Welcome everyone. If they're being right at six o'clock, we'll get started here. And um Joanne, if you could do roll call. >> Council members Ericson >> here. >> Larson >> here. >> Miller >> here. >> Council member Valento is absent tonight. Mayor Roberts >> here. If you're able, please join us. Stand 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. >> Council, we have an agenda in front of us. Is anyone interested in making a motion to approve? >> Also move. Motion is there or second? >> I'll second it. >> Motion second. Any further discussion? All in favor? >> I opposed. We have an agenda. Uh let's see. Item number five, awards and presentations. We don't have anything this evening for that. So item six, open forum. This is an opportunity for anyone to come speak to the council on any city matter. Uh please treat try to leave your comments limited to around three minutes. And if you do come forward, please state your name and address for the record. >> Hi. Um, my name is Jeff Watson. I currently live up in Stacy, Minnesota. And my concern is my my main question right now is if you guys are aware of the situation that's currently happening in Minnesota and especially down in Minneapolis at this moment with ICE and the way they're out of control because last Friday we did a general strike and protest down in Minneapolis and they had a about 400 businesses that participated in this general strike and we 50,000 plus people down in protest. Well, now we are doing another strike this Friday and and we're trying to do more outreaching to try to get more businesses, more cities in support of Minneapolis. And I was just curious if you guys would be willing to participate in that and try to do more outreach with local businesses in this area. I'm currently trying to reach out to Wyoming, Stacy, and North Branch as well to try to get a complete shutdown in support of Minneapolis and Minnesota in this these trying times. So, I'd just like to hear your answer on that. >> Uh yeah, so in this open form, there's not a lot of back and forth, but uh if you wanted to leave your name and number with city staff, someone could reach out and myself would be willing to reach out as well. >> Thank you. >> Yeah. Thanks for coming this evening. I think the next gentleman is more uh on a agenda item for the eight for the uh belt uh consulting or would you like to speak now? >> Uh Mayor Rabbits just it isn't an open forum or a public hearing tonight and so just this would be the time for public comment unless you asked for public comment >> when we spoke about it later. >> Are you interested in speaking to this to during open forum? If there's any specific questions, I'm happy to add whatever. >> Okay. I think if council has some questions, >> just a quick quick point of clarification. So item 8 AI says public hearing on the agenda. >> Oh well, we can um we can do that uh eight. Sorry, it's giving me >> our first action item. As I read the packet, I understand. >> Uh, no, it's for um 8C. >> He's regarding the >> He's here for the wireless towers. We have two ordinance amendments on tonight. Busy night in our legislative capacities. >> Gotcha. All right. >> But if we have questions at that time, again, last. >> Okay. Anyone else interested in coming to speak in front of the council tonight? >> All right. With no one else, we will move on to the consent agenda. Um, I'm going to make a motion that we approve consent agendum items 7 A through D and then F through M. >> I'll second that. >> Motion, a second. Any further discussion? All in favor? >> I opposed. Consent agenda passes. So, what we'll do then was we'll move that that item that I pulled. is the Belts Park volleyball court addition to our first item. And I would guess that Dave would speak to that. >> Yeah. What would you like to know about that other than what's in the memo? >> Um, so I guess some a couple questions. Just the long-term plan of that and location. I know it was talked about at at the parks and recck commission. Um just questions on how the location of that from where the ball field is still existing. I think that's the long-term plan to keep that ball field and then how um if then ice would then go over that space. We're going to continue use that for a rink. I think that's what it is. But I think just more public conversation just to let people know that we what we're deciding here tonight. So, we met with the parks commission probably last last Octoberish and brought up questions of possibly moving that rink to a different location andor if they wanted a volleyball court still at built since it was taken out during that reconstruction. Um, the commission was pretty set on keeping that rink there. They wanted that in that neighborhood. Um, so since we're putting a volleyball court back, we figured making a dual purpose where you could flood that sand in the winter time and then in the summer be a volleyball court. take advantage of using the lights for the rink so you could use those volleyball courts at the night time. That's why we kind of decided or proposed moving it to that location where you see on that picture inside the memo. It's a bad picture in the memo because it's really not that size. It's about 80 ft by 100 ft. It just looks like it's bigger than what it really is in there. The overall goal would be to get it farthest to the