City Council - Regular Meeting

If they play their cards right, they might get to lead us in the pledge of allegiance. Oh, there you go. Except for the mayor, but, you know, she likes to lead.

You've got teeth. Yeah. What's your name? Warren. Warren.

I thought I saw you when you were a tiny maid that size. Yeah, I'm planning to.

No, I just have that heritage brand.

Her heritage. That's like, theoretically, it's a practice.

Hey guys, how are you doing?

Do you guys know the Pledge of Allegiance?

You want to help me gavel in? I know. Let's go.

Do you want to help? You're going to help me or Johnson?

Yeah. It's going to be exciting.

So what you can do is you can stand right here. So when I tell you, you can palm a gavel. You don't have to do it very hard, okay? And then you say, and I can help whisper this to you, but you say, I call this meeting to order. Please stand for the pledge. And then what the kicker is, is you've got to start saying the pledge. Nobody else starts saying it, but you start saying it. Can you do that? Yeah. Okay. Tell me what your name is again. Call this meeting to order. Go ahead. I call this meeting to order.

I call this meeting to order.

Please stand for the pledge.

Please stand for the pledge.

Remember, you got to start. Nobody's going to start without you.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Thanks, buddy.

Great job.

All right. Can I get a motion to approve the agenda, please? I'll make a motion to approve the agenda. Motion by Council Member Pascoe.

I'll second.

Second by Pershmann. Any further discussion? All right. Can we get a roll call vote, please?

Council Member Pascoe. Aye. Council Member Sayer. Aye. Council Member Pershmann.

Aye.

Council Member Conrad. Aye. Mayor Johnson. Aye. Motion passes.

All right. Is anybody here for community comment this evening? Are you here for a community comment?

Yeah.

Fantastic. OK. Presenters are welcome to address the city council for matters relevant to the city of Carver's authority for up to five minutes on items that are not listed on tonight's agenda. Specific requests for information may not be immediately available, in which case, follow up will occur with the presenter sometime after the meeting. The city council should not be expected to immediately act on requests. However, they will follow up accordingly and may schedule items for future consideration. Come on up, Tim.

This is your chance. I'm not the person that's going to be presenting this. Okay.

We've got Christy's participating remotely, so we need you to make sure that that green light is on so that she can hear you. Okay. What's that? Yeah, I was just gonna make a comment about that. We don't care. What's on your mind?

I've got a neighbor that he's getting a golf cart and he wants it to be street legal. As of right now, golf carts aren't street legal in Carver.

That's correct.

And the big thing was, because it doesn't have blankers and seat belts, this thing has everything on it. So he wants to push something to get it. street legal. I'm asking you how we can do that.

Well, I think this is a good step. As I kind of read the the description of what community comment is, we aren't going to say like, okay, we can't act on it because it's not on our agenda. It is something that we could at the end of the meeting say, do we want to talk about this at a later date? We went through that, boy, I feel like it was just a handful of years ago. And I think that at that time, the sentiment on council was that a lot of us still remember Greg Osterdyke's accident and how terribly injured he was in a golf cart. along 6th Street. So, thank you for coming, I appreciate you sharing that, and it might be something that we choose to take up at a later date.

May, May.

We can have Brent follow up with you.

Mayor Johnson, are we able to, like you said at the end of the meeting, discuss whether we'd like to have this come back as a work session discussion to talk about?

Yeah, I think that's something that we can talk about in council communications.

So if you stick around, Tim, you'll find out if the council's willing to consider it. So this kind of how an ordinance is created is the council has to initiate the process, so it's not like a yes or no if someone comes up. So someone like you or somebody else might ask a question about either this ordinance or another ordinance, the council listens to it, and then there's a part That's called city council requests, where a council member or the mayor could say, hey, I want to look at golf cart ordinances. But if no one says, I want to look at golf cart ordinances, then it doesn't go anywhere. So somebody on the council would have to say, I want to amend the ordinance. But it's not as simple as, because if you come in and say you want to change, somebody else might come in at the next meeting and say, I want it to stay the same. So that's the process that we use, if that makes any sense.

Well, his big thing with this is they have a special needs kid. And they want to bring him down for ice cream and stuff like that.

Yeah, and I've spoken to him and I gave, this was maybe over a month ago and I shared an update with the council so they're aware that someone was interested in the topic. If you'd like...

Otherwise, we broadcast live. It'll be videotaped. You can watch it tomorrow or in three days. Either way, we will direct Brent to follow up with you.

We have a short agenda, so it shouldn't take too long.

It shouldn't take too long. Okay. All right. Okay. Thank you.

I'll wait for him.

Okay. Thanks, Tim. Okay. We are going to postpone employee service awards for a different meeting. We don't have any public hearings, but can I get a motion to address the consent agenda?

I'll make a motion to address the consent agenda. Approve the consent agenda.

We've got a motion by Council Member Pershman.

I'll second.

Second by Council Member Conrad.

I got it.

Let's see, any further discussion? All right, can we get a roll call vote, please?

Council Member Pascoe? Aye. Council Member Sayer? Aye. Council Member Pershmann?

Aye.

Council Member Conrad?

Aye.

Mayor Johnson?

Aye, motion passes. All right, we don't have any business items, but at this point I would like to go back to the work session agenda item and talk about the water rate tier discussion. So for anybody who's watching at home, this is a work session item that we ran a little bit over and ran out of time. So this is going to be something that we're talking about for the first time and having a more casual conversation about.

