[Music] we're right at 7 o'clock so I'll call toate city council meeting to order and Julene can we have a roll call please council member Ericson here council member husnik here council member valento here council member Roberts here mayor Bane here I'd like to invite everyone to rise and join us for the Pledge of Allegiance Al FL of the United States of America and to the for it stands Nation indivisible with liy and justice for all Council we have an agenda before you and I would like to note the agenda um was amended earlier today um and so just wanted to note that there is an additional item on the agenda for a 2025 budget discussion and that will be a discussion in the discussion piece no action taken this evening um with that I will entertain a motion to approve so moved a second Motion in a second all those in favor signal by saying I I I oppose and our agenda is approved our next item this evening is open Forum open forum is any interested um parties opportunity to address Council and a topic of your of your choice um I will say this evening we do have a um a hearing on the agenda under item 7A consider ation of the property at 23620 Jensen Avenue that is a hearing however it is not a public hearing we will not be taking public comment during that portion we will have an opportunity for the property owner um to address Council if they choose um but if you are here from the public and you want to speak specifically to that topic um this would be your time to do so is there anybody that signed up for open Forum this evening thank you uh jamy deckman and if thank you could I could have you full name and address for the record that'd be great Jamie dman 56 7th Street Northwest and will you be taking questions during the budget section or during the uh improvements uh portion of the meeting we won't be taking public comment but now's a great time to kind of get your questions on the record and we'll try to address them at that time I just if it was going to be readdressed I didn't want to jump the oh no that was a great time to get that feedback so I think you must have heard this a h 100 times budget this year everybody's you know still reeling from inflation and if I read all the uh numbers correctly something on the order of $800,000 is the estimate for the improvements for the median and roundabout if we're going to spend that kind of money I'd much rather see a dedicated right turn lane from Broadway onto 61 South instead instead of mulch uh to alleviate the traffic problems there and then uh possibly a redesigned pedestrian Crossing there's been a couple of incidents in that space uh and then just further on that if we're going to keep adding trees to medians where they the trees die because it's just not a good spot for them there's not enough uh soil to sustain those plants we need to look at a less expensive plants and be something that can stand up or be easily replaced uh there's a lot of missing trees and we just keep throwing new ones after dead ones and that's all I've got thank you very much thank you Jill green hello uh Jill green 6349 207th Street North I'm very terrible at public speaking so please be forgiving um I just came to give you guys a couple updates on the senior center because you haven't had them and I was super excited today because of all the things that happened over the weekend and people didn't have time in the office to hear it so excellent they asked me to email and I couldn't do it because there was too much to say in email so I am here to tell you guys um so with Christmas approaching people I don't know if they get super giving or what but I had a lady reach out to me last week her name was Kristen May and and she had bought some of those Domino's fundraiser cards and she messaged me and asked me if I wanted them for the seniors and they order pizza at every 500 tournament and so I was like that'd be amazing like thank you and so she gave us that and then another group last week called me and asked me if there was any seniors that wanted real Christmas trees because they wanted donate them and deliver them to their houses that's amazing so that they all have real Christmas trees and then today when we were there um we had just taken out the Christmas tree and we're starting we do a a different theme every year on the tree so this year it's silver bells so we were getting all the stuff ready for it and uh this family came in and they had said oh we're too late and I was like for what they have a 10- foot Christmas tree real one that they want to give to the senior center I know I'm so excited so we're going to put it outside and we're going to have our first outdoor tree and they are so excited they are so unbelievably happy about this and I was pretty much in tears because people are so generous and I just nothing makes me more happy than seeing them all smile and I I just can't think of a better thing and it was the best so I had to share it all with you guys because that's big news thank you so that's it all positive thank you thank you um is it Tom Crow oh building you're you're here for later on excellent um Steve shenen Steve Steve shingan 7760 214 Street Forest Lake um I try to put my application in for uh the warming house and I I didn't know we had to do it online or anything because I've been doing it for eight years and I just they usually notify me and so I found out that that I had to put it online but trying to figure it out I I can't figure it out I contacted uh Kyle young and I tried to call him and I stopped in for the last two weeks and he called me today and said that uh uh they had six applicants already and uh that um they were full and I've did it for eight years and I was never contacted it and trying to figure it out how to do it I I couldn't figure out how to do it online I mean I I fig I figured out most of it um there's some I don't I don't know who filled out who made that application or anything but in one in one spot it says what's your what's your require I think they mean salary but they wrote down sily so I don't I don't know um I don't I don't know and I I called Dave this morning I only called Dave once and I know I'm sure he's busy but I only talk talk at him once but I don't know uh Kyle said it's up to Dave who gets hired or not so I'm just here to ask Dave you want me to work or got a job for me there or what maybe we can address that tomorrow tomorrow morning why I give you a call tomorrow Steve give me a call give me a call tomorrow so I can fill out the application y I'll talk to Kyle and see what's going on okay like I've been doing it for eight years everybody sees me around to park I've been a park Rancher for eight years and uh I didn't know nothing about this and I've been trying for the last two weeks thank you um Kim y Bower um yeah if you would you like and do you want to speak in open form or were you just signing in okay yeah because we sure okay and so let's take you one at a time though and and we'll have kind of name and address for the record and happy to hear your feedback Kim Young Bower um 23830 Jensen Avenue North Forest Lake and um we're all up here because we've been dealing with this property for I don't know how many years and it's just getting worse and worse I mean we don't even know who lives there I think it's like they got campers in the back they got tents up they got kids running around and I mean it's it's just it's a hot mess and we're just really hoping we've had to look at this nightmare for a long long time and we're just really hoping that somebody will finally do something about it understood thank you um I'm Terry pennison I live at 9355 239 Street north um and just so you know for those of you that haven't seen this property it's a dead end Road it's a mile long Jensen is where you enter I'm on 239th which is where you take a curve now it changes names so I have to drive it's not next to me but I drive past it in and out of my development every time and I think the very first um formal complaint that I'm aware of that came into the city was in 2015 so we're going on 10 years and it only has gotten worse over that time Becky and I have during that time had been in contact with Al Newman from the fire department who assured us that he was handling this rather than take it to the courts it was going to be taken care of that never happened it went to the courts it's been in the court system for years now in and out it was on in foreclosure um and during that time there was a known um water breakage in the lower level of the house that flooded that was never dealt with so there's mold growing in the house um there's been two fires very close to each other that damage was never repaired the city repaired some of it all they did was put some plywood up so it's not you couldn't wasn't a gaping hole into the house nothing else was ever repaired then um like like Kim said there's been campers people living in the campers not just campers out there people living out there with extension cords strung out where are they using the facilities they don't have know so there's who knows where where their waste is going into where we all have wells you know um there's piles of garbage because they don't have garbage service so it's everything's just piled up with a a tarp over it um you know and I and we came to the city I looked up in May of 2019 as a group like this and we assured it would be looked into um council member bom asked for some photos I sent her the photos she said that's horrible and here we are it's only gotten worse so I know I I'm thankful that the to the to the new incoming council members that you're looking at it anyway and hopefully taking it seriously we have our doubts so because we've been told many times that oh it's going to be this date and that date comes and goes and then there's this date and that date comes and goes so um hopefully are we able to stay in during that discussion we just can't speak on it then correct okay all right so hopefully there'll be some some sort of not a resolution tonight I get but a direction and more than just lip service because that I feel like that's what we've gotten for almost 10 years now and it gets it gets disheartening so and I feel like if this were on Broadway Avenue or you know somewhere visible we would this would this would have happened a long time ago would have been done but we're out in the country and nobody cares so c yeah we're the city we pay city taxes but we yeah hi hi I voted for you yay my name is Pat beaver and I live at 23760 Jensen Avenue North Forest Lake Minnesota I worked as a nurse for 42 years and paid my debt Buy in that house watch my children grow up got the news that my son didn't make it back from the war that is my home and I 35 years I've planted flowers you guys would love my yards it's my home it's my beautiful home and when we moved out there it was the most beautiful place I watch these people's children grow up I bake cookies for them it's like a big family and is with anything else you know what is the rights of the majority of the people few people can make the majority miserable because they're protected I don't think I call to see if somebody could park their van or their motor home in my driveway to stay for a month and was told no I'm a citizen I abide by the rules I didn't do it there's three motor homes in there campers cats running all over dogs kids chickens there's chickens there now the garage burned off years ago the whole garage in the front so all is plywood going into that place I think we as taxpayers have paid two or three times to have people come up and feel dumpsters up to get them out of there everybody wants to help them help yourself I I we can't do it for them and our rights are being so violated I I feel like I feel like a loser citizen here you guys you know my home my beautiful home is becoming a ghetto and I'm sure you guys all feel like that too when I drive by there I'm an