Township Board - Regular Meeting

How can you hard? You guys ready? I don't know. Good evening. Today is Tuesday, March 3rd. Please stand for the pledge of allegiance. I pledge algiance 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. Heather, would you please take role? Council member Ratitz here. Mayor Prom Smith here. Council member Laskkey here. Mayor Sullivan here. Council member Kek here. Council member Gowski here. Council member Ruska here. City manager here. City attorney here. DPW director here. Finance director here. Planning and zoning administrator

here. Police chief here. Fire chief here. City engineer here. Roll call complete.

Thank you. Uh disclosure of conflict of interest. Any council member with a conflict of interest regarding an agenda item should disclose at this time. Public hearings, we have none. Citizens comment on agenda related items. Any citizens with correspondent to be distributed to council should provide items to the city clerk prior to the start of the meeting or after the meeting has adjourned limited to 5 minutes. Consent agenda. All items marked with an asterct are considered by the city manager to to be routine matters. Prior to approval, any member of council may have an item removed and taken up during the regular portion of the meeting. Items include approval of minutes, cash balances, revenue and expenses, balance sheet, consideration of TJ's block party and concert, consideration of the 2026 run the peer racing event, consider consideration of Trinity Lutheran School 5K color run. At this time, council will take action to approve the consent agenda as presented. Is there a motion?

I'll make a motion. I will second that. Heather, would you please take role? Council member Ratitz, yes. Mayor Prom Smith, yes. Council member Laskkey, yes. Mayor Sullivan, yes. Council member Kek, yes. Council member Gowski, yes. Council member Resga, yes.

Motion approved. Thank you. Consideration of release of protective covenants on Renaissance park lots. Some of the council members have expressed interest in removing the protective covenants placed on the Renaissance park lots after 30 years. There is concern that the covenants may be hindering development in this area. The declaration of protective covenants for Manasty Renaissance Park Industrial Park could be released upon receipt of approval no less than twothirds of lots within the development. The city currently owns two of the 12 lots. At this time, council could take action to authorize the city manager and city attorney to prepare and release of declaration of protective covenants for the Manaste Renaissance Industrial Park for the lot owner's consideration and upon receiving twothirds approval, further authorize the mayor and clerk to execute any documents necessary to complete the release. Is there a motion?

I'll make that motion. Is there a second? I'll second. Any discussion?

I think we should discuss it a bit. I are we just wanting to remove everything? I mean, some of them were good. I didn't like the idea that they had to come to the city to make the purchase and ask our approval to sell, but on some of the things like underground utilities, uh the access like to M55 versus, you know, I think some of them were good. So, if we vote on this release, does that just mean it all goes out the door? So, I'm going to invite um Jeff Mucula to give some background on this, but um I also have the zoning administrator for Manasse Township here. So, they're going to be subjected these lots are in Manaste Township. It's still going to have those requirements, but um we'll start here and we'll we'll talk through it. Um so, Jeff, if you could.

Yeah, just a little bit of background. Uh I was the project manager for the engineer of record when the industrial park was uh developed and the state of Michigan created renaissance zones throughout the state of Michigan to help um um create industry and competitive and basically um these were kind of tax-free zones. So when the uh when the site was approved by the state, the city began design of that industrial park and applied for and received both a grant from the state of Michigan and a loan from the state of Michigan. The loan could be forgiven based on a number of jobs that were created within the Renaissance zone. So every job that was created forgave part of that loan repayment. And obviously the city's goal was to create enough jobs uh where we didn't have to pay that back and converted the loan into a grant. The layout of the park itself was modeled after Haidider Brower uh industrial park up in Traverse City. And if you go up there and you drive by it, you don't even know it's an industrial park. It's wooded. The lots were laid out so that there was vegetative and kind of forestry uh surrounding them. The lots were bigger so that industry could be created. It's kind of the opposite of what the industrial park is at the end of Washington Street where there is no there's no trees. It's just wide open and it's just building after building. So the uh protective covenants were kind of a hybrid of those two issues. One was to create the park and the the feeling of that park um with the you know no access off of 55 making sure that it was all interior and and those sort of things. And then the rest of uh those covenants were to protect the city's rights so that we could create the jobs and try to get the infrastructure uh loan forgiven.