Thank you, Mayor and Council. So the Council had previously requested a review of our tiered rate system for water use and charging. The state of Minnesota, through its public water plan statute, requires public water suppliers, which the city is, to implement demand reduction measures as a conservation technique. And so the city meets that standard through its tiered water rate structure. Below you can see the table of our current rate structure and how kind of as the more water that you use, the higher that rate gets. Kind of anecdotally, in addition to kind of that structure, I would mention that I would say most of the pressure that, that's another pun, the pressure we see on the water rate side of things is related to irrigation. And as you can see, and Andrew mentioned it kind of earlier in the work session, at least a million gallons, sometimes in excess of a million more gallons a day on our water system or demand side of that system to handle peak demand. And peak demand is the framework for developing when additional infrastructure is needed. And so fundamentally the council I believe have kind of provided an overview, wanted to maybe perhaps introduce a fourth tier to curb that high level irrigation demand because the more irrigation demand we get is going to probably lead to either escalating or expediting the timeline for an additional water treatment plant or other related infrastructure. So we built a concept with Northland's help that was a cost neutral position. Now there's certainly other pieces where you could try to raise rates on the higher end to lower rates on kind of the lower end of the use tree, if you will. the more that you do that the more speculative you get and what the impacts would be because we can't see with any reasonable degree of certainty what people's cost appetite would be for how much you'd have to raise the rate to prevent them from irrigating and if you create a rate that's too high that people don't use and then you lower the lower tiers and all of a sudden you create a revenue deficit in your overall system so just wanted to provide this as a follow-up to the council request and see if you wanted to consider adding that fourth tier or some variation of what you see. I would offer, and I kind of mentioned this briefly in some earlier comments, the majority of the feedback we get on high water rates is related to irrigation. And so I wouldn't expect that to go down. I would expect it to go up. If you create another tier and make it more expensive to irrigate, I would say that narrative related to high cost of water and Carver will grow much higher. And so just weighing the pros and cons of that within the overall framework of what you're trying to accomplish. So with that, happy to answer any questions. Andrew is here on the water side. Lynn can answer any questions on the rate structure and billing if you have any.

Brent, when we talked about this, there was a hurdle of high water users being apartment buildings that had a single meter. Was there a workaround figured out for that?

There can be. We just didn't spend the resources in figuring that out until we... I mean, you can either do it on your existing rates. We could work with the city attorney on developing a workaround for that. That just wasn't a priority at this point. The other... I would say maybe adverse impact might be high water users. I think in part there's been a trend of a lot of new car washes in at least the metropolitan area, I think. Carver probably hasn't seen that. My conjecture is because of our water rates and just the cost of doing the business is going to be more expensive at that higher tier than maybe another community. But to get back to your original question, if the council wanted to develop a, I would probably say it's probably similar to a methodology. Dave, do you have any experience with that, or could you shed some light on that for the council? Or carve out or something like that.

No, yeah, we would, council and mayor, we would be able to work through some language in the code. I mean, it comes down to how you structure your fee schedule. And the only statutory limitation on utility rates is that they have to be fair and equitable. there's not a case law around what that phrase fair and equitable means but I certainly you know to me it would seem like if you're creating a more fair situation for a multi-family housing structure that has just one meter creating a way for that to not be unfair would probably make a lot of sense. So we would be able to get there. It would just be a matter of thinking through the language of how we would want to do it and how we would want to make the language look in your fee schedule. And I'm sure cities do it. I haven't seen recently an example that comes to mind, but I'm sure there's examples out there. And if there aren't, we can work through something and figure it out if that's what the council wants.

okay thank you sure so I had requested this because my hypothesis was to find a way of maybe curbing demand through price pressure but also helping to reduce the rates a little bit more for lower water users This doesn't net out quite that way. Um, but I think Brent said we could say, take it back and let's see if we can use this as a mechanism again, to reduce the rates for folks who are lower water users in our community. Is that a little bit of a gamble? Yeah. Also, yes. That Brent indicated. Um, but I think. From my standpoint, we just went through the infrastructure plan and so much of this is water usage that keeps going up and up and up and all of the new homes that are coming in are coming in with sprinkler systems. And there's a very real cost to our infrastructure system to add in the ability to have an amazingly green lawn. So that's kind of where I stand.

So I agree with the logic here of protecting costs as much as we can for the majority of users in the city. And I think the majority of users are under 20,000 gallons. So I agree with that logic process. I want to ask a different question, though, while we're talking about this. On the other side, we've been talking about how we regulate or putting a moratorium in place on a really heavy water user. I'm not talking about a car wash, but let's talk about a data center. So while we're looking at this, do we look at a fifth tier for an entity that could dramatically impact everybody's water bill? I know that gets into we have to worry about opportunity for commercial development. I'm not talking about... curtailing that, but something to the size and scale that it impacts everybody. I think that might do a couple of things. It either discourages that type of water use or it encourages a water reclamation system that doesn't impact the city. So if you're going to build a data center in Carver, build one that doesn't have that impact on the community. Is now the time to look at something like that?

you could i mean i think that's a policy question that's less of a legal question than it is what does the council want to do in terms of rates i mean i i don't love land use policy being your land use policy is being kind of achieved through utility rates although if you can justify a higher tier being charged those rates and it's you have the reasons and you make the findings that those are equitable and just from your perspective I think we can support it legally but you know data centers is just one specific use there's a lot of things that use a lot of water there was a bottling facility somewhere in southern Minnesota that uses a lot of water. There's many different land uses that use lots of water. And Carver is very unique when it comes to our water. We've got a lot of unique geography and a lot of features that could make sense. And so I'm punting a little bit on the legal issue, but I want to make sure you understand that there's also kind of an underlying policy issue that's your concern.

Well, that is the concern, right? We have difficult, expensive water in Carver. We were just talking about a lift station. We have the topography that doesn't make it as easy as other communities, and that's why we have to talk about changes to what we bill for irrigations. But on the extreme end, I also want to protect residents against some extreme use that impacts everybody. I don't think a car wash fits into extreme use. Bottling might. But if we were to consider a tier that, again, maybe not to... prevent somebody from coming to town but certainly encourage a different system that uses water recycling and reclamation well that's an incentive to force a developer to look at that okay if we're coming to carver we have to strategically think about our water use rather than just drawing from the city So if we're talking about changes to this, I think maybe it's worth a discussion for council.

I was kind of thinking similarly. I love that you're thinking strategically because I think to use that to maybe dissuade high water users when, again, like, We're looking at that infrastructure grid that Andrew showed us, and that's just assuming growth. I don't think that one of our assumptions in there, and correct me if I'm wrong, Andrew, but is a bottling plant or a refrigerated warehouse that requires a lot of cooling. I think there's some, then we would be looking at an even larger second water treatment plant, and it just, to what end. I also recognize and feel like it's very much a high wire act in terms of wanting to encourage growth and development, especially commercial and industrial, but saying, nope, anything but high water users.

Again, I want to ensure that a commercial developer would look at how they're using water. Car wash is a good example. I think most of them do a really good job with water recycling and reuse. So if you're coming into this community that you'd be focused on maybe not the lowest cost path, which is just consuming city water, but a system that doesn't impact Our community is greatly, for all the reasons we just mentioned. So we're talking about it. I wanted to float that by that I think maybe that's a discussion we should have is a tier on the other side of this to direct commercial development into smart water use, not necessarily driving it to prohibit them from coming to town. But back to the immediate concern, I want to see a tier that protects the majority of users from or insulates them as best we can from price increase. And if that's heavy irrigation, I think from charts that I've seen in the past, that's a much smaller percentage of users. Am I wrong about that?