west as possible and farthest to the north as possible as keep about 150 ft yet for that baseball court or baseball field and then out of the way for that proposed or not proposed but if we ever put that parking lot in there we keep it out of that footprint as well so we won't have to move it again. uh the green space where that volleyball court used to be that was talked about moving it maybe back over in that area but it's been reported pretty heavily that people are using that green space now. So we don't want to just jam two volleyball courts in that green space and put a volleyball court or you know two in that area. So after that discussion, it was kind of decided if feels like you're jamming a lot of stuff in one area, but you're leaving that whole other green space for green space now or something potential in the future. So Dave, you're limited on the north by that paved trail um which isn't reflected in this picture that you're suggesting relative to size knowing that we have that hard stop on the north side. How you know as you look at this picture relative to say the tennis courts this current picture I'm looking at shows that the volleyball courts would go about halfway. I'm assuming that may not may or may not be accurate. and my spatial, you know, isn't great. So, what are we talking like? How close are to the baseball field are we going to end up being knowing that we're limited on the north end? >> The the goal is to get it as about 150 ft away from home plate that would still be able to use your for a youth baseball field. When I measure just an aerial to where the rink is right now, it's about 145 to 150 ft. So, what I laid over that volleyball court is basically where the rink is right now. So, basically just be turning the ice rink right down into into sand and just making sure we're not infringing on the where that parking lot may go on sometime not into the hill and then as far possible as away from that baseball field. >> Thank you. >> Do do we put a a a liner or something down for to keep water from going going into the the ground? We tried that in the past when it was just on the grass and the problem was it would kind of heat itself from the bottom and then we'd have open water on the bottom of the rink and then ice on the top. Um I think with sand there's that possibility now to be able to put a liner in there just because you can freeze that sand and you're not going to have that the warmth coming from the ground temperature. We're having the troubles right now at belts it's 20 below and you're still getting frost boils from underneath the ice. So, anything will be better than what we have right now. Sand is really good to flood over top of. You might not even have to put a liner in it. Liners are just expensive. They're3 $4,000 that you just throw away at the end of you can't really use that plastic. Uh you probably haven't done a survey, but are last year um even though it seemed like it was open and closed, are the the usage for the the rink about the same or probably haven't run those numbers yet? >> Uh in comparison to like Tower Park, >> well, right? And even to last year, have those numbers gone up or they stayed flat? Are they down a little? >> Um I know we have numbers currently right now. We're 800 plus at tower and we're about 100 or so at belts. So, it's significantly less use question. >> Um, I know I'm asking a lot here, Dave, but do you know what the average distance from home plate to an outfield fence for a little league team is? >> You like to get 150 ft. That's that's where you want to get for like a tenu tenu field. And that's that's what that field was kind of made for, you know, a softball as well. I mean, it's not made for 12U or people crushing home runs. It's T- ball and and little kid ball. I mean, I don't think you'd ever want it anything more than that. Or then you're worrying about balls going to the St. Pete's garage or parking lot or onto Southshore Drive. >> Yeah. >> I think you want to keep it just like a for little kids to play on. >> So, we'd have that distance. >> Yep. >> Okay. >> Just for reference, the home plate to the sidewalk that's so down the left field line I would call it is about 170 ft just to that. So you're really not cutting that much off what you have already there as a limitation. >> You're more restricted by the the tennis courts and you'd almost have to build like a green monster type deal to shrink that distance, but your right field is probably restricted just by the hill that was always there versus the center field. >> Good. And will there be Um, if it's in the packet, I apologize, but more standard like a permanent footing where this the poles go into and then they're just taken out at the end of the season. >> Yep. So, they were just like telephone poles and tenn and like a tennis net that was up there. So, it's it's planned to get real actual stansions for volleyball court that'll be ground mounted. So, you can slide the tube in there in the summertime. In the winter, you pull the tubes out, cap it, and then you can flood it. And then the You just take a metal detector, find them again, and put them back up. It also going to have the actual border string around there, too. So, when people come and play, it actually shows what that the, you know, the size of the courts all laid out and stuff, too. So, it's