older senior citizen come out drive down 235th drive down Jensen Avenue tell me if you'd buy my house I'm at that age where I'm gonna the stairs are getting a bit much for me and it's ruining my property value it's ruining all of our property values and we're not mean people we're nice people we give you the shirt off our back but we're just so tired of it we thought it the right way and like that what was that movie I've had enough I'm mad as hell and I can't take it anymore thank you hi my name is Becky mikers I live at 23833 Jensen Avenue North I'm on the same road as all these wonderful neighbors of mine I want you to see my face you get a lot of my emails you know what I have to say you know how I feel unfortunately our whole neighborhood isn't here tonight for other obligations children I left my children at home cuz they're Sicky hearing me complain about the house down the street my husband's here another neighbor that's a little too shy to be up here which is fine I personally don't like being up here either you know my concerns you've read them I appreciate you all trying to start to do something I hope that what you say will happen um Abby you and I have talked a little bit about you said it's you feel bad that it looks bad it's not just the way it looks anymore it's the children it's the whole environment the animals we are now we now have a cat that we didn't know we had a cat that is living back by our shed just for shelter looking for food we aren't cat people we have a dog so um just some really odd stuff and like Terry said 10 years years we've been here 10 years we were here for both fires and the second fire was the house the first was the shed and when the second fire happened if I remember correctly Al Newman said that the house was inhabitable at that point everybody moved out there was smoke damage water damage and there was the frozen pipes the year prior and nobody lived there it was vacant which it should have been and it should have been addressed then unfort for it wasn't and they slowly started moving back in these are health concerns for those little kids that live there I wouldn't let my kids live there I won't even let my dog live there the fact that there's people living there breaks my heart and then unfortunately they had one of the sons living in the motor home who needs well isn't there anymore but needed medical help as well mental health help and being mooned on the way to work from him and him talking about our neighborhood not helping them it's sad and nobody should be living like that so I appreciate you all for reading my emails I appreciate you for taking the time to come out to the property I don't know if it's if it's something that we can have or look at but I'd like to see the soil samples that you guys took if there is anything that we need to be concerned about that affects our personal Wells with us all being on a well out there and um I hope to see some Chang changes otherwise you get to see me again or you'll hear from me again so thank you very much thank you I think that's the end of everybody that has signed up is there anybody else here that hasn't spoken that would like to and Jolan do we have anybody online no attendees indicating they wish to speak okay with that we will close open forum and um bring the agenda back to council Council for your consideration tonight is consent agenda items 6 a through 6m I'll entertain a motion to a motion to approve or any changes I'll move to approve consent to agenda items 6 a through M I'll second we have a motion and a second all those in favor St no by saying I I oppose and consent agenda is approved moving on to our regular agenda our first item this evening um 7 a is to consider adoption of resolution in order to correct or remove the Hazardous building at 23620 Jensen Avenue North in Forest Lake um we're going to start with a presentation from Amanda to provide information we'll do an initial round of questions that Council may have um we will then open it up if the property owner is here and would like to speak we will certainly provide that opportunity um and then we'll bring back to council for decision and Amanda all yours when you're ready okay hey Abby it's this guy right thanks okay uh good evening your honor Council uh so tonight we are here to talk about a 463 action for 23620 Jensen Avenue and if you recall um actually just about a year ago uh I looked up my my dates for um what I did a year ago and we did a 463 action for a burnt out house in another part of the city um this is using that same tool um so first I'm going to walk through just a reminder of what a 463 action is so a 463 action is uh a tool that we can use under State Statute to repair or remove hazardous buildings um the city has the ability to require that the property owner either correct the Hazardous conditions or require that they remove remove the the Hazardous building so the first step is that Council needs to receive an official report in the packet tonight that is your official report along with this presentation the report must uh provide facts that make the building a hazardous building in your packet there is a inspection report by the interim city building official uh that declares the building a hazardous building uh just for for clarification a hazardous building becomes that um because it's either has inac excuse me inadequate maintenance dilapidation there's some been some type of physical damage um or you know often a fire hazard as well so after you receive all those those that packet of information and in a few minutes I'll ask you to officially enter those all into the record uh then uh you have to approve a resolution and an order that's also in your packet that resolution and order is based on the official report and that will require the uh property owner to correct or remove the Hazardous conditions or demolish um raise or remove the building I'll get into a little bit more detail about what we're asking for tonight in regards to that uh but the order also needs to include a reasonable time to complete the work assuming that Council approves that order and resolution tonight that order needs to be served on the owner just like you would serve any other complaint in a litigation matter um so they have 20 days to serve an answer if they object or if they disagree with the facts that are presented in the resolution order and then you know the attached document doents um if they do answer then we would be in a traditional litigation route where we would need to prove out facts in court to be able to move forward with the 463 action uh but if they do not answer um and then the owner does not complete whatever the work is that we are requiring by the deadline uh then I would file our order officially with the court saying Court the city needs to go in and essentially demo this building so well a property owner can be instructed to correct fix conditions or remove a building a city is not in the business of fixing up a building our only remedy is really to demolish and remove the Hazardous structure occasionally I've seen a court um give an owner more time if they show up but usually they just say you go do what you need to do so then we would perform that I already said this that we we don't correct hazards we really just demolish or remove the building and all of the costs related to the 4 63 action so that includes my time now all the way through um to the cost to demolish the building do uh do get assessed against the property so let's talk about the specific property that we're here uh for tonight 23620 Jensen is a single family residential property the owner is currently uh Jonathan East uh stamy um he there is a notice of mortgage foreclosure that was filed against the property in August it was supposed to go to share sale in September it was extended to October and has now been extended to January so it's not entirely clear when or if that share of sale will happen and in a foreclosure process just so you understand uh they have six months after the share of sale to redeem the property so that's sort of from a timing perspective that's just helping understand about how long you know assuming the share of sale actually happens on January 28th about how long after that um um they would have to redeem the property and then assuming that the property owner does not redeem the property they would have to be evicted so realistically after this January 28th date assuming it sticks for a share of sale uh you're probably looking at about nine 9 to 12 months to actually remove the individuals from the property so now I want to talk about a timeline of events um at 23620 Jensen this does not include everything that was spoken about in the um open Forum this evening tonight we are focusing on the structure there are admittedly additional code violations on the property so exterior storage Vehicles all kinds of things that's not what this action is about this action is about the the the building the house so on March 18th of 2019 the property did experience a significant structure fire that destroyed um a majority of the attached garage and it also caused smoke damage to the remaining portions of the house uh the fire chief went to the property multiple times over the years uh to ask the owner to properly you know fix the hole in the side of the of the wall and the roof that was caused by by the fire um as was mentioned and uh there was some plywood put up but there was not actual correct materials put up um to fix the the damage that was caused by the fire October 23rd of this year uh the inter and building official conducted an exterior inspection of the property at that time it was decided not to um do an interior inspection those would typically require an administrative warrant and given the ongoing situations with the property we felt like it was best to see where where we could go with just an exterior inspection and if needed um come back for an interior inspection that again would likely in this situation require a warrant to be able to go into the home um based on just that exterior inspection of the property however the interim uh building official was able to declare the the house a hazardous building so there was enough damage that he could see from the exterior of the home to determine that it was no longer safe um and so what he found was that the house the home structural components had been compromised first due to the fire but then also due to the fact that there wasn't adequate repairs made to the home so uh the house was essentially has essentially been exposed to the elements over the past 5 years that have caused additional deterioration uh structural damage and rot to the remaining structure on November 15th uh we did mail a copy of that said inspection report and a notice of this meeting uh to the property owner in addition to posting a copy at the residence um so there's just going to be a few photos because photos help everybody understand what we're kind of talking about in terms of the significance of the damage um of the property so in this photo you can see the the damage to the rough structure and the use of the plywood as a a covering although it is not um obviously does not protect against the elements it does not do any of the things that it would actually need to do to be a a correct exterior material exterior material this is another picture of part of the burnt out roof and you can see how you can kind of see in this picture how it the trusses go into the house and there isn't really a a way to um prevent rodents again elements um all of that from going through those trusses into the home same thing in this photo uh this is showing an additional location where there has um moisture and other elements have been allowed to get into the home through that you can kind of see that hole there on the side um as well well as what looks to be some mold growing on the side of the um plywood