[Music] right at 5:30 so I'll call tonight's Eda meeting to order and Christina could we have a roll call please uh sorry commissioner Larson here commissioner L present commissioner large here commissioner ho here and president B here I'd like to invite everyone to rise and join us for the Pledge of Allegiance Al to the flag of the United States of America indice I just realized I am working off of the wrong agenda all right uh members of the Eda we have an agenda before you I will entertain a motion to approve or any changes I move we approve the agenda second we have a motion and a second all those in favor signal by saying I I oppose and our agenda is approved our next item this evening is our annual election of officers and Christina could you just walk us through the officer positions that we are Abby oh Abby thank you thank you um sure the Eda has a president a vice president I believe a secretary and a Treasurer position and could you remind us of who's currently seated in those rules I knew you would ask and the only two that I am aware of are the President and Vice President so you being the president and Sam being the vice I can't tell you the last time that this was done um I know that other bodies um were questioned of whether or not they had done it for a while in the past so i' I'd have to go back and look through our notes I apologize for not being prepared for that question if and secretary and treasur are two different positions on the Eda they are and if I remember correctly I'd have to pull up again um I'm terribly sorry for being unprepared that they can also um never mind I believe your your Treasurer needs to be a commissioner but your assistant Treasurer and your secretary could be staff members and I think typically your executive director serves as the assistant Treasurer if I remembering your bylaws correctly which is the city administrator City administrator serves as the assistant correct assistant Treasurer did you say that's that's my recollection okay thank you um and mayor B since there or president B since there isn't a full body here tonight if he would would like us to put together just those bylaws for review and bring this back with position descriptions be happy to I'm apologize for not being prepared for that fa I would prefer to take this up with a full body um at least one where we have not two council members or um two commission members missing um and I think having that full information of roles would be helpful um also just a reminder on since we're pulling that information just the full um kind of Eda scope and Authority certainly that would be representative of the positions that we would be nominated nominating agree I almost called you council member commissioner langness member less um so Abby I do think that the and I just read the bylaws because they were included in your packet and I do think the secretary and treasur if I remember right are can actually be staff I don't remember assistant listed for either one I agree and that's why um I I I agree that I think that they were not maybe the most clear and I think that just having them in front of everybody at the same time might be the best thing unless there is significant opposition to waiting one more month I'm I'm I'm happy to to table I was just going to suggest that that be included in a subsequent packet yeah I'll bring all of that information back for the next discussion item perfect so with that I'll move to table to the next meeting I'll second all those in favor signal by saying I I oppose and table to to our next meeting um next item for consideration tonight is item six the approval of minutes from our regular meeting which is March 11th 2024 is there a motion I'll make a motion we have a motion is there a second second Motion in a second all those in favor signal by saying I I no no or abstain I'm going I'm going to abstain was not present okay next item item seven our um consideration of the downtown Shoreline study recommendation and Abby is this you as well yes thank you at your last meeting our planning consultant Bruce Chamberlin was here presented to you findings of the downtown Shoreline study and bolt launch relocation um at the time the Eda had provided staff and Bruce with some direction for some modifications I think the biggest of the modification was to remove the requirement for additional parking on the other side of uh lake Lake Street um which has been incorporated into the plan it is kind of an optional thing that we could start to look for future parking in the future so tonight before you is the final Shoreline study and recommendations and uh the request before you tonight is to make make recommendation to the council to approve or adopt this study do you have any questions for me thank you Abby I could and um I was not at our last Eda meeting and so have had a little bit of background and got caught up just a little bit on what that um kind what the discussions were so I appreciate the work of the UDA on on this meeting already um when we say I just want to be clear and when we say um adopting the study um does this mean that we are approving the study and we are um kind of bringing that study phase to its natural conclusion we are accepting the we're we're accepting the report as a final final report um I just want to clarify between that and any of the go forward recommendations that might be part of the study um just want Clarity of what we're approving this evening um that is a great um question I think um the study that was brought forward as to the potential for relocation of the Vault launch and redesign of the shorelines so um I think the approval of the document the acceptance of the document or adoption of the document somewhat of the same but um I think it would be up for this body to make the recommendation to the Council of whether or not they want to accept the findings as presented and kind of solidify that this would be the overarching plan as part of our downtown plan moving forward for the shoreline and the boat launch remember member L yes um Abby so on what page is this here on page four of our agenda um you give a list of next steps and the fourth one says secure