City Council - Regular Meeting

and whatnot to get people to replace their lights far, far exceeding that $500. So yeah, at this point, it would be a $500 fee to us this year to participate.

OK. Do we know who our mechanics are going to be? Do you have that information, Tim?

I'm looking it up right now. I believe we have three of them that are in town. Elzer, Braith, and then, um, I think A&W, the one outside the town, I believe is a participant. Don't quote me on all those. I can look it up for you.

No, that's all right. I just, I do. Are any of them going to get excluded or can they, are they all eligible? They are.

Whoever wants to participate. Okay. Um, it's legacy. I'm sorry. Not A&W.

Okay.

Okay. Thank you.

Okay. Any other questions? If not, I guess I'll make a motion to approve the consent agenda. Second. We've got a second by Bruce Wolf. If there's no other questions, all in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposition? Okay, passes 4-0. Next, government agency, I don't see any representative of any other government agencies, so next we'll go on to the public forum. This is a time where people... I got the sheets. Go back. Um, this is a time where if anyone would like to speak to the council, uh, on any issues that are not on the agenda or in any public hearing, uh, there is a Jose, but I talked to Jose before and he says he was there. He, uh, basically talked at the public hearing at the planning commission and, and so it, uh, he does not request to be. So if there's no one, uh, who would like to speak to the council at this time, Okay. Next, we're going to go to the public hearing for the vacation of the flat there. Uh, so are we going to have an introduction and then we'll open the floor?

So, uh, as the city council would recall, um, back at our last meeting on June 15th, the city council introduced an ordinance for a vacation of, uh, two little areas of right away, right off first Avenue, um, kind of near the bus garage by the school and, uh, the city's, um, open yard up there and, uh, kind of east of chart and, uh, the MV building. In a nutshell, Mr. Sullivan, who is here tonight, purchased a couple of properties up there. One of the right-of-ways is between the two different properties that he bought, and then on the very north end, he's just looking to get rid of an easement there. Again, there's not any public utilities within those areas. We also contacted BevCom, Comcast, all the usual cable companies and everything. they did not indicate that they had any, uh, utilities within those, uh, easement areas or those right away areas. So we are looking to actually vacate both of those, uh, right of ways. They're all the alley, um, right away from the, uh, plot of new Prague out lots from the late 18 hundreds. And we do want to retain an easement over both of those areas just in case we do need to have some underground utility put through there. But the right away will vacate, uh, to Mr Sullivan. and it basically gives them a few extra feet to build some new buildings up there. And, uh, that he'll help his industrial zoning, uh, which was reestablished, um, uh, about a month or so ago as well. So it just helps the redevelopment of the property. So, uh, we do have to have a public hearing for the item here tonight and subject to that feedback. Uh, we could look at, uh, having the second reading of the vacating ordinance, um, again pending any public comment received.

Any questions? No, I'll make a motion to open the public hearing for ordinance for adoption number three, six, three vacation of public right away with a plan of new break.

I got a motion by Bruce Wolf, second by Sean Ryan to open the public hearing. All in favor say aye. Any opposition? Okay, so the public hearings open. Uh, the only person I have on the list is Pat Sullivan. If you would like to come and,

I really have nothing more to say. I just, if you have questions, I'm here to answer them.

Okay. Does anyone have any questions? No, I think we're good. Thanks, Pat. All right. Does anyone else like to speak on the subject of this vacation? I'll make a motion that we close the public hearing. Okay. Second. Okay. I have a motion by Sean Ryan, second by Bruce Wolf to close the public hearing. There's no other questions. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposition? Okay, the public hearing is closed. Now we can basically address the second reading of ordinance number 363. Does anyone have any questions or comments?

I do have a question. In the ordinance itself, after the last whereas clause, it says, now therefore the city of New Prague, Scott, and LeSueur counties ordain but this property is in Scott County.

Is there a reason? That typical language because our corporation covers both counties. That's how it is typically.

Okay. I just needed that clarification.

We'll only record it with Scott County.

Okay.

Any other questions? Okay. If not, I guess I'll make a motion to approve the, uh, ordinance number three 63 for the second reading.

I'll second. Go ahead.