going to be a definite improvement of the court itself, plus two of them. Um, if you're going to make it that big for the ice rink, you might as well, if you're putting the sand down and and cutting it out, you might as well make it for two. And I think you're going to see a lot more people using it just with the lights on at night time, too, that that people can use it in the fall and the spring and up at night time. >> I I do like that idea, have it lit for just more usage. So, >> and it's a lot. I mean, it's at $14,000, but public works is probably eating another 15 to 20,000 off it just by doing all the the shaping work and putting the sand in and doing all the underground stuff. So, I mean, basically that $14,000 is just for the sand and for the equipment. The rest is done with public work staff. I would say my former employer, we built one volleyball court for $14,000 about 10 years ago. So, this is a pretty pretty good price. >> Great. All right. Anyone make a motion on this one? >> I'll make a motion to approve the installation of the new volleyball courts at Belts Park using the park dedication funding as presented tonight. >> I'll second it. >> All right. All right, we have a motion second. Any further discussion? All in favor? >> I >> I opposed. Motion carries. Thanks, Dave. >> All right, item 8A. Uh, so the next two items, uh, I've made public a number of times. I am likely going to be into the the cannabis business. So, I will be turning the meeting over to another council member. We have a different situation here this evening. acting member or council member Valente who is acting mayor is absent. So uh the three council members will make a decision as to who is going to lead these next two items. So I will be leaving the room. Council member Larson unless you have any objections I would uh make a motion to appoint uh Leaf as our acting mayor for this discussion. I would second that motion. All right. Thanks, guys. >> All in favor, Mr. Mayor. >> We need actual motion. All right. All in favor? >> I All right. Here we go. Legal and I'll just make a note that uh Mayor Roberts has left the room for this conversation. So, first on the item cannabis buffer zoning ordinance tax amendment. Abby, you want to walk us through, please? >> Uh yes. Late last year, um, you heard an application from Forest Lake Cannabis. They were requesting an interim use permit, an IUP, to allow for, uh, retail cannabis at a property that was located within 250 ft from residentially zoned property. It was at that time we discovered that there was an inconsistency in the city code and that we had put in buffer requirements, but we had tied them to licenses and the intent really was to tie them to use um cannabis-based businesses. At the time, the council directed staff to work with the planning commission on an ordinance that would clear up that code. Um and that's what's before you tonight. Ordinance 766 defines cannabis activities. It applies a 250 foot separation requirement from those higher intensity uses. So the manufacturing, the distribution, but it uh does not it no longer requires a buffer distance from the retail uses. We retain all other performance standards. No other sections regarding our cannabis regulations would change. Planning commission did hold a hearing on this on January 14th, 2026. They did recommend approval to this council as staff is as well. There was one note of concern and I think that this has been echoed by staff and I think even the uh council is just this whole idea of what if a license what if they do want to expand? What if they go and they expand? Well, it's no different than any other use permit we issue anywhere in the city. um we can say you know this restaurant is allowed to have these indoor operations but the minute they spill it on the street it's a violation of the code we enforce same thing would be would be the case for cannabis we don't have any case law to point to all we can say is we have tools to deal with that if that would happen but we don't believe that is going to be the case with our retail establishments so tonight um staff is asking you to hold a hearing on this matter and after you've taken all testimony you discuss Uh, ordinance number 766. As noted, both the planning commission and city and city staff would recommend you move to approve ordinance 766 amending title 15, chapter 153 pertaining to cannabis businesses. Any questions? >> No. Me, you guys? >> No, sir. >> All right. Thank you, Abby. So, with that, let's open the public hearing for ordinance number 766 at 617. Is there anybody that would like to speak this public hearing? Anybody at all who want to speak to this hearing? All right. Seeing none, if it's okay with legal counsel, we'll close the public hearing at 6:17. Okay. Thank you. And bring conversation back to council. So, what questions do we have for Abby about this zoting ordinance? I think I'm good with uh we've discussed so much of it and the 250 ft was my biggest concern and it sounds like if they want to spill out into the street, we have tools to deal with it. So >> that is correct. >> I don't know what else we could do. >> I think we cleaned it up and it makes more sense. It's more direct. So >> thank you for our attorney can weigh in on it. >> Yes, >> your honor. Council, if I may, um, if you recall way back in December, November