I just and so council member um Laskkey to your point yeah one of the elements in the restrictive covenants was kind of that access would be off of this wouldn't be off of 55 would be off of Renaissance Drive. I think Karen, if you'd like to come up, but I'm I don't know if um your zoning or if that's something and really this is a township issue. Um so if that's something they can incorporate when someone applies or plans a plan.

I'm sorry, Mr. Gamble. Um I'm the zoning administrator for Manacey Township. So, when dealing with a situation like this, the planning commission uh would recommend that the driveways would come off of the Renaissance Park versus um M55 and MDOT would have their input with this as well. So, that would satisfy that issue that you have brought up. Like what about underground utilities was mentioned in there? Well, we do have um an ordinance, Jeff, where I believe that that would cover it where they would be required to connect to the sewer and water if it's available.

Yeah. All the utilities are along Renaissance Drive. So, obviously, that's where but as far as wires, that is kind of an additional burden to place on the developer to put wires underground. So, I don't know that that would stay in place if those were. But that's like these are the kinds of things that place all additional burdens on developers when you say

well I guess I have to disagree with that because we have these covenants in place and from my point just dispert getting rid of them is the easy way out because we are not following the covenants we have in place. I most of the people don't build in the 18 months they're supposed to and they're never held accountable. So, is this just the city's way of taking the easy way out, or should we make amendments that we could actually make it better both ways? Because it's our own fault. We're not following the covenants that are in place. and you know make something that at least some kind of covenants that we could actually

but we don't have people knocking on the door begging for these because the covenants are in place and

you know we're giving that land away now you know 37 33,700 an acre minimum and we're giving it away for less than that. So now we're giving those people. Now this does this make business sense. We're selling that land. Well, sometimes it's costing us, you know, at a minimal under that amount. They're going to we're going to give them the ability to turn around and sell it and make a million dollars profit, you know, a half a million. That gentleman who bought I mean, he's in a sweet spot. Bought 100 acres for what? $1,000 an acre after we paid for everything. And now he can turn around and sell it. We're not taking into consideration that the soil was contaminated there. There was other issues there. I mean, we're not giving it away. If if it was undervalued or underpriced, people would have been scooping them up. We wouldn't have had them on the market for over a decade.

As I understand it, it was the covenants that quit them from scooping it up because of the requirements that were difficult, you know, to build in a certain amount of time. They couldn't sell it, you know. So that's, you know, when I talk to different people, that's what stopped them. One other question, the the sewer and water, if there's an issue on that, is that the city liability or is it the township liability?

Like if there was a water freeze out there, there was something because we do have water out there, right? We we have water we have public water and public sanitary sewer. So So it's treated exactly the same as it is in the city. So we would be responsible for it. If something were to go wrong, we maintain it up to a certain flush point. If there's a backup, we go we respond to it. Yep. So it is ours and we also get utility fees from that too, right? Absolutely. Absolutely. Yep. Yes. So we're we thinking that I mean I'm just that we just throw out all the covenants and just say nothing on it or so anybody

the the whole intent behind this was to have to create and maintain industrial man manufacturing employment that just hasn't happened. I can't the time I've been here over four years we've had a lot of people interested in the property and the first question is what do they intend to do there? how many jobs that they can create. We've turned away a lot of people wanting to purchase these because they don't have, you know, they want to do self storage. They want to do um just things that aren't creating employment opportunities. Um as council member Raza mentioned, there is, you know, you're supposed to construct within a year and then you're supposed to have complete construction within 18 months. You said it hasn't been followed. It's one of those things where we have these in place, but then there's it's costly to go after to find uh to go after these people legally through the court system to hold them accountable. Um, and I think Blake can talk about that a little bit, but then there's a repurchase. So, there's all these things, but it's costly to enforce these as well. And if we're not going to enforce them, I think that's the point. It's kind of like what's at this point, it's been almost 30 years. Do we want to continue with this or Yeah. Do we want to spend money on legal fees to enforce these things? But either way, there's going to be a little bit of a cost. But I think this was set up with good intentions. The one of the things Jeff brought up this morning was that I think when this was first set up, um, we were one of the few Renaissance zones and then the state started giving these away more and more