needed properties can you walk me through any conversation or where we're at um in that if the owners of the Preferred Property we discussed at the last meeting we have not heard from them at all staff has reached out to land owners but has not heard anything is this list of next steps in chronological order or is that just listed as here's things that need to happen these are things that need to happen um the next very next step that would take is engaging with the Minnesota DNR the existing boat launch agreement expires I believe at the end of this year forget with our agreements if it's this year or next year but we have to give a pretty hefty three-month six-month notice to them if we'd like to vacate the existing bat launch otherwise our agreement with them renews automatically for an additional five years and so at the very least we'll want to start those conversations with them that we want to start having um more talks about uh preventing that fiveyear uh renewal thank you um renewal from automatically occurring so I would to answer your question um I think that it isn't a chronological step order but these are things that need to continue to happen as part of these projects um based on conversations that we had um in um our last meeting I'm interested in just kind of your review of the final I'm interested in additional feedback kind of gauging Eda members level of support of the plan um just open it up I'm interested in interested in perspectives well I think that Fourth Avenue site is a good site um the only thing I think that we kind of were bouncing around is a secondary site for additional parking but I believe this one had like 27 sites for boat parking I think that's pretty pretty ample amount of bolts for that particular area and not even including the street area or whatever and I think our challenges were to try to find another site across from Highway 61 which was probably the big problem I think that we all kind of agreed upon we don't want pedestrian traffic Crossing that highway so I think the four Street location was probably our best site and the one that we probably mostly supported if I think we're in agreement on that I don't know thank you other perspectives I have a similar perspective um I I liked that Fourth Street location um I think it hinges heavily on whether we can acquire that property and so I think we need to time that very soon if we're going to pursue that I like the idea of Lakeside Park not having the boat launch at it and having that expansion um one concern I do have is and it really hinges on what council does with an agenda item on their meeting tonight is with regard to the uh Veteran Memorial and it appears that staff's recommendation is to not move it significantly but I think if you move that significantly on the other side of the park where there's you know more of the amp theater side I don't think it would fit over there as well so as it's laid out I like the park plan I very much like the new location for the boats I hate the auxiliary parking for boats across the street um and then I would say some timeline things need to maybe get adjusted but if it's not chronological I'm not concerned about that other perspectives unfortunately I wasn't at the last meeting and I'm not very prepared but I have a question have we looked at keeping the current one and the Fourth Avenue one in addition both yeah wow has that been was that a consideration um we looked at keeping um the existing bolt launch as a potential not necessarily that we would have both um the downtown plan contemplates relocating it not necessarily keeping the exist one so the study really was formed out of if we're going to relocate it where would we relocate it tell me more about your interest or kind of that question I'm just I'm trying to figure out there's a tremendous amount of pressure on the lake and if we did both he'd end up with a lot more parking the issue is the parking it's not so much the boats on the water as it is the vehicles and their trailers parked behind those businesses because they're calling and complaining and they're only supposed to be there for hours and all that it doesn't cost us anything to keep the original one that we have already paid for it it's already there so if we only if we added the one on Fourth Avenue if I mean I think it's going to be a fight with verton to try and get him to go along with that deal but maybe for enough money he will um I think we open it up quite a bit I mean that's a that's a huge amount of additional parking on the on the new one along with the existing that we have and we could enforce that a little bit with the existing one you know whether it's a ticket or warning tickets to start out with or however we decide to do it but it doesn't cost us anything to keep the one we got have two Fair um idea I would I would put I would I would put out there that um there was a lot the the downtown study recognized a lot of benefit benefit of of taking taking the existing out just to allow for um you know better flow there's you know better A lot trying to happen but to your point it is already there and that is an interest that is an interesting perspective if I might add there there will be costs associated with the existing launch the launch needs some pretty significant upgrades and if we were going to reinitiate conversations with the DNR we would be seeking that they would help fund some of those improvements if not again most of those improvements I don't think um our state partners are going to be interested in helping us fund to launches I also don't think that it would probably be in the city's best interest for long-term maintenance because we do maintain the facilities to have responsibility for maintaining both launches um in the down mown area I think ideally we would love if the DNR would maintain the launch in the long run um but those will be part of our ongoing conversations with them okay it was just an idea any other kind of perspectives member L what you want approval of is our approval of this plan uh we'd like you to make a recommendation to the city council regarding this plan um can the Plan be worked on if it we say yes we approve