when we first talked about this, we were trying to get a hold of the Office of Cannabis Management to get some direction from them. I did finally get some response from them. And it does sound like um for a micro business or a a mezzo business, whatever their endorsement is, in other words, if they're allowed to do retail sales or they're allowed to do manufacturing or they're allowed to do cultivation, whatever they get for their original endorsements, if they want to add an additional endorsement to that later, in other words, expand their business into from just retail to manufacturing, they do have to go back to OCM, apply, and then OCM has to send all of that information to us just like the first license application. So I do have that in writing from OCM. So that um resolves some of the concerns around expansion of the business into another an additional use. >> Okay. Thank you. So with this zoning ordinance change, so we will not correct me if I'm wrong, we will not have any sort of a separation for retail business from residential. >> That is correct. >> Okay. And that's in alignment or that do we have any of those sorts of separations for any other retail businesses in town? >> Um for general residential uh the clerk could um or Jolene could correct me for like our liquor and our tobacco do we from just residential uses? >> We don't have any buffers for residential uses for those other licenses. Um, we do have buffers for schools and I believe daycarees. >> Yeah. And >> and all of those buffers would still remain in place for schools, daycarees, and uh residential treatment facilities, I think, was the other. >> Okay. So, this aligns with our other >> Yes. >> controlled businesses for us. Thank you. All right. So, any further discussion or questions or I'll entertain a motion. I'll make a motion to approve uh ordinance number 77, excuse me, 766 amending section 153.092 UU of the city code uh to apply the residential separation requirements for cannabis businesses based on site activities rather than the state license type. >> Got a motion. Is there a second? >> I'll second. Any further discussion? All in favor? >> I >> I opposed. Motion carries. All right. Next up, item 8B, Forest Lake cannabis interim use permit. Abby, >> thank you. Um, acting mayor Ericson. Uh, members of the council, in November, you heard the application from Budding Measures LLC, otherwise to be known as Force Lake Cannabis, looking for an IEP for cannabis based retail sales. This was the applicant that you had received an application from directly pertaining to that residential buffer requirement that we acknowledge was kind of an a whoopsie in the code. At that time, um, the council was not prepared to move forward with an IUP with various conditions. So, you've elected to table the IUP, directed staff to amend the code. Tonight, this is being back brought back before you uh for conformity to the city code and issuance of the IUP um which would allow for budding measures LLC to operate a retail only cannabis based business at 1467 Lake Street South. Um, included in your packet is a resolution 01262601 granting an IUP to budding measure movement for retail only cannabis operation at that site and staff would recommend that you consider approval for it. The applicants are here if you have any direct questions for them. Do you have any for me? >> Thank you, Abby. Any questions for Abby? >> No. >> Or the applicants? >> No. Well, I know we've discussed this one before. Um, doesn't sound like there's too much question on the table. So, I'll entertain a motion if there's anybody so moved. I would make a motion to approve the resolution 01262601 granting an interim use permit to Budding Measured Movement LLC for retail only cannabis operation at 1467 Lake Street South subject to the following conditions uh which there are >> there are the list in in the >> 14 >> attached Thank you. Is there a second? >> I'll second that motion. >> Any further discussion? All those in favor? >> I >> I opposed. And the motion carries. >> Good luck with your business. >> All right, we'll bring Mayor Roberts back in to carry on the meeting. Right. HC single family zoning district uh tower zoning ordinance text amendment. Abby, >> thank you. Uh, Mayor Roberts, members of the council, um, at your last meeting, you heard a request from Bu Consulting for a zoning ordinance text amendment that would make certain modifications to our regulations for wireless towers. At that meeting, you directed staff um that you were favorable to some of the amendments, but that there were others that you had some concern over. Specifically, you were favorable to allowing for um wireless towers in the single family residential district, but only when they are 10 acres in size and guided for public institutional in the future land use map. You also wanted to require stealth camouflage design. Included in your packet tonight is ordinance number 765, which um memorializes that council direction and would amend the the code accordingly. Additionally in your packet is a resolution 01262603 which denies the applicants requested the other items they've requested essentially making the findings of why it is we don't want to change the code. So staff recommends that you um consider the items as you previously discussed and then move to approve resolution 0126263 