and so it wasn't unique and so there were many options. Um, we are still pursuing with the 40 acre site. Um, Andrew Stafford's done a really good job with and put a lot of effort with with the city's help to put in on my site, the 40 acre site. So, we're still trying to attract, but we're using the current tools that the state has to put on the state website for employers to, you know, we're highlighting that property as a place for a manufacturer to come. Um, but this particular incentive, I think, has kind of run its course. And is it was it a good idea? Yes. But did it did it attract employers? I wouldn't I think we can look back and look at the properties there now and say it didn't probably didn't come to fruition.

Just another point, this those protective covenants only pertain to the platted property. So that's uh north of East Lake Road. Um, all the property that the city owns south of East Lake Road and then east of that on along M55 are not subject to this. It's just the platted industrial park.

And just to clarify, we released the covenants. We're still going to have the zoning restrictions from hate to say restrictions, but guidelines from the Manaste Township. It's not sound like it's going to be a free-for-all. We've had the property for over 20 years, and as Bill said, they're not knocking down the doors. And you may have talked to a handful of people, but 20 years is a long time and it's still empty. It's time to do something with it instead of kicking this can down the road. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think we only own two lots that are left in the PL. And we just sold one parcel last year

and three parcels this year. So, I think that's pretty good sales. I mean because I think people now understand that the covenants aren't being adhered to. I agree with that. Yeah. So yeah, we don't we don't want to be the entity that says come buy this property to enhance the economic opportunities and manasty and wink wink. We're not we're not going to enforce anything. Right. So, I I agree with you that we need to uh get some information from our attorney and the city manager about what that could look like.

Um I feel like I I agree that any agreement that's been over 20 years, uh we should get fresh eyes on it. And no offense, I'm I'm just one lady who lives in Manaste. I'd rather have our attorney uh on that and um that firm and their expertise look at more recent updates uh so that we are doing what uh we're being responsible, we are communicating responsibly and we're attracting businesses uh responsibly too.

I think the last thing is I think Bill you'd be good at that is contacting like the one sold for 675,000. what is their feeling? And sometimes when you buy land in a place that has covenants, you say, "Oh, this is a good thing. It's like an HOA or whatever." But and sometimes you say, "Oh, thank goodness. I'd rather have more neighbors here get rid of them." But I would almost They did pay quite a bit for that property. I'd almost want a little bit of their input on it.

And Liz, that's the next step, right? Is that twothirds of the property owners have to agree to it's we I like that we're all talking like it's our decision. I love that. But it ultimately it it isn't. And so um what's before us is to get those people the information about what that agreement might look like uh in advance of hey let's just re re let's lift all these restrictions. How do you feel about that? I'd rather have something in my left hand ready to go.

Yeah. So, this is I I appreciate you making this our first step is uh you know getting with our attorney and Bill you taking the lead on this so that uh we're being responsible. I feel like that's really important. But the first step is to pass this so they can do that. Thank you. That's the first because that does talk about the two/3s. Yeah. It's not like it's unilateral our decision. Yes. This is going to authorize them to make those changes. Yeah. and put some put something together that makes sense and that is uh responsible of this body and uh the people that are purchasing from us. But I think the motion is to release all the covenants. We'd have to change the motion to release and

and Blake it's to create an instrument to potentially release but it would all ultimately it would be subject to getting 2/3 the city has yeah that one6th of what the two of the 12 properties but I read that to be that's correct. So the motion is to release all of the covenants. So obviously mechanically you can propose a partial release. So, we would have to approach all of the lot owners with draft language releasing a portion of the covenants um to get that twothirds approval. I see. Thank you, Blake. So, it's it's the lot owner's decision. Yeah. This is just giving us the mechanism, as you said, to do it or to give them the option

and to create a a revised whatever we want to call it, revised covenant. Revised covenants. But either way, we have to have twothirds of the lot owners. Yes. permission. Correct. Yeah. But I think at the same time we want to release it and then provide uh their books and then there's their their vote comes that final.

