence from me that included the staff memo and the settlement agreement that's for your consideration tonight. Um, as noted in my memo, the prop um, code enforcement officer Dan Pearson cited the property owner at 554th Avenue Northwest for a few different things. The property owner appealed the citation and um, in the process of setting up an appeal hearing, the property owner agreed to enter into a settlement agreement with the city. So, just a quick summary for those that weren't on the council at the time and for those that were actually I don't I think Hannah might have been the only council member when we adopted our administrative citation program in January of 24. This was designed to create an alternative method of enforcement outside of the criminal citation system or criminal enforcement system. It empowers staff to go out, confirm a violation exists, send notice, give time, work with land owners to clean them up. And if they don't, then we can um administratively site the the land owner. This landowner was cited for two different things, unsheltered storage and unauthorized vehicle. Unsheltered storage really pertains to the personal property, clutter. I don't want to always say junk. I don't want to classify people's um uh personal items as junk. Um but essentially it's excess amounts of items. In this case it was building materials, trailers, lawnmowing equipment or lawn equipment, bicycles um that were all just sitting outside and weren't inside a building. And then also unauthorized vehicles and that is not only unlicensed vehicles but in um an excess amount per licensed driver. It does like play more of a heavy focus on inoperable vehicles. So un that unlicensed or dismantled vehicles. There were several on-site. Um the property owner has made efforts to rectify the violations even through since the citation and working through the settlement agreement, but additional work is needed. Settlement agreement conditions do indicate that um the property owner would build obtain a building permit, construct a structure, and rectify the outstanding violations within the next 12 months. Failure to do so would reinstate the citation um and allow us to then recoup costs associated with this. Um it also would wave their right to appeal this citation again or any subsequent citation for the same matter on the same property. So, let's say they end up um in this agreement um cleaning it up later down the road, we don't necessarily have to send notice. We could go move right to a citation. So, included in uh on the should have been included on the day tonight, but certainly sent to you via email and will be uploaded as part of an amended packet is um a settlement agreement and staff would recommend the council move to approve the settlement agreement with Samra Montoya, property owner of 554th Avenue Northwest with major modifications by the city attorney. Do you have any questions? >> I have one. Abby, have you reviewed the site and is it possible to build a garage on the site? >> We have reviewed the site. Um, there is the possibility of building a garage in the northeast corner on the site of the property. um the specific site plan has not been approved or the building that's been proposed, which is why we are giving the land owners some additional time to obtain that building permit to work through the provisions of the zoning code with staff in house >> and it's city water and sewer there. >> Uh I would I'd have to double check. Uh city water and sewer are certainly available I'd assume. Um, but if you could give me a second, I can >> answer that question specifically. >> Only concern I had was if it's a septic, if they would then be building on their alternative site and that might not be >> That's a great question. It's un it's unlikely an old when I kind of consider Old Forest Lake that it would be an older septic system. I believe that there is sewer water available. >> Yep. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Was this So, we have a number of properties like this in the city. How did this one rise to the top here or >> We're a complaint based um city. Um so, code enforcement officer Dan Pearson does them based on complaints that come in. So, a complaint was filed. I think the original complaint might have been in late June inspection in early July. This was a circumstance where the owner never reached out to Dan in the time frame that he gave them to clean up. Um, the time lapsed. He probably even sent two notices. We really tried to do over and above uh requirements and then he sent the citation. Wasn't until after the citation went out that he heard from the owner who then just submitted an appeal right away. Um, this one didn't necessarily rise to the top for any reason that it was in excess more than any other property because I think all of you, if you drove by it or um, you know, know the area, probably not in excess of some other ones that you've driven by or know of throughout the community. It's just we are only inspecting based on complaint. Um definitely one of those things that we will look at how we continue to enforce. Um what I would say is properties that with with collectors. Um, but at the same time, there's a lot of them and they're they're probably the some of the harder properties to enforce is they take a lot of staff time to consistently keep going back and checking and trying to work with land owners to rectify the violations. >> Questions? Anyone? Motion. >> Sure. So, make a motion to approve the settlement agreement with Samra Montoya, property owner of 554th Avenue Northwest with minor modifications by the city attorney. >> I'll second motion in a second. Any further discussion? >> All in favor? I opposed. Motion carried. We are in the discussion part of the meeting in which we have no items here this evening. So, we'll go right into staff updates and Ellie, we'll start with you. >> The only update we have from finance is that our next council workshop is um a week from now and we will be seeking final budget direction for the truth and taxation meeting that will happen December 8th. >> Thank you, Ryan. >> Uh mayor, city council, nothing to report on tonight other than Highway 97. It's fun to drive. It is >> right, Abby. >> Um, the only announcement that I have is our new building official, Jason Wagner, will be starting on Wednesday morning. Um, and subsequently without necessarily an announcement, but a shout out to both our building inspector, Nate Moes, for really stepping up and helping run the building department. um in in the time period we haven't had in-house building staff. Um we will only have one more vacancy left in the community development department. So I also want to give a shout out to Don Boogie. Both Nate and Don really helped hold together the community development department through um the challenges that we've had in this last 12 to 18 months with our vacancies. So >> BCM Tom, good job. >> Yeah. Yeah. Thank thanks to them. That that's great. Uh Dave, >> I know this. >> Chief Newman, >> I only have one update. Uh today they picked up engine two. So that's the second apparatus that we've sold here in the last month. Uh through vehicle replacement, we've have several vehicles that are coming up. Uh engine one, we're working with uh two different brokers uh to come up with a price that's fair for that. uh Rescue 2, which was a Chevy uh Tahoe that is was sold this week. And so they'll be picked up later this week, uh leaving two brush trucks and engine one. And so hopefully before the snowflies, uh we'll get those vehicles sold as well. That's my only update. >> Chief Peterson. >> Yeah. Uh mayor and city council members uh today officer Ashley Loren started uh with us and um with your approval uh this evening officer Hannah Belelka will be starting on Wednesday. So like to welcome both of them. It'll be great to have them both on board. Welcome to them. >> Mark, >> uh just wanted to thank both the Mate folks and those from the 49ers. So, two of our five bargaining units we've met with and excellent discussions and we think we're still on track trying to get our five contracts settled by the first of the year. We're very hopeful we can do that. So, member, >> yeah, I just want to echo what Ryan said. Um, you know, I hope our citizens I know that construction is very painful, but uh when you drive on 97 and when you drive on Northshore and hopefully someday on Eureka the rest of the way and the the remainder of 97, they'll appreciate the small headaches we have to put up with to get our roads in the condition they deserve to be in. >> Council member, >> nothing for me tonight. >> Council member Erikson, >> uh, nothing this evening. Council member Larson. >> Uh nothing tonight. Thank you. >> I just want u couple comments. Uh the chambers celebrated their annual awards, the gallon awards, and uh the city um won an award on arts in the park. What was the exact name of the award? Do you recall what that was, Abby? >> Green something or other >> community event of the >> I think it was the green green initiatives or green something. And so as everyone knows that the that event's been going on for years and it's the dedication of our park former parks commission, our former parks employees and current employees and commissions. So uh we're very proud of that and that event just continues to grow. I'd also like to congratulate the Force Lake Lions for being named the nonprofit uh of the year and former resident, he's still in Columbus and a regular at city council meetings, Gary Lee's volunteer of of the year. welld deserved for both those that individual and organization. So uh with that anyone really want to make a motion to adjurnn >> also move second. >> All right. Any further discussion? All in favor? >> I >> I opposed. We're adjourned.