denying the requested amendments and approve ordinance number 765 amending title 15 chapter 153 pertaining to wireless communication towers. Any questions? questions. >> I think they got it based on our discussion. >> I wasn't here for the last discussion, so I'll take your guys' word for it. >> Oh, I read through the packet. So, >> yeah. Yeah. Well, if uh you're okay, then we'll make a motion to approve resolution 01262603, a resolution denying requested amendments to wireless communication tower standards and approve ordinance number 765, an ordinance amending title 9, chapter 153, uh sorry, title 15, chapter 153, section 153.065, section 153.069, 069 and 153.092 pertaining to the wireless communication towers. >> Great. We have a motion. Is there a second? >> I'll second the motion. >> Any further discussion? >> All in favor? >> Opposed? >> Motion carries. Right. 8D Spike Spikes and Hool's planned unit development in Abbey. Well, again, as noted in your last meeting, uh you approved uh planned unit development and site plan approval for spikes and hool phase 2. You approved a resolution for it, but included in that was not an ordinance that changed the zoning ordinance. Um the map um staff is bringing that back for formal council consideration on just the memorializing your approval with ordinance number 767. Staff would recommend the city council move to approve ordinance number 767 amending the official zoning map from MU1 to PUB and then also approving an accompanying summary publication resolution of 01262602. Any questions? Again, I think you got it all, but Council Member Ericson probably weren't there for that one either. take your word for it. >> Did you have any questions? >> No, I I I heard I heard about the conversation, so I'm good. >> All right. Anyone? I'll make a motion to approve ordinance number 767, an ordinance amending the city of Forest Lake official zoning map uh reszoning all property of Sodor Speed with Spike and Hools from MU-1 to PUD and approve resolution 012626-2 authorizing publication of the summary of an ordinance number 767. >> All right, I will second it. Okay, we have a motion to second. Any further discussion? All in favor? >> I >> opposed. One abstension. Moving right along. 8E uh city sign name modifications. Dave. >> Yeah. We were here last council meeting and we uh decided on that new logo and um I know we said public works big concern was that just adding that 6 ines for just creating that extra weight and extra place for that window to go. And after the meeting um staff kind of brought up and said kind of hey big dummy there's there's another way you can do this and still kind of keep the signs the same. Um, with that, uh, if you look at the memo, our current ones spell out the avenue and the direction, so it's a longer, you know, wording for all of our signs. Um, Washington County kind of has those signs where they they tuck in the Avenue North or the street north and make that smaller writing with the block number. Um, doing that would at a minimum cut all those signs back down six inches and basically then that logo would be a wash. You'd end up with the same size. Um, there's two benefits. You save you save dollars. It actually be any any cost extra now to putting that logo on because you'd be saving the six inches on your overall length. That and then it would just match the county signs too. I think then all the signs when you're driving down the street will all look exactly the same. be numbered and and lettered exactly the same. So, I should have thought about this when we had our last council meeting, but um I think if we're going to make a change and add a logo, we should um I would recommend that we just change that lettering as well. Any questions? >> No, seems to make sense. >> I actually think it looks nice. You know, long as you're putting the logo on, change them up a little bit so they have a whole new design. >> Yeah, I like it. >> Yeah. Very nice. >> Well, Mr. May, if you're okay, then I'll I'll make a motion to update the street sign lettering to 6 in main lettering and 2in designation and block letters. >> Is there a second? >> Second. We >> have a motion in a second. Any further discussion? >> All in favor? I >> I opposed. Motion carries. >> 8F, local options sales tax. And Ellie, >> good evening, mayor and council members. Tonight in front of you, we are going to walk through the local option sales tax last Tuesday at our workshop. We went through an in-depth presentation that you can find online if you are wanting to look through it again. But the main highlight tonight is we are seeking legislative approval through the resolution to submit a proposal for a 5.5% sales tax to be included on all eligible taxable goods for the city of Forest Lake. What this looks like is these are 2023 numbers because with any sales tax we're two years behind. And so we are assuming that by 2026 and 2027 this will generate roughly $2.5 million a year. And so we are assuming that this 0.5% sales tax will go for 20 years generating roughly $50 million. The reason we are implementing this is because it will go to support the new public works facility. In order to get this process started, we will submit the resolution to our legislators and then once that is submitted, they will then take the opportunity to review it and vote on it. If we do get