So just some historic looking through the old documents there was a time when the city owned the majority so they just did a restated covenants and they kind of modified some things. They had an ad hoc group. Um, I think based on just the conversation I could have Blake and I can work on a draft letter to the lot owners, kind of see if there's an interest in um, releasing the restrictive covenants or having a conversation about it. But to your point, I do think there's some rumblings like people who followed it who see other people not following it

and just knowing that it is ultimately we'd be responsible for taking people to court and it's a burden on the city to go to circuit court to enforce on these. So that's kind of at this point it would be something we try to enforce that's in Manacey Township but spending city money on this type of to find relief which is I think as council you probably want to know if you're spending money to to enforce in something outside the city like that. Blake does that cover it? You said that

Yep. This is not the equivalent of enforcing your municipal ordinances in district court. You're more situated like a private property owner. You would have to bring a civil lawsuit in circuit court to enforce these and restrictive covenant enforcement generally is very expensive and timeconuming and you'd really have to look at the cost benefit um of of enforcing these which is why I think maybe how the conversation began. We have this covenant that we're not enforcing. So, let's create a covenant, an amended one or revised one that is enforcable but yet has some safeguards for the community

and the township. Yeah, I guess you want to spend city money to enforce on covenants in Massie Township is really the what the crux of this issue is. That isn't what I said. I said we have a covenant. Yes. with rules that we're not enforcing. So, we need to change the covenants to something we can live with and are willing to enforce because what we have is discouraging people because you you're looking at this property and it's got these stiff covenants on it. So, it turns you off. So, you want to update the covenants. Yeah.

To so they're enforceable and then spend taxpayer dollars in Manacey Township to enforce those covenants. if it's necessary. Well, that's what he just said and you told him that's not what you said. Like that's exactly what you're saying.

I I think I I understand that the the attraction of keeping some control over some of the aesthetic pieces or you know of that property is there. But I think um for the taxpayers and for the property owners like either it is a covenant or it's not. and and if it's not, then they follow the laws and the rules of everyone else who buys property in this county and this state. And to hold it uh somehow different or sacred for a loan that has long since passed and conditions that have long since passed is I think we're creating a burden, a financial burden and a legal burden that we can't back up. So with that in mind, I I'm I agree that lifting the covenant would help the city and and it would anyone who's buying those prop the property would understand I own this property free and clear

just like if it were down the road. Well, then in that vein, there's probably no reason to even spend money to change the covenants. Well, we and just leave everything the same. Well, except that then we're we're it we're forever kicking this can down the road. Well, we only have two more lots to sell and they'll probably sell this year. So or next year or or the entity next you suggest that we lift or keep either way. For example, the you have to build in 18 months.

I I don't think that's I'm just speaking my mind. I don't think that's enforceable and I don't want to spend our city taxpayer money to enforce that in someone else's township. Albe it a beautiful township. Yes. And no offense. So, and we're not enforcing it. So, if that's the case and everyone's feeling we don't want to spend the money, then we should leave the covenant just as they are. We're not enforcing them and we shouldn't pay the lawyers anything more to revise it or go around and get twothirds votes or anything. Okay, that's what I say.

I understand your point of view and I respectfully hold a different point of view, but now I feel more educated about my point of view. So, thank you for bringing that forward so that we could so that we could hear it out loud. Are we ready to vote? Yes. Heather, would you please take role? Council member Ratitz, yes. Mayor Prom Smith, yes. Council member Laskkey, no. Mayor Sullivan, yes. Council member Kek, yes. Council member Gowski, no. Council member Ruska, no. Motion approved.

Thank you. Consideration of local revenue sharing board grant applications. The local revenue sharing board, LRSB, distributes 2% of the funds from Little River Casino. The deadline for the 2026 cycle 1 applications is Friday, March 13, 2026 at 5:00 p.m. City staff have prepared two grant applications for submission. This agenda item includes two separate motions, one for each application. One. At this time, council can take action to authorize the submission of a grant application to the local revenue sharing board for the fire department in the amount of 54,87740 for the life pack 35 monitoring defiill. Is there a motion? Motion. Second. Is there any discussion?