I got a second by Sean Ryan. There's no other comments or questions. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposition? Okay, passes 4-0. City engineering projects. Are you going to do that or is Chris supposed to be online?

I am here. Can you hear me okay?

Yes.

Okay, well the first item I have in front of you tonight is the project updates memo. If there are specific questions on that, please let me know. I'll maybe highlight the lead service line project. So we did not receive certification of plans prior to June 30th. So I need to confirm with PFA what that means. All the documentation was sent to them by their schedule. They did ask us to submit for the 2027 intended use plan as a backup in case they did not get certification at a time, which is where we are now. So there is potential that project ends up bidding over winter for spring construction versus late fall for most likely spring construction. So I don't really see that affecting schedule too much, but just wanted to mention that project and As far as where that's at. So are there any other questions Chris?

I have a question on the 2026 project it says they're concentrating on the 3rd Street intersection first Are they gonna finish that first and then open it up or is that going to be closed through the whole eight weeks? I

So the schedule the contractor provided last Thursday was to complete removals at that intersection either end of last week or even early this week. And then they're gonna move south towards other intersections and start removals in those areas. The concrete crews are gonna be in next week to start putting in all the curb and gutter for the curb radii and the roundabout and splitters. And I think they had a tentative date of, maybe around the 20th of this month. So they have up to a month to have that intersection closed, but it sounds like that's probably gonna be closer to maybe three to four weeks as far as how long that the street closure will occur. So it won't be closed throughout the entire summer. It's just gonna be for a maximum of 30 days that that intersection can be closed.

Okay, thank you. I have a quick question on 10th Street too. Uh, or on that project, have you had any as a contractor complained about people still driving on that road? Can somebody say that there's still a lot of traffic being used even though that's the road is closer as part of it still open?

Maybe that south half, Matt, maybe you could answer that too or yeah, it's a completely closed between just south of high V's entrance and then it's closed at fifth street southeast. I noticed yesterday, Uh, when I took the dogs for a walk, I saw someone pull the barricades to the side. So people are driving through it. So it is closed back up this morning.

Okay.

So yeah, otherwise it should be a hard closure between, actually it's just north of fifth street. It's that village street is a hard closure all the way to the high V entrance. Okay. You can still get to Ivy off of 10th Avenue. You still get to Village Street, but anything in between there is a hard closure.

Okay. But it is okay to drive on that south of there, though, like on 5th to 12th?

Yeah, so you'll see it's partially closed, so we're trying to get residents only to use it that live in that neighborhood. We don't want it to be used for full access like it normally would be.

Okay.

Thank you.

So is Village obviously not a one-way now? It's a two-way during construction. Because that's where the temporary stop sign is up there? Yep. All right. Yep. But once everything's done, it'll go back to a one-way? That is correct. Yep.

Okay. Yep.

Well, are we going to leave the stop sign for all the people that go out that way? If you ask me to, yes. Okay. Any other questions for Chris on any of the projects? We might have lost Chris. Okay. Okay.

So that's the next one. Chuck. Yeah.

So the next thing is the city engineering projects update, uh, approval of the material testing.

Yep. So this is material testing for the 10th Avenue Southeast project. Uh, this year is rework project. Uh, we reached out to the three contractors that have done a material testing for us in the past. Um, just like last year, we only received one back. Uh, this year, Braun testing gave us a quote. Valley Testing is the one that has done it since 2003. And prior to that, it was Braun for four years. I guess I can let Chris finish.

Yeah, that's correct. So with three companies that are sent the proposals, only one responding, Braun Intertech, their proposal amount is $44,420. That includes about $14,000 towards the two minutes plant monitoring. This is a requirement of to have that work performed. There's a high likelihood that their material is going to come from a plant that's going to have a MnDOT inspector on site, which is pretty common in the metro area. So if that does occur, then that third party monitoring won't be needed. So this is just an estimate. I mentioned that because it's a little higher as far as percentage of the project than I was maybe expecting to see. I think a lot of that's just coming down to the number of trips that are required over kind of an extended period of time. And the relatively low cost, you know, million dollar project over two months is a little different than the $4 million projects we've been seeing over four months the last couple of years. So I think a lot of it's just the travel time. But with that said, this is a requirement of state aid to have all this testing done. So with the only one responding proposal, I would recommend approval to Brown Intertech.