legislative authority, it will come back in front of the council and come back in front of the city of Forest Lake for adoption and to request a vote. This is something that is determined ultimately by citizens. All we do is generate the paperwork, talk about the pros, the cons, and what that actually looks like. And then once that referendum is held, that will determine if the sales tax is going to actually be implemented. And if it does get approved, we would do a city ordinance and then we would move forward with it. But a little bit more about the logistics of the sales tax is through the University of Minnesota, they conducted a study and roughly 47% of it would come from residents within the city of Forest Lake. And so big picture of the study, they broke down traffic patterns, people coming in, people coming out, where businesses are spending money, what time that's being spent, and they then determined 54% of it comes from non-residents. And so that would allow us because this is a regional facility to spread out that funding to then take less pressure off of just the residents of Forest Lake because then it would go to support everybody actually using it. With that, Mark, did I miss any of the major points? >> No, I would just uh say that, you know, there's a timely article in the League of Minnesota cities here. The fact that covers about multiple option sales taxes and in here you you'll see that there's kind of a sidebar here. It talks about the six steps. I want to make sure that the public is aware that this is only step one. And there's a deadline here. We realize that some people might be kind of um alarmed by the idea of talking about a sales tax and voting on a resolution to put this in front of the legislature. We understand we're a long ways away from, you know, actually doing this and deciding that this is the way we want to fund that facility. Um, but unfortunately, we need to do that now because of the legislative schedule. Um, if we waited till next year, then we're out really until 2028 because this has to be done during a general election. So, you would have to If if you would approve the resolution tonight and uh gain support from your legislators to put forward legislation, it would then have to go to a referendum vote on the next general election, which of course be this this coming year. So this November. So um the timing of it is such that we need to kind of keep our name in the in the hat, if you will, for now. And this is again just step one of six to actually enact this since there's a lot of time here yet for the public to weigh in on this. In fact, it's a system that really heavily favors public input in the sense that it comes to a vote at some point. So, um we feel like this is u a good step to make sure that we have all of our options still on the table as we navigate the difficulties of this large project. So, um, with that, uh, I do want to point out that in front of you is a a slightly revised version of the resolution, and I can just walk through a couple of the, um, changes on that. Uh, what we did is we we just added a little bit of verbiage um to reflect the u exact wording of the of the statute. So there's just a a little bit more of a description of the project um in terms of what it entails. So on page two of the handout here, you'll see that there's a little bit of a breakdown. The building will consist of office space, mechanics, basil workshops, warm storage, and cold storage. Um and then together with associated infrastructure, the statute lays out that these are um the associated infrastructure is also eligible uh cost. And then um I wanted to just address the the numbers here as well. Um the statute asks to estimate the amount of the the time in which it will take to raise this amount of money. And um in speaking with Oakdale and a couple other jurisdictions that have done this in the past as well, um the amount of money that is asked for uh has generally remained in the in the U document here, this resolution, the nominal amount that the building will cost on day one. So the amount that we'll pay the contractor, consultants to design and build the project. Um and then the amount of interest because we know what bond rate would the bond structure all that kind of stuff that is simply we've got a little clause in there that says so this is a $50 million building plus the cost of interest in financing and so um relative to that we also understand that then raising $50 million is not enough um but that is a minimum if you think about the idea that two and a half million at the beginning of this would be the what we would predict as the starting point that sales tax revenue. And of course, as prices go up, that tax revenue goes up. As growth happens, as there's more retail and more sales in our city, then that revenue goes up as well. So, it's likely that we will raise more than 50 million, but that is a sort of bare minimum base value. Um, and then we've left it open here as to whether or not you would set an ending date. Uh, the statute does not require you to do that. The statute says you can leave the tax in place until the project is funded in full. So essentially the only thing we're putting a ceiling on here with this resolution would be the $50 million mark. So with this resolution, we would really not be able to raise that amount