Heather, would you please take role? Heather, I have a point of order. I'm I'm on the revenue sharing board or as the city representative. Do I abstain or am I vote? Thank you. Thank you. Council member Resga, yes. Council member Gabowski, yes. Council member Kek, yes. Mayor Sullivan, yes. Council member Laskkey, yes. Mayor Prom Smith, yes. Council member Ratitz, yes. Motion approved. Thank you. At this time, council can take action to authorize the submission of a grant application to the local revenue sharing board for the police department in the amount of 15,43 for the LAR device and radar units. Is there a motion? I'll make that motion. I'll support it.

Any discussion on this one? I guess I'm just curious how the police department uses the LAR in practice. That's a great question because I just the lighter or radar. Which one do you want? I get the radar part. I just don't understand the You know what a LAR is? Yeah, it's it's like underground stuff. Well, shapes and different densities and stuff.

That's kind of the science behind it, but it's a handheld radar uh that officers can hold. So, the value of having a LAR is, especially in a uh a city like this with parks and tight corners, you can't park a patrol car past a 12 degree deviation. So you can't run the radar in your car necessarily to get the corners and get the distance. So we used to use 15 years ago is we use a lighter. So it's a handheld LAR device and allows us to capture the same thing that your car but again you can get you can maneuver easier. You can capture traffic let's say around a loop in a park that you can't capture uh in a car. So again we haven't utilized this tool in 15 years. ours. Um, and we've got employees who are really um, uh, support enforcement of those things. And, uh, so we're going to breathe life back into our LAR program to utilize speed enforcement in those areas so we can have, you know, safe parks, safe neighborhoods, safe school zones.

Boy, was I off how you were going to use Well, the science was kind of right a little bit. Yeah, that's what I'm used to hearing. That's why I didn't understand. That's cuz you don't get speeding tickets. That's why you're a pure soul. Why don't you ask me? Council member Gabowski, how did you used to write speeding tickets? Did you hear the question? How did you How did you used to write tickets? Stopwatch speeding tickets. Well, we use the old ones where the thing had to go down and then you had to make sure it held the where the speed was. You saw how fast the horses were running. Ouch. Thanks, Chief. Father, would you please take role? Council member Radits. Yes. Mayor Prom Smith, yes. Council member Laskkey, yes. Mayor Sullivan, yes. Council member Kek,

yes. Council member Gabowski, yes. Council member Ruska, yes.

Motion approved. Thank you. Consideration of the West River Street skate contract award. The Downtown Development Authority DDA has been working for several years to upgrade the streetscape along River Street in accordance with the streetscape study. project was outlined to renovate and upgrade West River Street between Maple and Spruce Streets, creating an event space, bumpouts, resetting existing pavers, and repaving the city or the street. The city was awarded a Michigan Economic Development Corporation MEEDC revital revitalization and placemaking wrap grant in the amount of 756,825 to implement the project. The project was publicly bid out with the city receiving three bids and was optimized to limit the additional funds from the city and the DDA while the meeting was the intent of the project. The DDA is expected to allocate additional funds at their next meeting. At this time, council could take action to award the construction contract to Trident Construction and approve change order number one, amending the major street budget accordingly, contingent on the DDA allocating additional funding at their March 11th, 2026 meeting and authorizing the city manager to execute the subsequent grant agreements contingent on city approval. Is there a motion?

I'll make a motion. Is there a second? I'll second. Any discussion? Yeah, let's talk about a little bit, don't you think? That's a big project.

I just wanted to point out the community foundation did provide a letter which I sent to council. They're interest they're they provided financial support to the project because it's going to improve accessibility to the riverwalk and that um basically plaza area also access to the park. So it was due to the the improvements over in that plaza area that's what they were interested in. So, um, between that and the wrap grant, over a million dollars and just over a million dollars in grant funding towards the project. So, just wanted to point that out to city council.

Okay. I've got a question on the the total cost, I believe, is like 1.89 million. The construction cost 1.56 million. The difference on that is like 33. And is that like in I mean we've we have an architect uh already fleece and vanderbring I guess it was and then right side and so I'm just questioning like is is there 300,000 that's going to go into the inspection I that was part I'm not sure.