No, again, this is like the kitchen table conversation, so there's a level of anxiety that comes into play with Raising the irrigation rate which is as we kind of named is really fluctuates on the weather so the more the bigger piece of the pie that you have for your revenue on the irrigation the more susceptible you are to revenue swings so like the idea of placing more of the burden on the irrigation piece as like a revenue shifting strategy has some inherent risk to it. Or you know that the first 10,000 gallons is gonna be, people are gonna use water to cook, to bathe, to clean, et cetera. And you're not going to get that, you're not going to get irrigation for probably six months out of a year. And then of those other six months, it's highly dependent on whether we might be introducing a lot of variables to the revenue stream that's very critical for the operation. So that's obviously the extreme, but it depends on... what your appetite is for what you want to see, what kind of decrease you'd want to see to the lower gallons. Or just to throw out a strategy, maybe you, instead of, if you think of the average family of four uses 8,000 gallons, maybe a strategy is to combine tiers one and two.

Friend, before we start looking at other strategies, can the rest of the council weigh in a little bit?

Yep, sorry. Go ahead.

No, that's okay. You have great ideas, but I wanted to, if we're ready, Eric, I didn't want to cut you off either if you're still... No, I'm done. Okay. So when I was looking at this, I do like... I guess the conceptual fourth tier where it has the peach colored header. Brent, if you could scroll down a little bit. Thank you. And thanks for reminding me what the average household of four was. Did you say it was about 8,000 gallons? Yes. Yes? Okay. I like adding this high user tier. I really do. I do think when I was looking at the end of this where they had some from Northland Finance, just some different ones, I would like to see that tier, though, not go below the 5,000 gallons. There's some that are shown at the 3,000 gallons, and that seems pretty – uh not quite realistic i don't think because as a family of two and we're pretty low water users um even 3 000 i think that just seems like kind of an unrealistic um goal for households unless you are i mean living by yourself and and i guess i don't know what it would take to get down below that but um so anyways one to five thousand at least five thousand as a minimum for that first tier My other thing is, Eric, thank you so much for bringing up that about the commercial. I think we want to be really cognizant of wanting to invite commercial into our city, but also knowing that constraint that it puts on for some of these users that maybe we haven't even imagined yet, right? So I'm glad that... We have a moratorium on data centers right now because I think that we aren't prepared to look at what that water usage looks like for the city of Carver. So, Dave, I hope that that gets included in some of the study that you're doing is what that might look like. And not only that, but just for, like, cost and things like that, too. So I agree with you, Eric. We have apartment buildings. We have commercial that we haven't seen yet. But I do think that there's something different for those that we should be looking at. And I know, Courtney, you said about the apartments also. So I think we wouldn't mind seeing, at least reviewing, having an idea of something else for those. for those other items that don't quite fit into this box right here of gallons. But again, I'm not sure what that top tier, if it's 20,000, 30,000, but I do think a fourth tier is really, I'm really meaningful to that as long as I think that first one doesn't go under the 5,000 gallons. Thanks.

Just before we continue to go around, tier four, Conceptual tier four starts at 20,000 gallons and they were 5,000 gallon jumps before then. Was there a decision not to start it? Was there a rationale behind the decision not to start the fourth tier at 15,001 gallons?

I would say it was like a deep rationale other than the the interest of allowing not allowing but providing a rate of like what we think of as reasonable irrigation levels to keep your grass green that's like based on the information that we have when you exceed 20,000 gallons you're probably over watering your lawn and so that was viewed as the um, the launching point for that 20,000 gallon framework. But you could, I mean, again, it's conceptual, so you can frankly make these anything that you'd like them to be.

I have some comments. Um, I,

I'm looking at some of the things in the document, and it's super helpful. I feel like it's very well written. And I just want to make it clear, too, in what it says about halfway through the first page is, we as a culture requested this as a work session, a concept showing a fourth tier to promote additional conservation and reduce the impact to peak demand. To me, this accomplishes that and that's really what's driving it. Promote that conservation and reduce impact to that peak demand. I really like Eric's idea of a fifth. Really just for anyone, everyone to just embrace water strategy. Simple as that. do like the state statute. I've been so surprised. I've told a lot of people, and I've never like, I don't ever quote state statutes. how many people I talk to that aren't familiar with this kind of upside down versus a lot of things when you buy, the more you buy, then the rate gets cheaper. Or if you get something delivered, quantity. No, that's not the way it is with your water bill. So I found it really helpful just as an education piece that is mentioned in some of the documentation that's in the packet.

I was going to try to find it really fast. So obviously, we have 1,000 people.

We're serving water, public water, too. So this is to encourage water conservation by employing water use demand reduction measures, as in defined. And there's some more terminology there. Construct a public water well, supply and request an increase that it's really just to achieve demand reduction. It's meant to incent people to reduce their usage. And someone shouldn't assume that the more you use, the less it's going to cost per gallon. So it might be time for an education reminder for others. Those were my only comments.

Do we have an estimate of how many households hit this 20,000 in, for example, a summer season?

I'd have to reference. Lynn, can you come up?

I see Lynn opening her laptop.

I think Northland, they...

It's Page Saints, right?

I'm sure that data exists, but it doesn't exist in the materials that we have in front of us tonight. We can find that out. Is that accurate?

Is it not on the next one? That's the estimated volume of water. I'm looking for a slightly more nuanced number. And I don't need an exact number. I'm just wondering if we're going through this exercise for four people in the city... how much this is actually going to impact, I guess is what my question is. I see that it's, you know, the big thing for me is that it doesn't really affect, it's not going to really affect rates because we are so concerned about, and rightly so, the possible fluctuations in what that higher tier would actually bring in in revenue. And so if we're going to be, if we're doing it from a conservation perspective, it matters how many people actually, fall into that category because it's not going to impact rates. So I would be more amenable to looking at more that ultra high user tier to protect the greater water supply. For you know anything commercial, you know that commercial industrial if that's gonna be a major factor in What our water costs and increases in water cost future if that's going to be a bigger player I'm more interested in a ultra high user tier than trying to catch Five people who are over watering their lawns in the city sure we could Come back with more refined data related to that question.