higher. And I think if I could look everyone in the eyes down the line here, we're pretty committed to that number, I think, and being that number or lower, right? And so um I think we're in a in a good spot there. Um the oftentimes other jurisdictions have put an end date on the tax sort of say that whichever comes first we either raise this amount of money or this date we're going to end it and you can choose to do that I think down the line. I'd rather you keep that open right now just because again we don't know what interest rates are going to be like when we go to bond for this could be good news could be bad news anywhere in between. So, um, that's I I just wanted to explain those numbers and so people can get an idea of that. Yes, we understand that $50 million is not the total amount we need to raise. We would need to raise more than that or supplement with general funds. And I think that may be part of the overall financing plan at the end of this as well that there might be a combination of sales tax and general fund and or utility fund revenue. As we've initially budgeted this, right, we've talked about half and half being from the general fund, half being from the utility funds through user fees as well. So, there's a number of different ways to put this all together. Um, this resolution tries to keep this as open as possible so that we have as many different options as we we can explain anything further if I could. >> Um, just one point of clarification. So, there's numbers and years in here, but correct me if I'm wrong, the real sentence or the most important sentence relative to the longevity of this sales tax is that last sentence where it says it will expire upon full funding of the project consistent with Minnesota statutes. >> Yeah, you'll notice the word approximately in front of that 20 years. And that's the the statute um I think I have right here. I can read it to you. It's highlighted so I can't miss it. So the the resolution must include the following information. Um the estimated time needed to raise that amount is what's required. So they don't require you to put a solid end date on it. Um, obviously, you know, that's an estimated time that we think we can raise $50 million. If we endeavor to raise more than that, we could could extend that until the project is fully funded. And that that number will be north of 50 million because of interest that would pay off. >> Yeah. Okay. And I think the important part of that is to call out the fact that this isn't a forever tax. >> That's correct. it is project specific >> because I I know that's already been talked about and and I I know this idea of a local area sales tax was talked about, you know, been talked about for quite a while, long before I was on the council. When I first heard about it, I was like, not sure how I feel about that because that basic assumption is that, yeah, taxes come and never go. >> Um, >> that's often discussed when there's school levies, right? There's always that fear that oh that levy will it will just be too easy for that governing body to just want to keep that levy on and use it for something else. That is not the case here. It we would have to go back to the voters to extend it. Actually Oakdale just did that. They um started the project and realized they had inflation that got the best of them. They were behind by I don't know eight or nine million. Um they went back to the voters and the voters approved an additional eight or nine million. So could go back the voters get to that at that point. >> Yeah. Which is important. >> Yeah. >> Thank you. >> Any other questions or comments? One comment I guess I do have is at least if we can get this message out and get the the voters to agree, a large percentage of this, a larger percentage comes from people who visit our city and uh and are using a lot of the the the facilities and a lot of the um infrastructure in our cities and the restaurants and the bar etc. uh and and additional businesses that um we never really as a city collect any revenue, but they are very hard on all of our city services. >> Yeah. And and so I can just add too like this, you know, I will be supporting this this evening, but this by no means is the end. As administrator St has talked about, there'll be I'm assuming some public hearing of some sort. Um there will be a referendum. People do get the opportunity to vote on this. Um, and just because any of us may or may not approve this tonight doesn't mean that we're fully on board until we get all the numbers and facts back uh and we get to go ahead with the legislature. This is just a step so at least we can continue to contemplate this as as this project moves forward. With that, I'm willing to entertain a motion if anyone's Mr. May, I'll um make a motion to approve the attached resolution authorizing the city of Foresight to submit a request to the Minnesota legislature seeking authorization to impose a 0.5% local option sales tax to support designated public works capital improvement projects subject to subsequent voter approval. >> All right, we have a motion. Is there a second? >> I'll second that. Any further discussion? All in favor? I opposed. >> Motion carries. Okay. Item nine, discussion. There's no nothing there this evening. Uh so we'll go right into staff updates and we'll start with Ellie. >> We are in full