the property does also have a deck um that is also not structurally sound so in the um in the inspector's report the deck was another item that was also talked about um needing to be removed and then this is another example you can see where um The Gutter is going into the siding there and is essentially allowing additional mold mold excuse me and water intrusion into the side of the home uh there's additional photos in your packet but this is just sort of a a flavoring of the type of damage that exists at the home right now so the what I'm recommending to council is if the um property owner is present to allow him to speak um this is not a public hearing but I would still recommend that he does that um so maybe we'll start there do we want to and see if the prop is the property owner here this evening and is online no okay um then I would ask that Council officially receive um the packet and all exhibits into the record um motion to accept the packet and all related exhibits into the record is there a second second motion and a second all those in favor signal by saying I I oppose and motion carries so then um and I'll there'll be a official motion on the next page um for you all but but then this last part is um adopting the order and the resolution and so I want to talk about this particular order and resolution so sometimes you tell a property owner you got to remove the building this is not savable example was last year's fire building right there was almost nothing left in this situation um it's poent it's possible that the property could be salvaged if somebody wanted to spend all of the time money and energy uh to do extensive repairs throughout so there is a pathway where the owner could correct all of the Hazardous conditions because of that the order and resolution allow the property owner to either repair replace remove hazardous conditions all of the Hazardous conditions that are identified in the building officials report so that's everything from the burnt fire problems to the uh rotting deck to the you know um water intrusion issues and then there was a few other photos around um other damage to the exterior of the building so it would need to be every single thing that the that the building official identified as a problem all of those things would need to be fixed and then the building official would have to come back out and would have to certify that the building is no longer a hazardous building so the property owner can do that or the property owner can demolish the building and remove it from the from the property either way whichever pathway the property owner were to select that um act those actions must be done by April 30th of 20125 and the reason that we've given him uh that long or are proposing that length of time um is because we're coming into winter and so if there is the desire to to try to fix a building that would give them additional time to do so um we are required under the statute to give reasonable time uh this is a little bit of an arbitrary date that was selected the other piece of information that we used to select the state was Minnesota has a cold weather shut off um you know time frame where utilities and things like that can't be shut off on a property and that starts October it's October 15th or something but it runs through April 30th so this was the other reason for that date is it essentially isn't part of that kind of winter deadline timeline um if the property owner does not do all of the repairs and get the build de essentially desertified by the building official or does not completely demolish and remove the building by April 30th then essent then the city would step in execute this order and we would go in and we would demolish the building we would not be trying to fix it so that is all of the information that I have I'm now available for questions and then I can move to what the motion would need to look like good thank you Amanda let's open it up Council questions that we may have for Amanda or staff we have um the inspector here as well if we have questions any questions mayor ban can I just note something for the record tonight it was brought up that there were multiple violations on the property um I do want to reference as Amanda had indicated the 463 is only one of the actions the city is taking um so we do we have sent notice again that certified notice and posted the property for all other zoning code violations which includes trash unsheltered storage and inoperable or unlicensed Vehicles we do have quotes to remove all of the trash and all of the personal property which would need to be stored um so we have given them time frame sometime a little bit later this month I don't remember exactly the date that will go in if they don't remove all of their trash and personal property will start removing trash from the property um the vehicles are a little bit trickier we're just having trouble trying to find um a toe company and an impound that wants to kind of work in these nuanced situations um so that's something that they are a little bit of a less concern as some of the trash and those sorts of things not to say that it's not of a concern um we did when we were on the property we did look there is enough personal property in trash that's blocking all of the entrances and exits to the RVs so we don't believe that anybody is living in them at that time um and then I also wanted to know we did not to do a soil sample report on the property that isn't something that we would do to verify these General nuisance complaints but I just want to State those things for the record thank you I have a couple of um process qu questions um your memo and kind of packet talks about an appeal process my understanding though we're not the appeal body is that right if there were an appeal who's the appellant body or who hears that the court okay so H so what would assing that you approve district is it yes district court so it would be Washington District Court okay M or Washington County and so outside of there's been some action on this property I believe that was on kind of in in the on the criminal side it's not is it's not that same path it's District Court path correct and so that that's a a criminal um citation this is still a civil action um that a city gets to take so it would same Courthouse but you know completely different yeah civil versus criminal and then um I appreciate that there's neighbor interest in this process um I also appreciate that we have given the property owner a timeline um what would you expect if any as far as updates to council or public updates between now and April 30th is there anything that would come before Council um what does that look like I just want to set expectations of um what people will know what's happening between now and April 30th so the only indication would be um if the property owner were to reach out and want to communicate with staff or you know depending upon what work they need to do they might need a building permit or a demo permit or whatever and so you know some sort of a permit and so then that would be a a touch Point otherwise really it's it's April 30th staff goes out there is the building done well we would know right because the building official would have signed off is the building demolished no and move forward I I think given the Foreclosure posture posture of the property and you know what what staff has experienced to date interactions with the property owner um and some of the interactions at the court level with the the criminal case I'm not sure that it's realistic that they're going to be doing the work that needs to be done on the property regardless of the amount of time that's given to them I think it's reasonable to assume that April 30th or shortly you know the at the next council meeting thereafter there would be an update from staff letting Council know that we are moving forward with the Demolition from that the city is moving forward and then also just to be clear um so we will be asked to take action tonight in a resolution that is the final resolution there isn't another resolution that would come before us for demolition is that correct no this would be it this is it your only this okay yeah and and to to that end assuming that that's what happens you know in in May of 2025 where the city is actually demoing the property at that point whatever is sort of remaining on the property would also be getting cleaned up as well just as part of that removing all the Hazardous conditions we would just Encompass that all in our in our demolition cleanup and all that would get assessed to the property understood the very last Point statement that you made is also just what I wanted to say is if I'm watching this and I'm thinking gosh this sounds like it's a really expensive process what happens who covers this can you just talk through the abatement process or what gets included in those abated costs yes so everything as I mentioned for this 463 action everything gets assessed against the property um so again my my time um any sort of abatement work that needs to done needs to be done if we raise the building all of that is going to be assessed against the property as far as the exterior storage or the stuff if that you know if that's going to be continuing on its own path sort of concurrently with this one eventually they'll probably meet at that faded May 2025 timeline but what so whatever hasn't been cleaned up ex from an exterior perspective will probably meet in May but in the interim any abatement actions that are taken to the exterior storage those are also assessed against the property um and So eventually those will get paid in a situation where you have a home in foreclosure and so you know there's going to be some turnover and some um change in ownership it's going to be important that as staff we are assessing those costs frequently instead of annually um so that way we don't miss our Windows of opportunity to collect on you know the basically the current mortgage company before it would potentially roll over to a new buyer but but that is something that I'm used to in other situations and so we do a pretty good job of you know every 60 days assessing that kind of a thing and in that case that's going to go before the council to be approved because generally you assess your charges once a year right you assess your unpaid fees this is not that way we would be assessing on a rolling basis question Mand you mentioned on the forclosure of the sheriff's sales situation 9 to 12 month window like how would that that potentially would delay this April 30th or may no because that that and that's why I want to do this now is is if the property changes hands that's sort of frankly not not my problem um because we've done this well he is clearly the owner the share of sale has not happened he is the the owner that they've filed a notice that they might eventually do a share of sale okay but that doesn't change this that does change um wanting to make sure that we have everything accessed to the property as soon as possible so we can get paid like on that shareff sale right if they have it in January I want us to get paid for anything that we would be owed from here until January um and then rolling after that and the question on on timing reasonable time I guess I would like to ask the the the neighbors uh their comfort level on this April 30th I mean if it we have the ability to move it up um but you people have to live next to it and so you've done it for 10 years but are you comfortable with that time frame uh and and or would you like to see that moved up to a more closer tighter date range it's it's probably a tough question to put up and and then the other question this might be more for Abby I don't know as far as picking up the trash or taking care of that that is a separate item but that's already that's going to happen or is that a motion as well that we need to make nope that