I

Well, like in August of last year, there were only 300 accounts that were over 10,000 gallons. So that's just a quick visual on what that was. And in April, this last month, there were only 10 accounts that went over 10,000. Went over our current third tier. Our current third tier. So I can get you over the 20,000. Yeah. And I just want to mention too that there's so many unique things that you can do with rates, you know, from the research that I've done as far as like base rates for the different industrial and things. So just keep an open mind when you're thinking about that. Thank you.

When you give the example of 300, out of how many users do we have? We have 2,200 accounts. 2,200 you said? Mm-hmm. Okay, thank you. Christy, go ahead.

Courtney, you almost asked the exact same question. It was 300 users that went over which tier in August of last year, I think is what you said?

It was the third tier. They went over 10,000 gallons.

I'm sorry, say that one more time and cut out just a little bit.

There were 300 accounts that went over 10,000 gallons last August.

Okay. And then you will supply us with a $20,000 one? Yep.

Yeah, no problem.

Okay. But it was $300,000. Okay. And then how many did you say was April?

Ten. Ten accounts.

Okay.

That's kind of to be expected, though, coming out of...

Right.

Yeah. All right. That was my question for you, and thank you.

Okay. I think we're looking for more information on that one before we move forward.

Do you have what you need from us?

Well, we can.

Mayor Johnson?

Yeah. You know, Brent had a few comments before, and I had asked for council to kind of ideate first. If it's all right, can we step back to Brent and see if he had anything additional that he wanted to mention? Yeah.

Thank you, Council Member Conrad. We can get the information on more finite on the user breakdown. I guess what would be helpful to me is if I'm hearing more just adding a fourth tier for conservation purposes and whatever that number is, I'd like to get an idea of if you want it to be revenue-specific or you want to shift costs because that's another...

In an ideal world, I would like to, but I also hear your concerns about how it being so weather dependent. 2024 was just a couple of summers ago when the river broke records and nobody had to water their lawns.

Great. I mean, the comment that I made related to combining with LINZ data, it probably doesn't make a whole lot of difference. If you only had 300 accounts out of 2,200 that went over 10,000, if you combine the first two tiers, then you're effectively making the first 5,000 more expensive than the last 5,000. less expensive, so it all probably comes out in the wash. But if you're wanting to explore those different scenarios, if we can get that direction, we can have Northland and our team develop some of those scenarios. Or if you just want to concentrate on the conservation specific, we can develop that data and get it back to you. So that's probably the question is, do you want to look at cost shifting scenarios and play around with that? Or do you want to keep just to the conservation piece?

Well, the one thing I don't want to see is that because we do have the 1 to 5,000 gallon, and that was the push for the conservation was to keep things lower. I don't want to see the people who are using 1 to 5, who are our lowest users, now getting charged more because we've lumped them into another tier. I agree.

I agree with that. Yeah. I think we're all in agreement with that, Christy. So with that then... So I think the question is, do we want to do kind of the cost dissuasion or come from a conservation angle? Is that what you're right?

Go ahead.

For me, it's conservation.

I think based on the numbers that we're seeing, it is going to be really hard to predictably lower rates for lower tier users. So if we're going to be adding another tier, I'd like to see it done from a conservation perspective.

So I thought the goal was to protect the lower tiers from price increase as long as we could and give a little breathing room by cost shifting to the higher end users. But what I'm hearing is it doesn't. So then it would be conservation, just change in behavior.

And what I'm hearing, Eric, is it's riskier. We could try to do that, but then we take a risk of this working, right? And it dissuading folks from irrigation and there not being any uber high irrigation uses. And then we're trying to pay the bills.

Understood.

But I... like that's not a game that I want to play. That's not a risk that I want to take. So I think I would like to see the conservation angle. I also am interested and just kind of want to float it out for council's consideration of making the third tier like having it go up every 5,000 gallons. Tier one is zero to five. Tier two is five to 10, 10 to 15, and then 15 to maybe 15 plus or 15 to 20. And then we add the Uber high. Let's make this as complicated as possible. Well, but I also like that. I just, I'm, I'm struggling with a, We set it at 20 because that's where most of the irrigation is and like 20,000 gallons is a lot of water to be thrown on your lawn and into the stormwater system.

You know, I think that for me thinking about those super high-end, especially on that commercial side, that almost seems like a whole separate animal to me than this residential single-family home rate. So I know, Kayla, I think maybe you just mentioned that, or about the other user. But I don't know. To me, I think if it works with the rest of the council, that that kind of gets pulled out and becomes its own entity. If that's possible, Dave, I don't know, city staff, I don't know if it is or not, or how we address that. But to me, looking at this right here with the one to 20,000 plus is your typical residential home. And I feel comfortable working on that from that angle and that lens, if that is where we see that going. If it's something where we want those other pieces in, then I'm going to have to recalculate some thoughts.

We can't pull out a commercial or industrial user and charge them a different rate entirely, can we?

I think Lynn might have some input.

I don't know. I'm skeptical. It seems to kind of fly in the face of fair and equitable if you're charging different types of users different amounts for using arguably the same amount of water. Because you're going to have a lot of commercial industrial businesses that aren't high water users that are using the same product that you cost the city the same amount of money to treat. So I'm a little skeptical about that. I don't love that idea just on its face, but I haven't delved into it.

From the research that I've done, I've seen it both ways. I've seen a little bit of a different rate structure for industrial commercial, but mostly they come at it with the base rate. They change the base rate for the different multi-family, the residential, Some even have different summer rates versus regular rates. But they mostly keep the rate structure the same and then they change the base rates based on the type of user that they're going after.

I think that I wouldn't argue that we would need a separate commercial tier, but having an ultra high user tier I think should be part of the discussion when we talk about what we're going to do with our data center conversation. Because if one of the reasons why we're concerned about data centers is we're concerned about water usage, one way that we can protect our water sources without blanket banning a type of use in the city is to have an ultra high tier water.

But I think we can be doing that work sooner rather than later as a setup for that.

Exactly.

But I don't know where we draw that line. I did some research and Carver Elementary uses more water than Lakeview Industries. So do we draw that line at 100,000 gallons? I don't know where it becomes another tier and that's our ultra high user, ultra high user.