So there's there's engineering and there's inspection and there's contingency in the budget but yeah let the engineer talk about that. So in the in the total cost breakdown that you see, it doesn't have any of the fleece and vandrink stuff in there at all. Have we already Where does that come in? That's all been expended by the DDA. So it's already paid. Is that what we're saying? Yeah. Okay.

Yep. And then the engineering costs that you see on the project total right here, um most of it's been exp or half of it's been expended already from design, um bidding, grant application, grant administration, survey work. uh three threedimensional renderings, design meetings. Um a lot of a lot of that stuff has already been taken care of um with that um portion. I think it was like 40% actually. And then the remainder is to pay for uh full-time inspection, staking, closeout documents, more grant administration, uh material testing, staking, construction man administration, all that stuff.

Because it just seems a little bit You know, Trident probably has a project manager, correct? And so then I know you're the owner's representative, correct? Overseeing it. And how how much is left? Like 110. Is that what the inspection cost? The the inspection portion of of it is about 110,000. Yep. It's that's estimated at I think 10 or 10 to 14 weeks of full-time inspection with somebody on site the whole time making sure that everything's being built. to specification and to the uh drawings. Um, and that's typical what we do on on all city projects.

Okay. That just still seems a little high. Like I Tridon is a reputable firm or we wouldn't have hired them and they have the drawings. I mean 50 50 hours a week of a full-time person down there. Mhm. Is that is that what you That's that's typically what we've done since we've hired here. Yes. Who's liable then for the project or something? Do you do you you're representing us, but the liability goes back to who's liable if there's an issue?

Well, so we we make sure like I said before that the contractor constructs the the project per plan and specification. So if they do not construct it per plan or specification, we're responsible to make sure that the correction to the the site or whatever isn't built the right way gets fixed by the contractor. So that way the city or the DDA, whoever our client is, doesn't have to hash that out with the contractor. In the event that you don't use the 50 hours per week, say something there's a delay in materials or whatever, it's it would we be charged for that or you can take a break or how does that work?

So I our our hourly rates are are figured into that. So if we don't use all of it then when we wouldn't but um typically we we estimate it based off of the construction schedule. Okay. Um so usually the contractor uses the full schedule I guess. I'm really surprised you're saying 50 hours a week because

I can't picture someone from Spicing being down there watching for 50 hours a week. And I I can just reflect back on our last Riverwalk project where, you know, we had community members noting things that weren't correct. So, how is there a disconnect? you know, if we're paying for 50 hours a week oversight. So, it it does vary from project. On the Riverwalk project, we did what it was probably 10% of that or something. Absolutely.

I was just going to say when whenever any of these projects begin, we've got a process with the engineer of record where they lay out a scope of work. They they form the estimates for us and then uh we meet monthly. In fact, we did just did this morning um where we go through all of those all those fees, the scope of services, and make sure that they they are providing what the city's needs are. Um that's actually a very good example where the Riverwalk doesn't need full-time construction. When they were doing the decking, that was a daily check. When there was the sheet piling, it was full-time inspection. When they're painting, they may check it every couple days. You know what I mean? a project like this downtown and that scope of work is is more full-time. Um when we're doing buried utilities, water and sewer, we want eyes on that full-time because you can't see it after they do the work. Um so I just wanted to come up and just reaffirm that the scope of services has already been reviewed by us and we feel is appropriate. Um as far as the liability, I I think Lucas answered that pretty well. their job as the front line is to find it, fix it on a daily basis. But then when we have items like on the Riverwalk where citizens were pointing things out, those were things that were we are aware of, but there's a the process there is that they get put in the punch list and the punch list is usually done at the end of the project. Like there's still uh things on the truck route, there's still things on Washington Street that have to be repaired and fixed and before we release the final funds to the contractor. And then the contractor carries uh a warranty period of a year from defects.

So um Mr. Stafford gave a nice presentation on everything, but then we have the value engineered things to bring costs in. Can you kind of like summarize what exactly happened there? Because you know I can look at the line items but not fixing these bricks doesn't mean a whole lot to me.