is not that's administratively being H happened so with the new ordinance you passed earlier this year we have a system in place to do administrative abatements they were noticed of the um trash uh the personal property storage there's a difference out there there's uh sometimes hard to tell but um and we do have a contractor that's on standby to do that work so we'll start doing it in increments um the first being get all trash off the property um I will say it's a pretty hefty quote to remove everything so the hope is that we can some action might spur the property owner to take some action on their own but we have enough right now that I I don't remember the exact date and I could look it up in just a few minutes like the middle of this month maybe at the most December 16th December is that what you said I December 16th I I'd rather look um regardless within a couple weeks and a month at most from the notice maybe 16th we gave them 30 days we'll be out there um starting to remove stuff at their expense so no one caveat to that is is like anybody right people can tell us to get off their property and then we would have to come back with we'd have to get an administrative warrant to be able to come back and continue to do that abatement so potentially if the prop property says get off my property we do have to stop we'll go get the the warrant to be able to continue to remove the stuff and garbage we can throw but personal property under state law we have to hold for a period of time for the person to be able to collect their belongings likewise with the junk Vehicles those have some Salvage sale uh value and so those also have to be stored for a while which just makes it a little bit trickier do we have us is it does it go into a storage facility like third party storage facility so again with the vehicles we haven't been able to retain third party services to tow and safely store um with the thirdparty uh trash junk removal that third party would store in a like an anary storage pod or storage unit they'd incur those costs until the time has lapsed that we no longer have to store it and then they would bill us for that cost that if if you are asked to leave the property is that request the judge that usually granted to go back onto the property is that normally a pretty easy yes go back yeah time frame is that week delay month delay I I was two weeks a week to two weeks okay Council any other questions so on your screen is the motion that I would be looking for if you are comfortable approving the resolution and order as it's currently written with the April 30th 2025 U date anyone ready I'll make motion that that we approve resolution to in order to correct or remove a hazardous building at 23620 Jensen Avenue North in Forest Lake there's a motion is there a second I'll second Motion in a second any discussion I just um thank you to the neighbors for being here and providing feedback I know this has been a very long process um and um I hope there's a time time frame here that's fair to the property owner but also give some resolution to everybody so we appreciate you being here this evening with with that any other discussion items hearing none all those in favor signal by saying I I oppose and motion carries okay let's move to our second agenda item this evening which is consideration of cannabis ordinance and also Amanda yep more of my voice sorry um all right let's see you think to replug it in mhm same same same dog and pony show probably oh maybe that's what okay are you guys seeing it on your screen yes okay because it's not popping up on this one which I think is it's there so that's your you guys are good everyone's good okay okay uh thank you uh Council here honor so um we've talked about cannabis a lot in the last two years I will not go through um all of the legislative changes as we have talked about them at nauseum um I will quickly run through the business types just as a quick reminder we'll talk about the current um City cannabis ordinances and then we'll talk about the proposed use ordinance so this is the Cannabis zoning ordinance this did go before the Planning Commission at their last meeting as well um so just a a reminder a cannabis businesses we're talking about um these micro and meso businesses where you can do everything from uh growing manufacturing to selling and allowing on-site consumption retail shops that's what it sounds like you're selling it to the public cultivator you're growing it manufacturing it you're processing it um wholesaler you're somewhere you're a middleman somewhere um the testing facility you're testing the product event organizer it's a license it's not really a business location you know it's somebody who's going to be getting a license to do a cannabis event for up to four days is what the license allows them to do um there's a cannabis delivery service and then there's also the medical cannabis uh combination license where you can sell for medical and and for personal eventually uh the hemp derived THC uh products will be licensed by ocm that remains to be SE the data is in flux on when that will happen I would anticipate potentially Sometime Late 2025 early 2026 right now there you just register is there a date to announce the date or is it influx as you said is there a day to announce the THC stuff no the date on when those licenses are expected like we were orally thinking December or January 2025 yeah do we have a date for a new date or we don't have a date for a new date the last that I was told was oh we're really close and I I asked my source at ocm and I said what does that really mean though and uh he couldn't tell me so they're still working if you remember they're doing that um social Equity applicant pre-license there was also just a lawsuit filed by some of those social Equity applicants against o so that is now pending as well which will probably further delay the social Equity licensing one of my question reasons to ask that question is I'm just trying to understand what's the lead time that Council needs or the city needs in advance of those dates and to be safe we should have this on the books because uh you know ideally by January 1 because our moratorium expires January of of 2025 and so we just don't really want to any laps but from a practical perspective if there's no licenses being issued there's no businesses that can run you know that can open it's it's sort of a I know academic exercise beyond the beyond the action tonight though is this the last step that's needed or are there are we expecting additional cannabis related action that Council needs to take that's what I was great question you will have one more so this is the this is the zoning ordinance and then at the um December 9th meeting right December 9th yeah the December 9th meeting you'll be passing the registration ordinance it's fairly boilerplate there's not a lot of jazz on that one um depending upon one decision that you make tonight um so that will get passed in on the Jan or excuse me the December 9th meeting understood yeah okay just a quick reminder about those hemp derived Edibles they're the ones that are legal on a federal level versus cannabis which is illegal federally which really drives all of the analysis from that point forward um stores that have um a liquor license are permitted to sell the THC beverages by right stores that have an on sale liquor license are allowed to permit on-site consum consumption of the THC beverages there's been a little bit of confusion around that and so I just wanted to make it clear those are not really something that we will be regulating because they're governed by their liquor licenses for the beverages there's the intent that like um smoke shops potentially will be able to sell the edible products by right but that isn't in the current uh tobacco statute right now again just a quick reminder um the maximum number of licenses to be issued before July of 2026 and of course this is um you can only have as many standard licenses as you have social Equity licenses so as jene mentioned there is a lawsuit right now but for by a group of social Equity applicants so if they issue no social Equity applicant licenses they can issue no regular licenses currently you have two ordinances on the book one is an interim ordinance that's just prohibiting the Cannabis uses right now while we're figuring out what we want our actual structure to look like and then we also have um an ordinance that prohibits the use of cannabis in public places the statute does technically prohibit cannabis use in public places but it was not written to be enforceable by the police so CI has put in most cities have put in this standard ordinance to be able to make it a misdemeanor Petty misdemeanor um the previous direction that we had from Council was that you wanted to keep the registration process with the city if you recall the reason to keep the registration with the registration process with with the city is that you are able to collect the registration fees the um the require like what the city has to do has changed quite a bit and so all that really is required is annual compliance check on uh s very similar to a tobacco or a liquor license where it's making sure that underaged people aren't being sold the product that's essentially the only sort of ongoing obligation with registration the other reason that most cities want to keep the registration process is if want to limit the number of those retail meso or micro businesses um you cannot limit those if you do not keep the registration process at the city level last we talked you were not interested in limiting the number of those but if you ever wanted to in the future it would be really difficult to sort of claw the pieces back to be able to do that the other direction from Council was that you weren't really looking for a lot of additional regulations in roblocks there is a lot of robust uh regulation at the state level around how these businesses have to operate and so that wasn't something that the council was generally looking um to add add to so we're going to walk through the cannabis use ordinance it's not like almost every word except for the really boring Parts okay so definitions the way that this ordinance is set up is um uses versus businesses and the reason for that is uh the these meso and micro businesses can do everything but you're not going to want them to be able to do everything in the same zoning District so from a practical perspective they might be allowed to cultivate and manufacture marijuana but we know that those uh are things that can be smelly and have some you know public nuisance components that doesn't make them a good fit in the downtown area uh whereas a retail shop would work down there a meso can be just a retail short uh shop or you know have a a retail component or potentially there might be um some Des to have some sort of on-site consumption in essentially like a Cannabis Cafe again that could be a good fit in the downtown but that's not really going to work in your industrial park so to understand to to reflect the way that these businesses are actually being used we split the year use table out by use versus by business type which meant that we had to create some definitions to fill in those blanks because ocm does not have definition for the actual activities they just have definitions and then they don't even have definitions for all the businesses they only put in like two I don't know why um so you're we have the definitions for indoor cultivation manufacturing outdoor cultivation and retail sales to allow us to be able to create a use table that talks about those things in your use table that you probably saw in your packet I have everything as an interim use right now I will tell you this is this is somewhat busy business unfriendly frankly um there is going to be a desire for businesses to have this as a conditional use permit where it it