Yeah, I don't think we have the information to make that decision today, but we're talking about it. We'll do a little more research to find out where that line should be and then we bring that back for discussion. Your question about going to 10 to 15, you know, I'm kind of okay where this sits. I'm giving, you know, we're really trying to curb behavior over 20,000 gallons and this does that. And it's impacting a smaller percentage of residents. I'm okay with the 10 to 20 for that reason. Really targeting that 20,000 plus.

I agree with you, Eric, unless we get, I mean, if we want to look at some conservation things, I mean, 20,000 gallons and more is a very high user, and I think that they should be paying more because they're straining the water system more than all the tiers before them. So I agree that I am fine with the first three. I'm perfectly fine with right now.

Anyone else want to pine Kayla? No. Lori, on the delineation of the Allens.

I can go with the majority.

I am okay with the current delineation. I don't see a reason to add a five. So that's the majority that you're going with On an island here. Oh see what I did there water Okay, so I think and I

trying to summarize this and tie a bow on it. I think what we want to do is we want to continue going down the path of the four tiers that we see proposed here along with an ultra high user tier at a rate that is to be determined where that starts, that again is that high wire act of what doesn't dissuade all industrial development but the high users that would really put a strain on our system. And hoping that staff's crystal ball can figure out what that number is.

We have talented staff. I know they can.

So can I summarize that with a twist? Yes. Yes. Part one of this is to come back with the conceptual fourth tier and apply a third column that shows the number of users that we would have in any given time of the year for those so we can present that. And wrap that up and include that in the long-term plan study so they can model that for growth. And then I... If it's okay with the council, like if we can, like the part two about like this, I'll just use a quotation, it's ultra high water thing. If you can give us a couple months to like research and contemplate and you can talk. Okay. There are some unintended consequences that I think we should take some time and find out what those are and bring those back to and maybe have conversations with people that are high water users and get their thoughts. I understand the... the goal it feels like it's maybe weighted a little bit on data centers and so like part of me wants to think about and talk with the team about should we let that be a data center conversation then and have that come in with that because I'll this as a scenario this company X is very loved in the community and you create this standard and then all of a sudden they get this new part of their business and all of a sudden they need to use 20,000 more gallons and now they're over the tier but they can't do it. want to flush that out with the team. We'll flush that out with the team. Because I don't think it's a great position for the city to be in, and the council specifically, to be changing water rates based on what the business is to that specific level. It feels, to get to Dave's point, it could be considered arbitrary. It's like, well, this one business, we're okay with this tier, but if you're this other kind of business, we want you on this other tier, I think there's some things that we need to study and research and get you better information on. So if you can, we can put a priority on this first part, and if you're okay, we'll spend some time noodling the other part.

Save us from ourselves, Brett. Yeah. Yeah, I'm okay with that. Does anybody disagree? I'm okay with that. Okay. Christy, you good? I'm good with that. Thank you. OK. OK. Clear as mud? We good? Yeah, we're good. OK. OK. Let's see. Then city manager's report.

Yeah, I have two things. I just wanted to give Brenda the mic if she's ready. The city, thanks to Brenda and her team's work, have launched the new City of Carver app. Not chicken wings, the computer kind.

It's super exciting that the app went live in both the Google Play Store and the iPhone App Store. So it's easy to download. It's a free app. Several staff members were trained on how to serve as administrators of the app. We're taking an opportunity to look through the app, which does interface with the website, so it's a good opportunity to double check things on our website as well. We have some additional training this week where we're going to learn how to market the app. They'll give us some tools and resources for that so that some best practices that we can follow. And then once we kind of get our handle on that and feel like the app is at a good place, then we'll begin marketing that. Some thoughts I have on how to market it is obviously the newsletter, the utility bill. I will do the website, some social media accounts. I thought about possibly doing a business card that could be handed out to show to people or to give to people with the information how to download it. We can share it at some of like the community market or the open houses and things like that. And then one of the fun features will be the push notifications. So tomorrow is the first day of the Carver community market and that's just a good example of something we could push out to say to our users like stop by between 3 and 6 and check out the community market or an open house we're having and things like that. It'll provide some statistics on the number of users as well as the top viewed pages. So that'll give us some good data on who we're reaching and how we're reaching them. So super excited that we're to this point.

Good work, Brenda. And Eric, kudos to you too for championing that. Especially for those of us who are naysayers and didn't think we needed that.

Not that that was me. Meet people where they are.

I have one question. Go ahead. Okay. Brenda, and I know it goes to websites, but is there, and maybe Eric, you can help with this, do QR codes lead to any, like, Play Store or the app or the Apple phone? If you were to, let's say, this is just what I'm thinking because Brenda brought up some marketing strategies. At our parks, if we had, because I think right now, because Evo Park has a QR code, so you can download that and you can walk around and read the historic properties of Carver. Is there a way to have a QR code that would lead to downloading that app if we had it at our parks and things like that?

I think that's a great idea, and I'm hoping they'll cover that on Thursday. If not, I will gladly ask that question when we learn about marketing that.

That can be added to our city of Carver bumper sticker.

But, you know, if it's on trail signs or at the parks or whatever, download our app now. You never know. Absolutely. I'm not sure exactly if a QR code or whatever would lead to that. Thank you.

Great idea. Thanks.

and then i have one other item it's that kind of time of year but i think it's this is kind of file under clear expectations and collective expectations um but as the um median and prairie kind of grasses grow on jonathan carver parkway we're going to be reaching a time where Just to name it, some people really like it and some people really don't like it. The public services team has gone through a series of trainings, so they are aware of the maintenance techniques that are needed. We're doing that on our own, thanks to Andrew's leadership. There is a maintenance mode that is scheduled. I don't think that we've quite turned the corner on accepting that as a community. That's what has been decided. And so I just wanted to give some space for the council to share if you have different expectations for that. Because Most of the things that we do are overwhelmingly where we like to land in a space where everyone really likes something. And this is kind of an art more than a science on the way that that looks. It's intentional, but I recognize that there are people that don't like that look. And it's not perfect. It's not a golf course. It's not going to... look maybe the way some people would like it to look or maybe they want the short grass. But as we share that story with residents or interested parties that call, just want to make sure that staff is in alignment with council on how you feel about that and how you want that cared for.

thank you for bringing that up I've received both my first email the year of how's it gonna be maintained we talked about that last week and from the same person hey I saw people out weeding today it looks great thank you so thanks for that I always keep going back to we had a really robust community engagement process when we were working on this project where we had members of the community help determine what that that what that landscaping was going to look like and The requirements were that it was Minnesota native, pollinator friendly, drought resistant, and low maintenance. This is what we have. To make any changes to that would require a significant investment, including making it look like a fairway or someone's front yard. If that's the expectation, it's never gonna look like that in its current state, and it's never gonna look like that without extreme resources like irrigation and maintenance. And I don't want to see our summer seasonals crossing JCP every week during the summer to mow it. That's just not safe. So that's a long way of saying, and I've clearly perfected my elevator pitch on that one, is that I'm fine with it as is. And I like it.