this plan but there's things still hanging in the air about this plan I guess I'd like to know what else I think that that is the question of what else is still hanging in the air so the the idea that this is a framework to help continue to guide our work um but if there's things missing or I just after the last discussion on this I thought there were some other unanswered questions that we're going to be looked at um I don't feel comfortable saying yes to this without having other information that was going TOS that I thought was going to be pursued like what now one of the things with um if Chris was saying if you keep the boat launch where it is now how does that impact the rest of what they're talking about for you're not you're not moving Memorial Park across um you're not doing it if you don't move it it's like dominoes other things have to change if you're not going to change that one thing get what I'm saying make it one I think I do I so if we approve it that does that me it's not flexible so I um go ahead CH I was just going to say I I would look at it like you do a comp plan that gives you this General guidance for how to plan down there it doesn't have to be exactly this but it starts to set some of that framework and really the details will have to be worked out as you go through things right but if you recommend this to the city council what you're essentially saying is you want to look for some boat a boat launch relocation area you want to do the shoreline um redesign restoration work is how I would would look at it doesn't you know a plan sits there it should never be ignored but it helps guide where those discussions go um to uh director Whitman's comments if there's something in there though that you really don't want to support and don't want to see move forward we should probably take that out before you make your recommendation to the council so that they understand what your recommendation is I would add part of that um part of the value in having the plan be documented and kind of Illustrated to the level that has been put into this is it it us approving the plan um green light staff to pursue those conversations on to you know continue to you know um you know have have meetings with the DNR have meetings with the prop Property Owners one of my challenges and and why I kind of asked the question about what is it that we're approving is in my mind a lot of this still um is contingent on Ultimate cost and you know what are those different funding structures but I you know through reading the staff memo it looks like there's a potentially a number of different funding mechanisms and so us approving the plan allows for in my mind allows for staff to go out and pursue some of those so that we can you know approve future projects with some projected funding attached to them um and us you know rejecting the plan at this level kind of stops all of that work and we just okay never mind we go do something else um so I think there's value I'm I'm um I have a lot of questions around the details um but I don't think that we're at a spot um to have those answers right now cost again and funding sources being one of them but I'm happy to support this because I do think it's important that we have staff looking at what those options are to bring back to this body bring back to the city council um just so that we can put a project together president B may I just ask a question commissioner Lord what um do you recall some of the or some of the questions that you have in this that I might have missed from your last meeting DNR approval oh yeah we won't not doing that unless we approve that okay so the DNR says um no way are they going to let us move it then a lot of this Falls away it's got to be modified then the DNR um we've had preliminary conversations with the DNR they're interested in having conversations about our the future of our bowan downtown they want to continue to see a boat launch in the downtown area um they have not expressed that they would be in opposition to moving it to another location on other public land as a replacement um but we can't necessarily even kind of get into some of the meat and potatoes conversation with them if we don't know that the appointed elected officials kind of have the you know an yeah for the potential to move right now now we have a downtown plan that says we should look into moving it this is kind of an extension of that 23-year plan to say okay we've looked into moving it we could potentially do it here's two locations and out of those two locations here's the one that looks like it could be feasible and so the recommendation really is a yeah we think that it could be feasible let's keep exploring that's more than anything can I ask a quick question yeah the extension with the DNR when is that due when do we have to make that decision I have to look at the agreement this is where because if we don't sign that it automatically don't have any idea what it's going to cost how much to to do all this and all of a sudden we get in over our heads now we're in trouble because we don't have the DNR it automatically renews if we don't give them notice and that renewal is for another five years I cannot recall off the top of my head if that notice period is three months prior to expiration or six months prior to expiration but I do know that I have it on my needs to happen this year this Summer that we need to send some letter to the DNR that either says we'd like to extend this saying that if we don't sign that or we do I mean that that's a big swing point there because if we don't sign it then we're going with this plan no matter what we don't have the choice or well or that it renews right that we the old site renews automatically I I mean I right but if we if we're kind of inching down this path and we decide not to renew it because we're going to put in a new boat launch and we get involved in the boat launch and we find out that economically it's just way too expensive because we're going to use I mean there's some private land there that we're going to have to attend and I know that person that owns that and that that's going to be an interesting deal and then we