Yeah. So, so in our process for design on a project like this on a street, we break every single item of the project into their own pay items. So that way our inspector and the contractor as they put in pipe, there's a line item for pipe and we measure the footage for that. There's a line item for asphalt, you know, everything's broken into things that can be measured by both parties and agreed upon every single day. Um in in the design we had I think a hund there's like 110 pay items on this job. It was pretty complex. Um and typically when we do full reconstruction projects we estimate things like um brand new manhole castings um curb spot repairs uh stuff like that that is is really nice to have in the project. But the existing structures out there might be okay. So, you know, we met as a group and we're like, "Okay, maybe we don't need to replace all the castings and, you know, saved whatever it was, 30 grand or whatever." And then went through every single line item and did that exercise for everything.

Okay. So, usually we keep those in as like contingency items. If there's budget for it, we might as well do it right now while the road's ripped up. Um, but it doesn't necessarily have to be. It was things like that. It Yeah, it was mostly things like that. It wasn't like, well, we decided not to do the northeast corner for some reason or something.

No, there was a lot of very painful conversations about what do we do if we can't find the the money from um, luckily the foundation chipped in a4 million dollars, which is awesome. um we would have probably had to cut out an entire block of the project because we like the agenda item says uh or was it um Jeff or Bill mentioned but we're trying to meet the goal goal of the project and if we were to cut out a whole block obviously we're not meeting the goal so okay that was most of the value engineering we're good it'll be good okay thanks Lucas yep other would you please take role council member Radits yes mayor prom Smith Yes. Council member Laskkey. Yes. Mayor Sullivan.

Yes. Council member Kek. Yes. Council member Gabowski. Yes. Council member Resa. Yes. Motion approved.

Thank you. Consideration of boards and commissions. City clerk has taken action to advertise vacancies on the board of review. Brownfield road development authority, compensation commission, downtown development authority, tree commission, and zoning board of appeals. Mayor and manager appointments require a motion. Second, and council voided support. Nominations for council appointments do not require a second. After all nominations are made, council votes on the nominees until one nominee receives majority support. Following applications have been received. Board review one alternate member vacancy term ending 123128. The purpose here property valuation appeals council appointment uh Taylor 5818 street. The downtown development authority one at large member vacancy term ending 63028. Purpose central business district and tax increment financing authority manager appointment. We have Chad Lefay 7 Filer Street and Brandon M 376 Third Street. At this time, council Amander could take action to appoint appointments as noted for the board of review. Is there a nomination?

I'll nominate Thaad Taylor, 5818 Street for the term ending 123128. Thank you. Heather, would you please take role? Council member Ratitz, Taylor. Mayor Prom Smith, Taylor. Council member Laskkey, Taylor. Mayor Sullivan, Taylor. Council member Kek Taylor. Council member Gowski Taylor. Council member Ruska Taylor. Nomination approved. Thank you. Uh, Bill, do you want to make your appointment for the DDA? Yes. I'd like to nominate Brandon Omen for the term ending 63028. Okay. Is there a motion to support? I'll make that motion. Second. I'll make a motion. Heather, would you please take role?

Council member Reddits Omen. Mayor Prom Smith. Council member Laskkey. Omen. Mayor Sullivan. Omen. Council member Kek. Omen. Council member Gabowski. Omen. Council member Ruska. Omen. Motion approved. Thank you. Citizens comment. This an opportunity for assistance and attendance to comment on municipal services activities or other areas of city involvement limited to five minutes. Letter submitted to council will not be publicly read. You moving. Okay. Mr. Gamble. Uh, nothing at this time. Thank you. Uh, Miss Rosa,

um, regarding the TJ's block party application, in the past we received the like a page that indicated that neighboring businesses had signed off and that wasn't included. Is that still going to be done? Because I couldn't tell from your cover letter if that had happened or not. Yes. So, that was done. Um, and she did break it down into two separate pages because when she applied for the DDA, there was a couple missing signatures and so we made our recommendation contingent upon her getting those remaining three signatures. Okay.