I know we had a warranty claim or something on the seeding, right? Did we ever get the percentage of wildflowers that was on the picture on the seed packet?

There wasn't a warranty claim.

That was me just asking a question at one point.

The seed mix and the seed supplier, I can't remember that. um by name but in talking to like residents about from memory like it was they're well regarded and so um you can out you could always choose to invest in like overseeding if you will if that was a choice

Is that an expensive investment to add a little more wildflower mixture to the mix? Does that do anything?

We could do that. I just want to clarify what the mow is going to be. It's not going to be a low cut mow. The goal is to continue the native grasses to come up. So the goal for the mow right now is to take care of those species that overwhelmingly took over the roundabout last year because those out-competed everything. So the goal is to go in, have a high-cut mow so we're not destroying those native grasses that typically take longer to grow. So those will continue to grow up and those won't be cut.

Can you, are you talking about the median or the roundabout?

Talking about the median, not the roundabout. Okay, you said roundabout. Two separate things.

Did I say roundabout? You said you were going to mow the roundabout, yeah. And I was like, it's okay, it's okay, it's okay.

It's been a heavy median day.

I'm sorry. I'm sorry, that's my fault. Okay, so mow the median. Again, it's not going to be a mow like when you mow your lawns once a week.

It's still going to be lawn.

Yep. And it will be once or twice during the growing season.

We're hoping to only do it once during the summer and then in the fall.

It gets knocked down before the winter.

Yes.

I want to thank the team for all the work that they put in. I saw, so for those of you who are unaware, I'm part of the Carver County WMO. And they do a lot of native plantings. And this spring, they had a really well-attended government-specific native planting maintenance program. And Carver was well represented there. I saw the pictures of the backs of the heads and I saw a lot of familiar backs of heads in those pictures. So I really want to thank them for putting in that extra effort. I think that I'm a big supporter of the native plantings for all of the reasons that Courtney said. And for a lot of people, what I tell them is how much do you want this to cost the city? Because non-native plantings. it's an annual expense and there's irrigation and it adds up over time. So, um, but I just knowing that they've put in the effort to figure out what's a weed versus what's a native plant and knowing how to do that maintenance in the longterm, um, has been really wonderful. And I'm just really pleased with the effort that the team has put into that. So.

Does anybody else have any thoughts?

I have a question for Andrew.

Go ahead. So I know it sounds like there was some weeding done this spring. What's the plan for the rest of the summer and into fall when that thistle is coming up or things like that? Are we going to have some planned times to go out there and get rid of some of the invasive or non-wanted species that are in there?

Yep, we can always spot spray. When the thistle does come in, because it always will come in, we'll go and spray it. So we have specialized guys that know which weeds are noxious weeds and following the county's footsteps in that too, because they do a big chunk of JCP. It's a conversation we have a lot, and it's tough when big chunks of your community have recently been reseeded or under construction. That's when noxious weeds like to thrive. So that's everywhere. So it's going to be a constant battle forever, but we're going to keep getting after it, fighting the good fight.

Yeah, if they love disturbed stoils right like that's they disturb the soil here they come I wanted to reiterate just really briefly what Courtney had said we do as a council as a staff get a lot of Complaints about the median on Jonathan Carver and TO REITERATE, WE HAD, AGAIN, LIKE CORDY SAID, A ROBUST, A LARGE GROUP OF PEOPLE FROM THE COMMUNITY WHO WERE PART OF THE FOCUS GROUP WHO DECIDED WHAT THAT WAS GOING TO LOOK LIKE AND THEN PRESENTED THAT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY COUNCIL'S APPROVAL. SO I THINK i think that's a i don't want to say an argument to people but i think that that is a valid point to let them know that the residents of this community are the ones who chose that design and the council approved the residents focus group chosen um chosen uh species and chosen aesthetics for it so i will stop there thank you thanks christy comments

No, no other comments. I agree with everything that's just been said. So I support what we have today. My question was, does overseeding give us anything? Is there a dramatic cost to that? Would it add something where people would see more color in there?

Yeah, we can look at some seed mixes and see how much it is. It's not really a big area. So a bag of seed might be 50 bucks.

All right. Well, that might dissuade some naysayers if there were a little more color in there. Maybe.

I love your optimism. Okay, Lori, anything from you?

Words of support or against? Support what the plan is. That's what we were recommended and we approved of. We know the great pictures they show in brochures don't always, they do require maintenance, but this is what we have.

All right, thank you. Anything else? Okay, communications. Eric.

Nothing.

Lori?

Nothing this week.

Kayla? Nothing to add. Christy? Nothing. OK. Go ahead.

Mayor, do you want to do council requests if you have?

Yeah. Sorry, that's kind of what I meant, council requests or communications. Still nothing?

So, well, I think we were going to have a discussion around the public comment a little earlier. Is that correct? That's our intent?

I would support that. Okay.

So I think we do that. I don't recall participating in the decisions that led to us allowing ATVs on city streets. And I understand there was concern about the accident with Mayor Osterdyke. But what's the delineation between an ATV and a golf cart? Because... I would kind of agree. I have seen golf carts that are far more robust than a lot of ATVs and they have brake lights and they have the safety systems. Typically the difference might be that one's electric and one's gasoline. But do we revisit that and state that it's an off-road or vehicle that meets these safety standards? Is that the way to look at this?

I'd like to have this at a work session, and then also add to that meeting materials for the licensing, because I just need a refresher on what we have in place.

Yeah. I can't believe this was before your time. It feels like you've been on council forever. It does, but yeah, I don't recall ever participating in that. So I think the thought at the time was, and Chris, to keep it honest, I think the thought of the delineation between the two, and clearly technology has improved, but the thought was that golf carts don't always... have turn signals, that UTVs have roll cages and seat belts and headlights, whereas golf carts don't necessarily always have that. And again, there was a real big conversation. You know what? Glenn was on council when that happened because he was talking about the accident happened literally in front of his house and in front of him. So there was... a fresh memory of that incident, even though it had been a handful of years or more since then.