What triggers the criteria for the testing? Is it because it's a state-aid road? Because we've done other street projects here within the city, and I don't remember seeing anything come before the council for testing of those materials.

The testing has been on all the street projects we've done, probably all of them, but definitely for the last four to five years, have all met the same requirement to meet what's called the SALT manual, which is a state

It sounded like a heart stomp.

Yeah.

Was he done?

No, I think he was talking to me. Are you able to answer this question, Matt?

I just know that when I... when you hit a state aid project like we did last year, it is a mandatory that you do, uh, you meet MnDOT specs, um, assuming that's the route he was going. But like you said, if the plant is already has a MnDOT spec already on there or a MnDOT inspector on there, we would not have to pay that additional 14,000. Now we're looking at the 30,000. So, um, I understand that.

Yeah. I, I just wanted to kind of get an idea of, you know, what triggers this testing. And so it's because it's the state aid.

Yep. Okay. Thank you. And why are we only getting one bid? Is, is that just the size and is it good that we're only, are we comfortable with only getting one bid? Well, I prefer all three of them to bid it, but, uh, is that the university of possible bidders?

We reached out to the two bidders that did not bid to see if they'd be submitting a bid and they said no. Um, they had enough workload for the summer. Um, last year we started the project early and still only got one bid. So, I'd love to tell you it's just cause we had a later bid, um, later project, but last year was the same, same story.

So only three that are capable of doing it and around this area marketplace.

Okay. And I, like I said, if you minus the 14,000 that I anticipate the 30,000, it's a little higher than expected, but I would agree with Chris that we were spreading out a million dollar project over eight months, not or eight weeks instead of, uh, the normal 12 week project, 12 to 16 week project that is a $4 million project. So, A lot of it is trips back and forth, which are spendy. So, yeah, I still do recommend and I feel comfortable using Braun. We've had no problem with them in the past. We have not, and neither have we with Chosen Valley that has done it the last four years, three years.

Okay. Any other questions? If not, I guess I'll look for a motion to approve the testing bid by Brontec.

So moved. Second.

Got a motion by Maggie Bass, second by Sean Ryan. If there's no other questions, concerns? All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposition? Okay, passes 4-0. Thanks, Chris, if you're still there.

He's not. He just said he's disconnected.

Okay. Tell him he can get ready to watch the soccer game. Sounds good. All right. Next on the agenda is... The compost center regarding our yard waste site, number 364. Who's going to take that?