runs forever with the land versus an interim use permit where it has a date specific that it ends the reason that I am recommending this in the current iteration of the ordinance is because we just do not know what this industry is really going to look like and I'm concerned that potentially where we think we want these uses we might be wrong and if we give out multiple conditional use permits that lives forever um there isn't a way to pull that back and so I am recommending that we have these as interim uses for maybe the next three four maybe five years to sort of let the industry settle and get uh the clear boundaries of the box kind of around it and then I think these should be transitioned to conditional use permits at that time um where we would actually make an ordinance Amendment and these uses could be conditional uses but while we're still figuring out the lay of the land I think interim is going to protect the city better but I will be honest with you it is not going to be seen as super business friendly um and so we add some language to our interim use ordinance explaining why we're identifying these as interim uses so the use table that you have in front of you um the outdoor cultivation well before I I don't have to read every line of this was there any zoning districts that you were unhappy with where you saw it or zoning districts where you wanted to see it that it was not in I think it's pretty standard so we or I think it's pretty intuitive in terms of who are we put it there the only two the only um two locations that the Planning Commission did ask about was on-site consumption if we should allow that in the conservancy and the Egg because we are allowing those meso and micro businesses and conservancy and egg right now the way that we have conservancy and the agricultural District set up we would need to change additional things to to Really allow them to be able to operate a business there um so that's why we don't allow um we don't allow the on-site consumption because even as it is the retail of cannabis products is as an access use because there really isn't right now under the code a way for it to be a a principal use so that can be done it would just require that we make some changes to those underlying zoning districts as well um so the only places in the whole city that you can do outdoor cultivation are conservancy and Agricultural and then for indoor it's Conservancy Agricultural and then industrial and then the manufacturing of these products you can do that in conservancy and agricultural B3 BP and I so your heavier use districts and then the retail can be retail is going to be the least restrictive it's allowed in the the B1 the B2 the mu1 and the mu2 and when we talk about that the retail of low potency hemp Edibles those are already permitted so we're we're not regulating those in really any meaningful way in this ordinance can man can I ask a question yeah um so I just with conversation with some people that are looking to get in this business my understanding is even in a retail situation um if it's downtown or whatever you will smell an odor from outside so is there any mitigation on odor that we would be requiring yes we do have mitigation on order so we have um and maybe that's a maybe what we'll do is we'll go we can talk if I jumped ahead of you I'm sorry see yeah no we can we we do so we do have um odor I just want to make sure that I get to the right um yes so every application for a business that comes through us as part of the registration process they need to have an odor mitigation plan that determines uh that demonstrates excuse me no odors will be detected from the property line or adjacent tenant space if they're located in a multi-tenant building and that's minor thing that's been important because if you're in a multi-tenant space and you have odor it'll Circ through circulate through the HVAC if that's not something that is specifically called out from day one are those systems known and common like what is an effective do we have a means of kind of judging what's an effective system or that that can be a wide range of solutions um is there a Best practice that we can point to or I don't I think this is still developing it's not something that staff would have personal knowledge of there is an a business in Stillwater the name of it is escaping me it's um it's an we use them in South St Paul it's a it's a really it's the best truly the best odor um not mitigation but sort of pro proving out that you smell bad um they're the best at that and um they have something called the nasal Ranger that detects smells and does all that I think at least initially we might want to farm out the odor mitigation plan to an expert just to confirm it does work do we have an ability to to do that to confirm that to do that level of okay good yeah as part of the iup or the cup we would be doing that piece and on that note um if they violate it or if they're a problem that would be a condition right of their iup or that then you we could pull their iup I think odor is going to be odor and security obviously we've talked about this those are the two biggest issues um in for these businesses um so I already mentioned that Planning Commission wants to think about maybe future on-site consumption and Conservancy in agricultural districts that was something you wanted now we would need to change those underline zoning districts now as well am I interest in not now maybe later kind of a thing yeah okay so let's talk about distance requirements and we'll come back to that use table um so we have right now that there must be 500 feet between cannabis businesses and there must also be 500 freet excuse me 500 feet from schools commercial daycares residential treatment facilities and most parks we did not include Memorial Park um because of what happened to the downtown if we included Memorial Park we did previously show 250 ft but the Planning Commission requested 500 to match tobacco and liquor each um use doesn't have the same things and by that I mean I think liquor has churches and schools tobacco has schools and parks and cannabis would have the things in this list so the lists aren't the same same but then at least the distances would be the same and that is measured from property line and so I think you maybe saw in your packet but this um this first one was the buffers around the different items at 250 feet and that box is zooming into the downtown and then this was the buffer at 500 feet ultimately Planning Commission felt like it needed to be 500 so this is the one that we have now what my concern I I spent a little bit of time looking at this and I appreciate the reason for a a greater distance my concern of the greater distance is that it pushes the uses from the common sense places that we might want a business of this type um and I guess I guess that's the question to ask is does it do we make the footprint in such a way that it it can just becomes a prohibitor just because of available space the 500 ft essentially all of Broadway is I think blacked out and that might be okay but that's a that's a decision that 250 does not mean all of Broadway's blacked out mayor Bay if I might adds staff when Consulting with our legal counsel did have that exact discussion which is why we were proposing a smaller number um as a buffer distance but then maybe increasing the buffer between two businesses um so that you had at least a block and a half or so between these different types of cannabis-based businesses um that was one thought that we had had so that it could help reduce the concent open it up throughout the community a little bit more but help reduce that concentration in any one kind of given area in the community what does that do for this um the 61 Corridor can you just so you want to go back to the two 250 I mean it opens up a bigger portion of the 61 Corridor and then specific to 12 it opens up most of 12th Avenue as well the the 500 was there some of 12th Avenue that was available of 250 excuse me street um I'm sorry at the 250 it opens up if you switch Amanda if you wouldn't mind switching to the 500 it does take out quite a bit of the kind of multi-tenant spaces through that area a little bit and I I I mentioned this with really concern on both sides right like one is let's have some common sense places for these businesses to exist but then also I do understand the the rationale that we don't want the distance to be too close to parks and schools and all of those things it just happens that the old overlap starts it gets to be a lot of overlap when you have 500 and then if you we were to consider on top of that and I think it's also a good idea of distance between business it just becomes compounding more challenging um which might be a strategy but um I I just don't want us to block out available footprint of what might be a reasonable location to the extent that we want we're okay with having a couple of well-managed businesses here in town this this ordinance is certainly a work in progress and it's going to take a lot of uh tweaking along the way I think and uh so that was why I was thinking that the bigger distances would be the where to start and bring it a little closer later on you know when we find out what what kind of issues are going to come up so uh that was just kind of my thought on it it so so staff's original suggestion was 250 um what specifically was cited on I didn't watch the Planning Commission meeting what was specifically was cited by Planning Commission on going to the 500 they wanted it to match with tobacco and like it seems odd to to have a higher restriction for tobacco and liquor than for cannabis which is true um one thing that we had talked about and I think there was um interest in that at the Planning Commission level and I know we've talked about at the staff level is it'd be nice if all these had the exact same rules right Tobacco liquor and and um cannabis so by that I mean they all they all have the same rules in terms of who you know who they have to be far away from and how far away from them they have to be um but we don't have that right now um as I hear you say that and I think about what's different with tobacco and alcohol in particular is we have major retailers that are selling tobacco there is there a path for major retailers to have um cannabis licensing and I mean would would we expect in the near term that there's a day where holiday and quick trip have cannabis licensing I don't know if they would want to but should that no probably not a difference is there's a a mass availability of tobacco um and alcohol that I see this as just being a smaller scope um your mass retailers probably are not ever going to get into the Cannabis game until it becomes legal federally because it's cash only yeah you're right because of how you have to sell it and and some of those things I don't see that being the THC that are I should say the hemp derived yeah that's probably already at most of the gas stations in the city right it's it's just a availability of product that it makes this question around distance a little bit different than from my availability standpoint than tobacco and alcohol but so are you thinking 250 or 500 now to be fair we can go higher um the the the state allows you to do up to a th000 feet but when we ran the models that was I mean there wasn't any place that would go I guess i' be in favor of 500 start now I I think we can always come back come off that number if if we get these requests um I think starting out it's just a safer number that we have a little more control about location of some of these so keeping the 500 between or from the the protected uses and then 500 between the stores yeah I'm fine with that for now as well I I had the same concern as you mayor Bane because for if you look up Broadway on this picture it just in downtown even too it just completely almost cuts it out where where that's where