don't have we don't have the lease of the DNR so what happens can we go back to them and try and register I don't think you would send a letter to the DNR telling them you don't want to renew unless you had those things in place and knew you were going there and had that land purchased I don't think we would recommend that you take that risk yeah but in order to get through all those things that's where we need to know if you know staff should be investing time in this forward I am struggling with member versus commissioner so if I our council members go ahead um Abby is one of the things that I heard from almost across the board and I don't think anyone expressed that they liked it was the alternative parking is there any um staff opposition if the the board chose to approve this eliminating that portion of it um I um I staff isn't opposed the existing staff in place myself our planning department team would say that parking lots along your Main Street are not the highest and best use of land we do think that there are some challenges for The Pedestrian connectivities and if there's future improvements in the downtown plan maybe the this could work there could also be an opportunity for some you know rear of the property parking in the future I'd be reluctant to remove it completely for the future us sake that oh hey when we redevelop this or if this redevelops by the way we might want to see if there's some ability for parking there um but it's up to this Commission and the council to ultimately decide if that's what you'd want to see in that area someday yeah I'm quite comfortable with the plan as it is that's the one hinge point for me um and I I would honestly prefer it be either removed or moved to another location um I I just think we look at that and go there's no way we would ever put parking there and so unless there's like some application Advantage when you're applying to the DNR that you have to have that in there or something I would rather it just not exist so I think you could make a motion to recommend this plan removing the alternate parking site just so that we can keep it moving and then just have that one final document once we get any other feedback from the Commissioners as well as the council yeah and then it would be documented that the the board is not supportive of that alternative parking and choosing the site versus the other ones right one thing I would also say is I would hope that um both being public bodies between ourselves and the DNR yes contracts are important and yes those dates are important but um I would hope that we are exploring and having open conversations so that this isn't a surprise and that that we are able to work together in what this next phase might look like um I I I know that there's certainly dates that we need to meet and I'm not advocating that we miss those but hopefully with some conversations with them that this is something that we're exploring together um and so whatever my my advice would be whatever we we need to do at you know the staff level to just make sure that we've got that open communication um and that I I am certain that we're not the First Community that's had this type of a conversation and so whatever we need to do contractually to maintain options while these decisions are being made um I I would hope that we would find a good partner in that so um the concerns that um member Hoy raises are are certainly valid and I would hope that there is a relationship way to navigate through some of those date deadlines as we kind of contemplate what this is going to look like over the next I mean potentially 20 30 years it's a long-term decision um they are aware that we're having these conversations and they do want to be a part of those conversations so is something that we're I don't believe they should be blindsided at the next time I pick up a phone call I'm hearing some app so I'm hearing overall General um kind of positive feedback about the study um I'm also hearing some concerns about what some of those next steps may be but also recognizing that we need some more information to understand what those next steps might be um any other kind of points to be made about the plan that we haven't already talked about that we should also consider any anyone ready for a motion I'll be ready for a motion I'll move that we recommend approval to city council with alternate B deleting the corresponding alternate trailer stalls location designated in the report there's a motion is there a second I'll second any discussion feedback to council all right hearing none all those in favor signal by saying I I oppose and motion carries all right we're going to do updates before we moved into our closed session um start with City updates um I will just note the first update I'll have is um the chamber isn't here this evening they just uh had a little vacation scheduled so just as a heads up no updates from our partners tonight I uh the only update I do have I think I may have let the we may have let the Eda know that midco was awarded a pretty significant Grant to expand their services to the entire south southern half of the city we identified during the pandemic that there's a very large part of the community that had no um internet connectivity and so we had supported their infrastructure expansion Grant and they were awarded that they are looking to do kind of a groundbreaking uh press release photo opportunity May 202nd any members of the Eda that' like to be present feel free to reach out to me um that would be for us to kind of show our support for this Economic Development effort in the community um and at least at this time that's the only update I have very good um that being the end of our updates I will move that um the Eda move into a closed joint Eda in city council Works work session persuant to Minnesota statutes 13 d05 subdivision 3 C3 to develop or consider offers or counter offers for the purchase or sale of lot one block two Northern Pacific Edition Washington County Minnesota is there a second a second we have a motion and a second all those in favor of moving into a closed session signal by saying I I oppose and we're in close close [Music] session