swing of year end here in finance. We have our preliminary audit dates set in February and then they will be back for a week in April with the assumption of that audit coming back to the council in June at a meeting. Um, going into the audit, we I have no major concerns. We had a couple prelim meetings. This will be my first year running the audit here at the city of Forest Lake. Our auditors seem great. Um, and then with that, just year end utility bills are going out. If people have questions about those, um, my staff is very receptive. Just if there's any questions as we get to your end and bills come out, feel free to reach out. >> Thank you, Ryan. >> Mayor, city council. Uh, nothing specific other than just kind of giving you guys a heads up. Uh Washington County is probably going to be attending our city council workshop in February to talk about county road 32 uh and our next steps plans moving forward with that. Other than that, any questions you might have >> Jolene this microphone. >> Um quick update that we are now live on governmentjob.com. This has been a labor of love for about the last six months with myself and when our new HR generalist came on board, she's really taken a a huge chunk of building this program out for us. So that just means that our job postings are much more modernized and accessible and we'll have a further reach. So that's exciting news for the staff here and for folks who are wanting to join our team. So, check that out on governmentjob.com or else there's also a link on our website that will bring you to our page for that. Um, our wellness committee has launched and is well underway. I'm excited about the work that they're doing to support our staff here in house to highlight and encourage wellness incentives. And our safety committee, which will be led by none other than Dave Adams, will be meeting for the first time this week. And this is exciting as well. Um although it's safety focused so some people might not think it's quite as exciting but it is mandatory that we have this committee. The city has not had one previously so we're excited to get this going and make sure that we are focused on staff safety in the workplace >> questions. Uh Abby, >> just a few updates. Last week, um Mayor Roberts, Mark Stz, and I met with a number of different regional, county, and state partners regarding transportation efforts in the community. So, they'll start to see some conversations happening and some service expansion within the community that I have already, I think, mentioned at various times. Um, also last week was our first of the year watershed district kind of permit coordinators meeting. So this is some of our frontline staff, permit staff, our permit inspectors, plan reviewers that are meeting with watershed district plan reviewers, permit staff. Um, right now we're looking at the potential of up to seven residential developments that'll be going through the entitlement process this um, spring, this late winter, spring. So you probably start seeing some of that coming through, but our offices are are pretty busy right now with new residential land development review. So happy to answer any additional questions you might have. >> Uh what would those seven do you have any idea equate to number of rooftops units? >> I'd have to I'd have to take a look. Okay. >> Um some of them are too premature to even say this is how many. I can tell you I mean you know if it were up to them we'd have thousands. Um um but yeah, I mean we're looking at, you know, several hundred new lots probably going to be entitled this spring at least. >> Great. So doesn't mean they'll all be built this year, but we also are seeing less of our developers are are less inclined to propose phasing plans. So where we might have seen in the past, you know, smaller phases, we're not seeing that same sort of thing with some of these other ones coming forward. So it's kind of exciting. >> Yeah. >> Questions. Senator Dave, uh, no updates. >> Chief Peterson, >> no updates. >> Chief Newman, >> no updates. >> Amanda, >> no. >> Mark, uh, just want to, um, I thought Alan would maybe sing the praises of the sales our trucks that we sold for uh come on Alan give them the update give the update. >> So we did sell two vehicles on the minbid auction the first vehicle which was a 2001 Ford 250 we purchased it for 26,000 originally we sold it for 19,800. The other truck was a 2005 Ford F350. Sold that for 23,800 and that was donated >> back in 2005. >> Excellent. >> Got about two vehicles for 20ome plus years for 5,000 bucks. Seems like a pretty good deal. >> Do just a qu follow question. Do do those dollars go stay specifically within the fire department budget? Is that capital equipment? it will go into the capital equipment budget minus the uh 20% that goes back to Columbus as their share of the original purchase. >> Uh just a quick reminder that we do have an airport commission meeting on February 4th. Council member Miller, >> no updates. >> Council member Erikson, >> no updates this evening. Council member Larson. >> Uh just a planning commission meeting on Wednesday at six o'clock. Please tune in or show up. Thank you. >> I don't have anything uh either. Thank you everyone tonight preparing for the meeting and presenting and enjoy a nice evening early evening off on a Monday. So right make a motion to