one would assume you'd see businesses um but the concern with the wanting it to be the same for tobacco and liquor I think is a valid concern so I would be fine going with a 500 and then maybe at a later date we can we can um come back to that conversation if it's if we find that it's needed okay I think that's wise okay so then moving to just sort of some of the misell Provisions extra rules around these uses there's a bunch of of rules in the statute around signage they can't have really on signs they can't have super big signs it'll be well under what our signage allowances would allow them to have anyways um our parking requirements are that they have to meet the minimum parking requirements for each type of use so if you're doing um manufacturing you have to meet a manufacturing parking use retail etc etc uh the security plan they must provide a security plan to the police chief that they the police chief will sign off on um and that needs to address um security cameras inside and out uh lighting all you know all all different facets is really the exact same plane that they have to provide to the state it's just from a safety perspective it's a good thing for the police to understand what is their what is their security plan for this building in the event that there is some sort of a robbery or something as we talked about odor mitigation so they cannot have odors at the property line or adjacent tenant space if they are in a multi-tenant building and that will be a condition of their um interim use permit there's some more special rules if you're outdoor cultivation if you're outdoor cultivation the plants need to be set back at least 100 feet from the property line you need to have six foot tall perimeter fencing and a screened buffer and no plants can be visible from the right of way there are a few cities that are doing a minimum size uh property we chose not to do that because we felt like we could still get what we needed to with these um restrictions uh indoor cultivation so if they're doing a greenhouse we want that lighting uh plan to be approved again if we don't want a neighbor to have you know lights shining into their property all hours of the day and night um and if you're going to be doing indor cultivation in the industrial district you don't get to use green houses hoop houses or temporary structures you're putting it up in a big building retail hours are going to be from uh 10:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. so that will match the tobacco shops is that right is that matching tobacco I don't believe or liquor I don't remember that's liquor okay it's matching liquor stores no I mean liquor till 10 p.m. but oh not sure why we got nine we can change hours if you think they're not long enough should it be consistent with tobacco and I mean consistent with tobacco and liquor I mean Liquor's got a different yeah the liquor hours are regulated by State Statute so um I I don't know I guess I don't recall if the state had any guidance on retail hours which might be where I know that early on there had been some discussion of Till Dusk and so I that may be where that that time came in I'm not sure there is some regulation in the state statute but it's weird how they did it it it was like a math problem that you could never solve so so that's why I know that's why we ended up putting it in here um but I think the intention was that it was supposed to match either liquor or tobacco I just can't remember which one and maybe we I don't recall may I missed on both tobacco has it I don't I'm looking at tobacco right now and and in my recollection off the top of my head I don't recall our restrictions but I'm just pulling up license restrictions right now do you have a preference on ours do you want it to match it should match liquor well when we say match liquor do we mean offsale hours which are different than on sale consumption yes that seems to make sense to me okay I'll make sure that that matches and then it's not allowed in an adult use business um so so additional standards for the more intense cannabis uses these are going to be the meso the micro the cultivating and the manufacturing so something where there's just more tendency to be a nuisance all those buildings need to be set back 2 250 ft from residential zoning districts or residential use so at least you know if you're a home you to be 250 from 250 from that you cannot use exterior storage this is probably pretty obvious but we don't want people storing these federally illegal products in outdoor pods or trailers or things that could be easily broken into uh and then your mechanical and odor suppression systems need to be and trash need to be screened do they also have to submit a security plan around lighting cameras you just think about yeah everybody does okay yep um so Planning Commission feedback one of the things that was talked about was that they recommended considering limiting your registrations if you recall that was the council was not interested in when we chatted before um so we can cap if we recap we need to allow at least one per 12,500 or any partial number of that so right now with the population in the city we would need to allow two a minimum of two uh retail meso or micro businesses if that's something that Council pivots on and decides that we do want that then that would be put into that registration ordinance that's coming on December 9th the tricky part with um limiting the number is uh who gets them so if you have a a couple people that come in at about the same time and apply for the license who who are we going to give the registration not license excuse me registration who are we going to be giving the registration to um there's different metrics that some cities have come up with for that process and so we can certainly do that but that just opens yourself up to some accusations of arbitrary capriciousness um when you're picking picking between um so that's something to think about if you decide that you want to cap the number of registrations and so that is the the summary of the ordinance is there anything that you wanted to talk about in terms of the zoning districts I have we need to check those hours and make sure that they match liquor off sale but other than that is there anything else do we have a maximum number of off sale liquor license that we issue or able to issue um I don't know that our code hang on I'm pulling up the number of licenses um 10 is the maximum of off sale in the city and I think we're about a little over halfway there right now that might be something to consider match up with with liquor um you you talk about the the cost of entry into this and are there really going to be 10 and more than 10 and um especially with the restrictions at 500 feet can you even accomplish that just just a thought to have some kind of a ceiling I guess yeah I mean we've aligned with liquor and several other things so I mean I'd be shocked if we got to that number but can to have something in place or is the idea to let it to go so we don't have to get in that position where we're picking yeah I can't see it being there but it could how many um how many tobacco licenses do we have oh um any rough we have quite a few because we have the Standalone tobacco shops but then we have all the retail locations all of the gas stations do you know roughly Standalone tobacco shops I can pull that up what's hard about I I um I don't think the city wants to be in the position of having to choose applicants so I think you're trying to find the I think a good strategy would be to find The Sweet Spot of something that's not going to put us in that position but also something that's going to be a natural Governor if something were to all of a sudden we find ourselves in a situation where there's you know 20 in the next year or something that would just seem to be not likely to happen um and I don't know what that number would be that would be so right now Standalone tobacco shops that aren't associated with any retail are at five five so is the is the goal to of what maybe maybe it's good to talk about what what would be the goal to limit what was it well obiously you just don't have an unlimited number just have some sort of a natural that aligns with other licenses that we I think for for me what is hard is my opinion on making this new ordinance new to all of us but not getting feedback from residents do they want a limit do they want to keep it at 500 250 we've not had that input and I don't know if we've had the ability to how we would get that to for feedback something like this isn't like a open hearing or public hearing or anything like this there is tonight this is it tonight yeah so it was it was posted as a public hearing I'm not sure if there's anybody here for this public hearing that's about to happen in a couple minutes but based on the fact that most people have already been up here I don't think [Laughter] so so I you know just keeping it something to limit it from being the wild w West which I don't think we' get there um and to align with our alcohol license seems to make sense but was there a suggested number that staff considered um did you talk about that and was there a recommendation that maybe I don't believe we did because the direction from you is that you didn't want to limit it yeah we that is you provided that very specific that is where we started you did but we did talk about okay we don't want 15 downtown and so one of the ways was to limit between the businesses and so when you've got 500 feet between them there's just a limit to how many get to be there um and then you pop in those that 500 distance requirements and so we felt like we're already kind of restricting the universe for where these shops can go and then keep in mind Statewide we're getting 125 yeah uh so it's probably a so we're just not going to get that money because and that's assuming that they're able to get out all the the licenses and the there's a lot of yeah I'm not optimistic there's going to be a you know cannabis shop popping up on every corner anywhere in the near future it's probably a self-governing number right like expensive Endeavor too isn't it to get started it's very expensive to get started yeah not going to be an easy thing to undertake it back also it's something you know so so if we didn't if council did not select a number to limit um I would imagine you know these licenses get issued we have some you know time of operation we start to understand what's working what's not working is this a ordinance we could adjust you know a year in two years in Fairly easily um I guess the the sensitivity at that point is that's probably not going to be a time where you're going to claw back licenses um those licenses have are out there people have made those Investments um so it's hard to contract the market but maybe can slow future expansion if there were things that Council didn't like yeah I anticipate that this ordinance will need to be changed just in the next year or two as ocm builds out what they actually look like and you know all those things so yes you could add that the other pieces that's just another example of why I'm doing I want them to be interim uses so that way you're not so the the business understands we're we're totally willing to test this we can't promise you that this is going to work forever um so that's the other the nice thing about that and I I apologize I don't think I've included a slide on this than I should have the concept is the interim use permit it's just like a conditioning exp but it has a date specific that it expires right and the date specific is when they no longer have a license with ocm so essentially as long as they keep a valid license with ocm they get to continue to operate it's if that license were to be you know removed or expired or whatever so they can't transfer it to a new license holder that person would have to come in and get