Kayla? I'd be happy to talk about it at a work session.

Christy?

Yeah, and just going back a little bit, yeah, Eric, with the AT or the UTV, it was very much it was safety and then also not just safety for the person driving, but safety for other folks on the road who have to be part of, you know, the commute, right? So that they did have the safe, you know, the turn signals and the seatbelts and things like that. I, taking back a little bit, I... you know, accidents can happen. Unfortunate accidents can happen at any time to anyone in any kind of vehicle. So I don't want to frame a golf cart around one unfortunate accident that happened. However, I do agree that some of the severity of that accident probably uh was caused by the fact that the golf cart didn't have some of these safety features in it um so i in closing yes i would like to revisit this i think um accordion has been a long time longer than we thought that since we've last talked about this um because eric wasn't here but i think we should take another look at it

Okay, so it sounds like we will bring this up for a work session. So just to give you guys an idea of how this works is keep an eye on our agendas. I think Brent has your contact information. I'm looking. I'm sorry, sir, you got here late.

Potentially.

Your name is? Jacob, OK. Brent's got your contact information, so we can let you know. It could be a number of weeks before this goes on to a work session agenda, because staff will have to do some research. I don't even know if you've already like are thinking about when it can get in onto a work session agenda, but, um, there are a number of processes. So very realistically, um, and let me know if I'm wrong, but this might not be for the 2026 golf carting season, if you will, by the time it would take us to get our ordinance amended, unless you're more optimistic than I am.

But I have a question. So the process will be probably the convergence of Brenda and Dave and I researching what the statutes are, building the resource library for you to discuss, talking about the last process, digging up those memos, But then the other part is how fast you want. We can do anything you ask us to do. Obviously, there are other things going on. So if you said we want to see it in the next 30 days, that's probably the fastest we can do it. But there are... um other things going on as you know to like long-term plan budget etc so um part of it is like how like water tiers etc so like what what's what are your expectations we certainly can do it uh in the fall and winter or if you said no we want to get it done and we want to have like a conversation about this this summer then we take that lead so if you give us a frame of reference for how big of a turnaround you'd like that we can build with that I would say we we need at least 30 days to like build the resources and have some internal conversation so I would say the soonest we can get it to you would be like your i don't know i'd probably say like their first work session in august the second work session in august is dedicated to the public services facility layout so that's i don't want to add anything to that agenda solar soonest I would say would be the first meeting in August work session you think you could have it by the second work session in July because we're what July once that'll be well then on to two meetings in between work session in July is we have isolated for the public services facility like building materials so like I just think that's gonna take your full time and attention so I yeah be hesitant I've been trying to keep that work session clean and tidy for mother things so that you can I mean that's a huge infrastructure project but if you want to do both of them you certainly can But that's where we started off. So this gets into, I mean, if you said you wanted to look at the next meeting, I know it takes 30 days, but we can... We'll figure it out if you say, hey, we run it right now.

As much as I want to be responsive to resident questions and concerns, I think you guys understand. Like, there's a lot of stuff going on. I'm not feeling the need to have this ready by the next meeting. I think August would be fine.

Can I ask a question? Do we? Oh, I can't.

No, we had our comment period at the beginning of the meeting. Yeah.

I went par, par, very par, so I could not be wrong.

So I don't want to change up the schedule. I think August is fine. I think the reality is, as the mayor said, probably best-case scenario, even if we made a change, it's going to come towards the end of the season anyway because it's got to go to a work session from there.

Just for those in the audience and those watching, like the – you hit a work session you play around with the language we might go back to the drawing board then let's say for this type of ordinance we might do a little bit more engagement and it's I hate even saying this but I know other cities have like had to deal with this like We're thinking about a real small thing right now, but as things go, there's a lot of gravity right now in cities exploring electric fill in the blank. And so do you look at that in a larger sense and not just focus on golf carts, knowing that you might have someone come in the next meeting and say, I want you to do something about electric bikes on sidewalks. And so like, it can go a lot of places. And I think the council has had a lot of experience when you look at an ordinance, especially when you haven't looked at it for a while, you might say, why did we do this? Why did we do that? And should we look at this? And so I'm, Just from a staff perspective, we really want to try to listen to residents' concerns and make sure that gets out, but I don't want to overpromise and underdeliver on timing when maybe someone thinks I can be in the golf cart by Labor Day when the council wants to look at other things. Am I missing anything, Dave?

No, I think you're right, and it's interesting, it actually predates me, too, because this happened 2020, 2021, it looks like. I was just looking at your ordinance when it was approved just before I became city attorney. But there's a lot out there on these special vehicles, ATVs, UTVs, golf carts. They're not the only ones. Other things are being discussed. And that's just the work session that we're talking about and pulling resources together for a policy discussion, how you want, if and how you want to legislate and regulate these things, if you want to allow them. If you do, then it's drafting an ordinance. And that takes, I mean, it doesn't necessarily take time once we get that guidance, but it's another meeting cycle or two, and then you have to publish and do things. And to Brent's point, it's like opening a can of worms when we talked about parking a year or two ago. We started with a very narrow issue and it turned into a really big handful of issues just because there was a lot of things in the ordinance that hadn't been looked at for a while. So I think everything he's hitting on the right notes, we can work on something collaboratively as quickly as the council wants. haste makes waste, I think too. And I want to be careful about how we legislate and create, if you want to create new ideas and regulations, how we do that. So totally up to the council and we'd be happy to work through things at your cadence.

Dave, I have a question for you. So taking out all the other things, let's just say that we're strictly going to look at golf carts and you know what, we're going to concern ourselves with all the other you know, motorized bicycles and all that later. So we just stick to the golf cart. I mean, we're going to, realistically, we're going to look at it in August. We have, you know, I'm sure there'll be discussion and a rewrite and then policy and then things have to be posted for changing ordinances. I mean, what, I mean, right? If we're going to change the ordinance, don't we have to have a certain amount of time it's posted or am I wrong?

There's a requirement about posting ordinances, but it's just 10 days before consideration. So it's not substantial. There's no public hearing requirement for this type of ordinance. So we're not talking too much time there, Council Member Conrad, but there is some lead time required there. Okay.