And so, it should have been in the document. Um, yeah, it it should have been at the tail end of the document though. I Okay. If it's missing, I can provide that. Well, I believe you. Okay. Perfect. because I thought that's not like him to not have his all stocks and done and everything. Um, and then also at the RAM still coming up on Saturday is the International Fly Film Festival, fly fishing films festival at 7 p.m. And a new exhibit is opening on Sunday at noon called the language of women and that's it.

Thank you, Mr. Gabowski. Um, it was in a paper that we have 89 unregistered short-term rentals. Are what are we working on that thing to get those registered? I sent a letter to that list today. So those are so we have the granite kiss agreement and we pull all of the Airbnbs that are listed in the city and then I cross reference with all of the applications that we've received and there's 89 some of them are hotels not all of them are rentals as I was going through um but I sent out a letter and then we hope to get

and then what will we find if we find that there yeah we would follow the ordinance we would probably because it's the first time. I would assume we're going to issue a few warnings just to be cautious on. A lot of them are registered as rentals and haven't updated to the short-term rental status. Um, most live out of state. I would say that's a pretty common thing or just they're up to date in the rental program and they're not local and so probably aren't I feel like we need to stay on that. went through.

Yeah. And and that's the the point of the letters and and it's a it's a pretty hefty process, I would say. And so Jerry and I have been going through and processing the applications and there's not a super efficient way to compare that list with the Granicus list is the only issue and keeping up to date with that is it is a bit tedious of cross referencing and deleting duplicates and things like that. But I got my list of letters that went out and then um we'll see what kind of push back we get back. We'll we'll follow up and escalate as needed. Okay.

We did get a couple after it was put in the paper. Um so I think just I'll keep bringing it up at planning commission meetings and as long as we keep putting it out, I think we get a couple more every time and come up with new strategies. Well, it'd be nice if we, you know, when you get these things done with that, the manager gets us some kind of notice so we can know that something's getting done with these things for new. Yeah. When when they, you know, you get get a bunch of them registered. Be nice to know that we have 130. I think I think what he's saying is as we repair that list,

let us know that we're down to 75 or Yeah, I can let I try to keep it in the planning in this month's planning commission packet because I didn't have time to act on that list in between, but for the most part, I include that list um with our permit report and so I can share that with Bill on a monthly basis if that's often enough or more freent. Certainly if you'd prefer. That's fine. We get some notice. Okay. So we get notice that it's being I can share that list with you, Bill, if you Yes, that's a great suggestion. Thank you for taking the time to communicate with us. Okay, that's K. I Nothing at this time. Thank you, Mr. Nothing at this time. Mr. Smith, I'm all set. Thank you, Miss Laskkey.

Just one question. Do we ever hear back from the oil on the well? So, the short answer is no. Um, Heather and I had to do a little bit of research to dig up the actual leases because those are the controlling documents. So, we've gotten those. I've sent them to Blake. He's looking them over to formulate the next steps and I believe Blake has or will be contacting the state on behalf of the city to see what So, that's where we stand right. Okay. Thanks for and any on the chill grants. Are we How are we coming on those? on you.

So the most recent step was the income verification. So before any contracts are signed, income documents can't be older than 6 months. And so as of now, we were ready to sign documents. We had to go through and reverify everyone's income. I would say we're probably a little over halfway through contracts being signed for that. and we're just working through as we're still taking bids for a couple projects that um the scope of work has changed or contractors or did you know that I mean you don't have to

so each household we only have one household that's utilizing the full 40 grand. So, of the 500,000, we distributed 40 to each of the 13. And then it came up that if you use over $25,000, you and the house is older than 78, you have to test for lead and then use that funding to abate the lead. And so, we scaled the projects down to 25. Um, I would say one is using almost the full 40. A couple are close to that 25. The lowest we have is only using 5,000 of the grant. um she's declined the rest of the funding. So, it's a pretty big mix, but I don't know the total. A lot of them are are right on the edge of that that 25. And we've worked to get as much of the funding allocated as we can.

The good news is they're working. I think Maddie and Jerry have done a good job. They're getting the contract signed. It's been very busy across the hall. Also, the first roof went up two weeks ago. Yep. Took advantage of that warm weather. So, we got another one going up right now. So, it's gearing up. It's It's happening. So, yes, that's great. Thank you. Motion to adjurnn. Make the motion.