their own iup um but that is actually somewhat standard in some other Industries and you know other cities so I think I'm hopeful that if there there is a a legitimate applicant out there that comes to staff staff can explain it in a way that isn't so scary that they don't want to you know invest in the city but they can hopefully appreciate why for right now it it really should be an interim use permit that's a good sorry I should have I apologize I should have had a slide on that um so the next steps are to open a public hearing on the Cannabis zoning use ordinance this was published I don't know a couple weeks ago we published it early um that this was going to be talked about tonight um and then we can move on what the next steps would be from there but if you want we want to open public hearing I can sit down perfect let's do that um let's open the public hearing at this time is there anybody that would like to speak to council specifically on the topic of cannabis zoning use ordinance and public hearing is open Jamie dman again uh 567 Street Northwest uh just on limiting the uh licenses uh we might find the right words we might like to limit the number of retail locations differently than say cultivation you know agricultural is going to be a lot less uh interface than a retail location but also as far as the distance between I don't see the difference between having two shops right next next door to each other as long as they're in a business area not near a school as opposed to spreading them out throughout the entire uh City so I mean once they're here the damage is done or not you know hopefully not um but you know two locations next door not that big a deal thank you thank you anyone else like to speak in public hearing anybody online jene no mayor okay anyone else not seeing anyone come forward we'll close public hearing and bring conversation back to council so just quick point of clarification your honor um yes the only licenses that you can limit are those retail licenses or the meso micro businesses um you can't limit egg you can't limit or you can't limit excuse me cultivation you can't limit Manufacturing whale all of those businesses you may not it's just the licenses that have the retail component so but essentially if you can sell it to the public you can be limited if you can't sell it to the public you don't get to be limited May B if I also can just make a point of clarification for the record the comment earlier was the concern of distance between businesses I've worked in two other states that have passed um marijuana or that's not the word we use is it cannabis cannabis um laws before and unfortunately in both of those States they started to see high concentrations of the businesses together which then um if it wasn't necessarily legitimate businesses increased the um unseed that can sometimes come with businesses like this um so not to say that that was necessarily the circumstance that's going to happen here in Minnesota um certainly don't want that necessarily in force Lake but spreading it out through the community we thought could help reduce some of those potenti potentially negative impacts that could occur with um the legalization of cannabis I think the whole room said cannabis I'm not sure why so what I'm looking for now for next steps is if you approve the ordinance in its current form um then I would be looking for a motion to approve the ordinance if you um want to just approve it with having ours match liquor we could just do that as part of the motion tonight and still approve the ordinance if there is more whole cloth uh changes that you want to the ordinance then I would ask you to make a motion to continue this to the December 9th meeting and so there there's two choices for you there um on the screen and then on that December 9th you'll have the registration ordinance which is not going to be very exciting thank you Menda Council ready for action add or additional questions that you may have I'll make a motion to approve an ordinance and acting for C code 53096 outlining the regulations of cannabis businesses with the modification of the hours as discussed very good there's a motion is there a second second it have a motion and a second any further discussion hearing none all those in favor signal by saying I I oppose and motion carries mayor if I may there was also included in your packet of resolution for summary publication of that ordinance I just ask if council could take a look at that um it is a lengthy ordinance so we're trying to save some costs here by publishing a summary is this um the um is it on page 187 of our packet I believe so I'm just trying to scroll my computer's freezing up yes yes it is um I move that Council approve resolution 11252 2402 authorizing summary publication of ordinance 744 in ordinance enacting Forest Lake City code I'll second as described on our resolution and we so motion and we have a second from council member valento any discussion hearing none all those in favor signal by saying I I I oppose and motion carries thank you thank thank you for that clarification Jolene okay um next item on our agenda this evening consideration of 7c um which is the snow and ice control policy this is a pickup of the conversation that Council had in our um last Workshop we'll give just a moment Dave floor is yours when you're ready boy I cleared the room I thought this would be more exciting topic every would want to stick around for popular guy uh at mayor Ban's point we talked about this at length at the uh the workshop last week uh was uh noticed that I missed um the part about this uh increased uh removal of the snow snow burm along Highway 61 I know it was a council uh direction or a want in like March of last year I just failed to to enter that in there um so on the analysis part you can see we added some language in there just to spell out that Highway 61 the bur will be just more of a priority for for hazardous conditions provided for improved pedestrian and parking accommodations uh it just may result in increased snow removal different than any parts of the city just so that kind of spells it out of why did the city come down here and mold or not mold remove the snow uh two times last month and my street hasn't had the snow removal at least we have something to go back to of that's kind of our our policy so that is what I came with out of the last Workshop um there's any other discussion otherwise just looking to uh approve that snow and ice control policy with that updated language very good thanks Dave Council open it up feedback thoughts on ordinance policy or sorry it's the policy as stated I think we're looking for a looking for Action tonight um Dave I appreciate you adding in the extra extra clarification related to the burm removal um also for those that are following in the public we've kind of um made part of our policy the public nuisance option related to abatement um for those properties that are um have chronically had challenges and complaints on snow removal um this provides an opportunity for us to um take care of that and essentially uh give those Property Owners a subscription service to um sign on to essentially an abated um um service for those that snow removal as needed so I um so I'm um you know I'm um happy to support the policy as we have it today but any other discussion you know we're making progress on this policy um by including the burn removal that's been talked about for the last couple of winterers um I still don't think this policy is where it should be um and we we discussed about that at the last uh Workshop um there's just been you know some new information that I've learned looking closer at the map um that I just have questions about that I think we should workshop with some more um Before we or before I'm able to support it do you want to um table tonight and bring it back for further discussion is that that'd be my preference any other are we and in doing so it snows a pile between now and that next Workshop we kind of following current policy um would be what we're doing if until we change the policy just so we're clear I'm hap I'm happy to bring this into another Workshop if that's what's needed that's me personally I was happy with the policy as it is um I don't know if another Workshop would help I didn't I missed the last one but I did read through this thoroughly uh as as it's written right now I wouldn't support it I think I was pretty clear at the workshop that I think downtown uh our goal to have a more walkable downtown should require uh snow removal uh we are doing certain areas that we've learned since the workshop that in some of some commercial areas that that we weren't made aware of so um I wouldn't support it at this point till downtown was included I um so questions so those that maybe watching and kind of wondering the consternation here the topic has been um expanding the plow foot or the the snow removal foot footprint to include um more of The Pedestrian areas of downtown and um personally I would prefer that we have a season with of seeing the abatement policy in effect um I appreciate that the goal is to have a walkable downtown and with the policy and the new Tools in place around abatement we have some tools to do that for those property owners that continue to um not follow those rules um I really concerned about City subsidizing that and us just taking care of it um personally I I think it subsidizes bad behavior and our downtown Redevelopment is going to require strong partnership with those property owners and that means you've got to you've got to you know do your part and take care of your your property and um for us to just take that on when we have another means of subs or another means of paying through abatement um I think we we were better served overall in taking that approach but um if this requires some more discussion we can certainly table and have that at a later time anyone ready to make maybe it's just ask is anyone ready to make a motion to approve tonight are not seeing a um not seeing a motion come forward um that is no action um and it can come on to a future agenda whether that's a um council meeting agenda for further action or sounds like it's probably heading towards another Workshop um for another Workshop topic for argument for the sake of argument I'll make a motion that we approve the the policy as it's written we have a motion to approve as written is there a second I'll second for purposes of discussion any discussion anything that's not been said already not hearing any discussion all those in favor signal by saying I I oppose nay three eyes two n motion carries okay can move into our next topic this evening which is the added agenda item related to plan discussion related to the 2025 budget um so I um had a conversation with council member Roberts on the topic of budget um and um or just talking about where we are for budget and the information that's been prepared so far and thinking about our upcoming um meeting um the truth and Taxation meeting that is on December 9th um and also the proposed Levy vote that will happen that evening just talking through what information do we have is Council have all the information that we need to answer resident questions that might be coming up between now and then um and so that kind of led me to put this discussion item on the agenda because I think there would there's a couple of pieces of information that it would be helpful for Council to have um between now and the 9th and potentially depending on what information shows we may want to schedule a special working session sometime next week we do still have a couple of weeks before um that Levy meeting and I think just to summarize the the two pieces that I think are still outstanding is one understanding where we are today for estimated 2024 budget surplus we know that we have a number of key positions that are still unfilled and we know