Okay, so I mean, I think to be realistic and honest with our folks who are visiting tonight asking these questions, it probably won't be for, again, the season of 2026. And this is, you know, unfortunately how, you know, changing ordinances and things like that works. you know council meets twice a month and so we have to follow that guideline i am really again happy to re-look at this golf cart issue it was something that we talked about very extensively um during the utv ordinance so i'm glad it's come back i'm glad we're going to be talking about again but i mean i just think we have to be really i just we have to be realistic with the public to say that that there's lead time between our meetings and the process of things. But that doesn't mean we take it any less seriously. It just means that maybe we can't move things quite as fast as you would hope.

So that's a really long way of saying what I said 10 minutes ago.

Super long way. Go ahead, Fred. Go ahead.

It probably goes without saying, but for those that aren't involved, when we provide the research, there's still a break point of the council saying, like, we'll provide the overview of the policy and the ordinance discussion, but I feel like the conversation is, like, heading towards you're already doing it, but the first work session is you deciding whether or not you want to change anything. You might say, we don't want to do this, and then it – kind of dies on the vine like that you don't prepare draft ordinances you don't do anything and so just for the audience members or those that are watching like that's a critical step it's not you're not i don't hear you saying we're and you could tonight like we want to change it i hear that you're interested in talking about the topic And so I just want to make sure that there are clear expectations on next steps, that there isn't a movement like the change is going to either happen this year or next year. We're going to present you with information for you to decide whether or not you want to make a change at all.

That is my expectation. Mine too.

Yeah, I agree. I don't think there's anything else I can add to this discussion now. We'll take it at the work session.

So, to be determined, Brent will let you know. We also post the agendas and the work session agendas for both. Are work sessions available? They can attend. Our work sessions are what I refer to as our kitchen table conversation. So it's a family dinner table conversation. There's no room for community comment at those meetings, which is the asterisk. However, we almost always have, I mean, we always have council meetings immediately after. And the very first item on the agenda, so it's really important you get here right at 7, is community comment meetings. And you can have time at that point in the meetings. And if you want to come back at our next meeting, we meet on the first and third Mondays of the month. If it's a holiday, we meet the next night, the Tuesday night.

Sure. So just to clarify, when we had spoken previously, there is no interim disability permit available in Carver like our neighboring city of Chaska has, even though Chaska does not allow it. You know what? I'm sorry.

I'm going to ask you to connect with Brent about that after the meeting. Okay. OK. OK. So requests, updates?

Done. Done.

Done. Christy? Done. OK. Just a few updates from me. On May 22, Les Schwab had their ribbon cutting. They had a great event. They literally were just finishing up putting on new tires on the Bountiful Basket van that they have. They've already replaced the tires on the CAP Agency's van. If I could choose a category of business that I would want in the city of Carver, it would be one that is a good community member, regardless of the goods or services that they're selling. And Les Schwab is definitely checking that box. So really great guys there. And I hope to see them be very successful in our community. On May 25, it was Memorial Day. And I rode along with the Carver County Sheriff's Department and did cemetery visits. three cemeteries that are in the carver ish area we started out at east union then we did st nick's and then we went to mount hope everything was looking fantastic in the mount hope cemetery so thanks uh andrew for your cruise work on that and then um yesterday i was back at east union church for the second time in a week. They have a speaker series that they do after their church services on Sunday. And I was there last year. This was my second year in a row of doing presentations there. I told Brenda, part of... Part of what I was talking about, I mentioned the city app, and we got a couple of folks who downloaded it right then and there. Brenda mentioned this already, but the first farmer's market of the season is tomorrow from 3 to 6, so that definitely means it's summer in the city of Carver. And then hopefully you all will be joining me on, I think it's Wednesday night, at the ribbon cutting for Creekside Park. That's taking place at 5.30. That is all I have for this evening. I would like to have a motion to adjourn, but I just want to remind everybody that we have a CEDA meeting immediately to follow.

I'll make a motion to adjourn.

Motion by Parchment.

I'll second.

Second by Sayre. Any further discussion? We don't have to do that. Can we get a roll call vote, please?

Council Member Pascoe. Aye. Council Member Sayre. Aye. Council Member Pershmann.

Aye.

Council Member Conrad.

Aye.

Mayor Johnson.

Motion passes. All right. I'm going to call the meeting to order of the Carver Economic Development Authority for June 1st at 820. Can I get approval of the minutes from our last meeting on April 6th?

I'll make a motion to approve the meetings of April 6, 2026, CEDA meeting.

Motion by Pascoe.

I'll second.

Second by Pershman.

Any further discussion? Can I get a roll call vote, please?

Council Member Pascoe. Aye. Council Member Sayer. Aye. Council Member Pershman.

Aye.

Council Member Conrad.

Aye.

Mayor Johnson.

Aye. Motion passes. All right. The Downtown Restoration Forgivable Loan Program for 200 Broadway. Mr. Merrick.

Thank you members of the EDA. And thank you for that reminder of the meeting.

Didn't go so well last time.

Yeah, the city's economic development authority maintains a downtown restoration forgivable loan program to promote historically appropriate exterior improvements in the district. You may remember at your last meeting that you made changes to that program. Greg and Meg Witt have applied for funding to conduct a tuck-pointing project at their property at 200 Broadway Street North. Tuck-pointing is considered a maintenance project for historic buildings. It doesn't require a certificate of appropriateness. That said, I did forward the application on to the HPC. So they are made aware of it. The overall cost of the project is $6,500. The project is eligible for $3,250 in program funds. So in your packet, you can see the application, property photograph, and then subsidy agreement and agreement note prepared by the city attorney. Happy to answer any questions that you may have.

I think this looks like a great project. I will make a motion to award a $3,250 in downtown restoration for giveable loan funds to Greg and Meg Witt for tuck pointing for their project to 200 Broadway Street North.

I'll second.

Motion by Johnson, second by Pershmann. Any further discussion? Can I get a roll call vote, please?

Council Member Pascoe. Aye. Council Member Sayer. Aye. Council Member Pershmann.

Aye.

Council Member Conrad.

Aye.

Mayor Johnson.

Aye. Motion passes. Can I get a motion to adjourn?

I'll make a motion to adjourn.

Motion by Council Member Pershmann. I was second. Second by Council Member Pascoe. Gets late. Can I get a motion? Wow, I'm totally losing it. I'll do roll call vote. Roll call vote, please.

Council Member Pascoe. Aye. Council Member Sayre. Aye. Council Member Pershmann.

Aye.

Council Member Conrad. Aye. Mayor Johnson. Aye, motion passes. Good evening, everyone.