Woodbury City Council — Transcript
Wednesday, February 11, 2026
Interlockan Neighborhood Beautification and Infrastructure Impact
Permanent Ban on ICE Detention Centers and Hero Center Regulation
Country Estates Second Edition Preliminary and Final Plat
Community Updates and Recognitions
Votes (3)
Open Forum - Interlockan Neighborhood Beautification
Dissent: null
Moved by null · Seconded by null
Steve Simon presented the Interlockan Neighborhood Association's history of volunteer beautification and funding. He detailed how a recent water treatment facility project severed their water and electric lines, requiring the association to rerun them at their own cost. He then showed pictures of the new 'monstrosity' (a structure with posts, yellow paint, a silver box, and a pole) installed at the neighborhood entrance, which residents find horrific, and asked the city what it plans to do to beautify it.
Open Forum - ICE Detention Center / Hero Center
Dissent: null
Moved by null · Seconded by null
Bill Erlick followed up on concerns about an ICE detention center, inquiring about a permanent ban in Woodbury and city oversight of the Hero Center. Mayor Bert explained the limitations imposed by the federal supremacy clause, clarifying that local bans might lack legal standing and be 'performative.' The Mayor confirmed that the federal contractor had provided written documentation stating they are no longer pursuing a detention center in Woodbury.
Public Hearing - Country Estates Second Edition Preliminary and Final Plat
Dissent: null
Moved by Council member [22:30] · Seconded by Council member [22:50]
Community Development Director Janelle Schmidtz presented an application to subdivide a 9.3-acre parcel into three 3-acre lots (Country Estates Second Edition), zoned R2 rural estate. She noted all requirements for lot size, private septic/well, and tree removal limits were met. Planning Commissioner Jake Guzek reported the Planning Commission's recommendation for approval with a condition to resolve an existing driveway encroachment on Lot 3. Council members clarified that there were no wetlands affecting lot sizes and confirmed the existence of a private road maintenance agreement.
Notable Quotes (8)
We've had an agreement with the city whereby uh we're allowed to run water, electricity um to those from the monuments to the island in the middle and to the other side and then down the island so we can put the lighting up that we want to put up and to water all the flowers etc.
What does the city plan to do, if anything, to help us beautify that monstrosity?
is there any way to ban them or do something more permanent so that we are can rest assured that it's not going to happen in the city.
There's a thing called the supremacy clause that the federal government has in the US constitution. So it does limit some things we can do. There are cities that have put in things that maybe just been been done to put something out there, but it may not have any legal standing in the long run. It's performative.
We did get written documentation from a contractor for the federal government that was looking at doing this work that this is off the table. They have no interest any further in pursuing this.
The preliminary plat requests to subdivide an existing 9.3 acre parcel into three lots each of each of which would be slightly larger than 3 acres.
lot three on the very east side there has an existing driveway from a neighbor that's encroaching. And so that uh we requested that be resolved before final plat is approved.
These are three acres free of wetlands.
Ordinances & Resolutions (6)
Application to subdivide a 9.3-acre parcel into three 3-acre lots.
Final approval document for the subdivision project.
Project number for the Country Estates Second Edition Preliminary Plat.
Project number for the Country Estates Second Edition Final Plat.
Document outlining conditions for the approval of the Country Estates Second Edition plat.
Biannual resident survey used to guide city policy.