that generally we are in a surplus position for 2024 which is great but because the topic is is specifically on the agenda or because there is a specific line item related to um Surplus planning um is part of the levy for 2025 I think the question is where are we for 2024 and what options May Council have considering that now we are you know four to five weeks before the end of the year we know that that's going to be an estimate but seeing where we are for 2024 planned budget surplus would be good and then where does that mean we fall around our our policy around 50% Surplus um are we hitting at 51 are we hitting at 55 56 I I don't know off the top of my head it's been a while since Council saw that and I think that those would be two important data points because that tells us where are we for 2024 from a budget standpoint it also tells us that Surplus number is always kind of the cumulative number of past budget decisions where are we an overall and again specific because part of the 2025 Levy is to fund that margin um let's just be clear on where we are for 2024 so I think that's helpful for us then to talk about and also to talk to the public around what's being asked for um for that particular budget item in 2025 um so that's helpful also we in our Workshop we had a discussion around public safety dollars but I think it'd be also helpful just see an updated worksheet we at one time there was a preliminary list I think there's maybe been some additional discussion at the staff level to just see that list again and talk about um what that means for near-term property or our near-term equipment purchases in 2025 I think just gives us a longer perspective on how we're using those Public Safety dollars because that's also another topic that's routinely coming up in Resident feedback um and so having those two data points would be helpful and then again depending on where we are with those data points I think we might be wise to look for some time next week for a special meeting I'd rather frankly have a special meeting next week than hold off passing the levy on the 9th I'd rather us do the work to get the information sooner rather than later um but I'd like to be able to see it what those numbers look like before we decide gosh do we need to have a special meeting um I'd like to you know so in with council member Roberts and I um in the position of the interim committee with Jolene I'd like Council to give us the ability to kind of the two of us meet with Jolene um especially um Kevin's not here this evening once Kevin's been able to to you know take a look at this request and then the three of us decide should we have a special meeting or is it something that we can just provide to council with some information from Kevin um I'd like us to be able to make that call if council's open to us doing that is that fa have just one vote fine with me okay I think um I'm not sure if there were other budget items that we wanted to talk about this evening but certainly I felt like it was a little bit of a different um or additional direction or different different level of specificity than what we had talked about in the workshop and so certainly wanted to get it on the agenda tonight so that that certainly can bring in anybody else's thoughts as to additional information that would be helpful I just did a lot of talking let's open it up anyone else have any thoughts did I do okay summarizing I I believe so I appreciate mayor that you're taking that extra step and looking at at it it's important we all that to the residents and uh you know there's ability to look at those couple of those different areas and potentially get that down a little bit I think that we owe that to the residents to at least look at that so I appreciate your willingness to do that I will say you you did just mention get that down a little bit I I think part of the discussion and Council needs to remember even if we identify those lovy pieces some of that might be a less fund to the general fund some of that though might be taking those dollars and reallocating to the park fund or some of the other funds that we've also um throughout this budget process have made some reductions on I think we should keep an eye on that as well um it might be as much a reallocation as it is a reduction It ultimately Council can decide it's a a reduction that is certainly something we can do um but I don't want to signal that I'm thinking this is a reduction I keep going back to that Park number that we' we've Whitted that away throughout this year and um if we don't need it for Surplus um I I still think we should really consider some additional par funding so hence let's get the information in front of us so we know what margins we're talking about anything else as we're thinking about budget and what would be helpful Julian do you think you have enough specificity for Kevin I do thank you okay Chiefs I know I just put you on the spot a little bit with Public Safety dollars does that make sense what we're asking for yeah it does and I've uh already been compiling a list for you um and of course with the discussion and the late addition to it I don't have it available for you but I can definitely have it available for you uh early next week for sure perfect I know we're in a short week with the holiday so um if we could perhaps Monday Tuesday is um if we're going to have a special meeting next week we're going to have to notice it fairly soon so um we can talk about what that timing looks like Julie may be also wise to get some availability from Council for next week yeah I I can send out a survey of sorts to get some dates and times of folks to be available next week all right should we move into staff updates Julene sounds good um just a reminder City Hall is going to be closed Thursday and Friday in observance of Thanksgiving also here at City Hall on Thursday the Rotary Club will be hosting their annual Turkey Trot so if you feel like running to burn off some calories in advance of Thanksgiving dinner you can certainly still sign up on their website um and that would be it for my updates tonight very good thank you Abby um just two updates I did send in one of our kind of end of the week updates for you the council but wanted to note publicly that we have a number of development inquiries we have six residential subdivisions in the um inquiry stage two of them in concept plan stage one M um multif Family residential and then three non-residential so Redevelopment projects so commercial projects so we are kind of potentially gearing up for a busy 2025 um planning and construction season and then also uh Hometown holiday next Friday December 6 4:30 to 6:30 I think I let you know that we had an abundance of volunteers everything's kind of coming together so hopefully you all come down the tree lighting is at 6:45 and customarily the whole console is there so see you guys down there could um so we have a tradition of full Council doing the tree lighting which I hope we can continue this year and also um I'm saying this out loud so I remember I will also invite new council members to join us as well oh yes I will note that uh our new council member elect Jeff Johnson did actually um recruit about a third of our volunteers um them to Hometown holiday so hope all of you can come down you wouldn't be um slotted in as volunteers but you could enjoy the event but we would slot you in anywhere Mana bonfire or hand out candy canes or something if you wanted good to good to see he's already getting to work excellent Dave uh just a couple updates as you probably saw in the weekly update uh belts Park crews are starting to tear down the playgrounds and remove the mulch uh the DNR did approve the updated site plan with uh The Pedestrian facilities uh you approved tonight uh plans and specs to start going through that so hopefully we'll get it all removed by by winter time and Bolton Lake and myself we'll get plans and hopefully bid that out and get it all put together next spring SL summer so um the other last thing is the compost site is open on Wednesday at the last one of the year and maybe forever um Washington Washington County site will be opening in December so it's customary for us to close that Wednesday before Thanksgiving so as long as Washington County can can take care of it then we'll we'll pass the Baton and let them uh run the compost site around this these parts so the only two updates I have nice Milestone just can one question Dave so is there a uh expected Savings in the budget on giving that on to the county the compost there we'll see that probably maybe a year from now we still have to do the full sight cleanup so we have it priced in there for closing out that permit the one problem is is we keep taking in ash trees and with our new RightWay policy we're probably going to end up bringing them there as well and storing our ash trees there so it may take a while we might just use that as our tree pile and then as funds come available we'll keep chipping it down we used to be able to get rid of the chips for free but now now we have to pay for it so it's going to be a little slower process to get rid of them is it you have to pay for it because of the ash no so District energy used to take them for free to burn them down in St Paul and their contract expired and they didn't renew the contract to take it so I mean now it's paying market price you can get some better deals if you have bigger chunks of wood and all that it's not really the ash or anything else it's just there's nowhere to bring it bring it for free anymore it's not worth somebody coming and taking and using their fuel oh yeah thank you but prior to the ash tree thing that there was some savings because we we haul all those leaves right I mean wasn't there some hauling savings along the way there we took all that money and just kind of buried into operations so it wasn't really a line item under compost the only compost say we have was to pay the intendant and we I think we had between $5 and $110,000 in the year just in case we needed to pay for certain removals or you know if there was a a mess we need to clean up so I think I left I took well we took the the Staffing out which is probably about $10,000 Savings in 25 there's still 10,000 in there that was planned for the clean up but I don't I think we're going to do the cleanup we'll just keep that as a a tree Treeway site for us for the inum chief Peterson uh yeah um last week we had a really good turnout for the senior scams presentation at the senior center I just want to thank ARP and Forest Lake Lions Club for their assistance at that presentation and all the presentations throughout the year and then I uh also want to welcome our two new police officer hires um Jeremy peler and Jake wman who started uh today AES that's all I have for you excellent no updates very good Amanda and Ryan mayor city council no updates unless you have any questions council member Ericson I just want to mention that downtown looks great Dave with the trees and the roundabout and all the Christmas decor really appreciate that and then I'm running the 5K on Thursday so anybody joining me for you no Sor cooking not run counc M hnik uh no please thank you counc member valento no updates council member Roberts nothing this evening um nothing further for me otherwi other than just wishing everybody a fabulous and safe uh Thanksgiving week um and look forward to seeing everybody we've got still got some work to do this year um and so look forward to some productive meetings here coming up in December um know let us know if we need a special meeting yeah certainly notification will come from Julene uh that is the end of our planned agenda I will entertain a motion to approve so move I set a motion to approve motion to adjourn thank you we've got a motion to adjourn and a second all those in favor signal by saying I I oppose and we're adjourned thank you all [Music]