Matt was going to take it, but apparently I'll take it. Matt, Tim, and I have been talking for a couple of months here about how to best, uh, handle, I guess, follow up to, um, and call it illicit use of the municipal yard waste site, but basically refuse and other improper items being put up there. Anything from, you know, we just call it generally illegal dumping to, um, you know, yard waste that maybe just put in the wrong spot. You know, we're not trying to necessarily, um, have huge penalties for that kind of behavior, but, there's a lot of junk that gets brought up there and we get a lot of people that do not pay city taxes or even commercial use that again, they're not paying taxes to, to have the waste brought up there. So, uh, we had an issue, I don't know, earlier this spring, Tim, you'd probably know the date when we were looking at actually citing somebody for, I think it was just refuse from not mistaken. and talking to, um, city attorney Scott Riggs, uh, about what we could, uh, impose for penalties. And it was explained that, uh, we likely didn't have a very good case based on our existing ordinance for nuisance and refuse, uh, type topics. And we did not have a specific ordinance for, you know, use of the yard waste and what penalties would be for not following the use of that. So Scott Riggs provided us a few different examples of communities that they've worked with and others that they did not work with, but they thought were good examples and we drafted a language for the ordinance, which is titled number three 64 for general regulations for the municipal yard waste site and basically provide some definitions of what an authorized user is. In this case it would be a city resident. You know, obviously we have city taxpayers that pay for that facility. Uh, not wanting to include those that do not live within the city limits and then identifying what illicit dumping is, which would be unacceptable materials or dumping in an unauthorized area of the site or outside of an hour. So we go through and identify, unacceptable things such as stumps, which can't easily be composted. Plastic bags, root balls are a problem up there. Large logs over six inches in diameter. Other materials from outside of New Prague, like the contractors that maybe just find it a convenient location to pull in and dump their materials there. Um, solid waste, you know, your mattresses, furnitures, appliances, uh, construction debris, and then, uh, dead animals and other has hazardous substances. So, um, trying to list all those things out. It's non exhaustive list. Uh, but basically the only items that really are allowed is yard waste from a city resident under six inches in diameter. So trying to make that clear for everybody. Uh, we do have the camera up at the site. We're able to get license plates. We can identify people through that quality of that camera. but really had no teeth to actually go through and um, do any enforcement on it. So the one thing that this ordinance would provide for, which is different from what the charter commission will be talking about, which would be an administrative citation. Scott Riggs wrote it at this point for what they call administrative penalties. Um, no, I'm not an expert on the difference between that and maybe chief Applin could comment on that. But, uh, in effect, you try to set it up similar to like a tobacco license, uh, where you have violations and first defense would be a hundred dollars and then up to a third offense, which within a 12 month time period would be up to a foreigner dollar administrative penalty and then loss of use of the site for a year. Um, obviously if they're not a resident, they're not losing anything. They would just get the fine. But, um, that's the ordinance we wanted to bring forward to at least, um, talk about tonight. We don't, we don't necessarily need to do the introduction if there's things that need to be changed, but we did want to bring the topic up so that we can have a little bit of teeth in enforcement and, uh, try to more than anything, really get the word out. I mean, we've tried to get the word out, but we have not been able to actually have a citation, um, that we can bring forward to anybody just due to the lack of, uh, an ordinance providing the backup to that. So I don't know if Matt or Tim have anything to add on top of that, but, um, that's kind of the topic, uh, we wanted to bring to you here today. And again, we don't need to introduce it, but, um, just want to get the discussion going. Um, and maybe there's a kind of a way we can parlay this into discussion with the charter commission and, um, administrative citations if there's a desire to do that alternatively.

So my question would be these penalties, To enforce them, do we have to go then to the court system?

It would, yes, unless we, as Ken talked about, unless we went with the administrative citations. It would go to the court, yes. The issue that we run into is we have we have city rules but not necessarily a city law or an ordinance that would prohibit say a root ball that's, you know, six feet in diameter. Um, the residential, we don't outline, you know, this is for residents only. Like we can put that up and say this is for residents only. But to relate that to a law is very, it doesn't fit that right now because we don't have an ordinance or a state law that ties into that, that regulation that we have. So, to answer your question, yes, it would go to a citation and then through the court. Hmm.

So scenario is, is that someone from outside the city limits of new Prague is dumping yard waste. I mean, how, how was that monitored? I mean, because I'm sure it happens a lot. So we're going to run every, every license plate through to see if that that vehicle is actually within the city limits or would it more apply to, um, illicit dumping from, from someone outside the city limits?

Yeah, I think in, in conversations with Matt and he can expand upon this if he wants to, but we, to run every vehicle and monitor every vehicle that goes in there every day, seven days a week is, right now is we just can't do that. So we talked about having hours that it's open or closed or having somebody sit up there, you know, some places do different things and to start with this and have an ordinance to start the enforcement, I think, and go from there. Um, and like Ken mentioned, getting kind of the word out to people that, you know, this, this is going to happen and it just becomes a lot of work for Matt and his, his folks to manage and, you know, uh, someone dumps a, you know, a water heater up there, that's a pretty clear cut, you know, that's pretty clear. But if someone dumps six root balls and someone from Cedar Lake comes in or, you know, someone that lives out in the county, that's where it gets a little murky with what we can and can't do. Sure.

So, so this is a good starting point.

Yeah. Yeah. And then we can go from there, right? Like if we, if we continue to have big issues, then maybe we, we look at having hours in the gate and lock in and it's only open from, these hours on these days and you know, maybe every vehicle then does get looked at and we go in there because then that would maybe be a more manageable feed rather than 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

So thank you. I mentioned that like a lot of things in town here, oftentimes it's uh, the neighbors that help police the situation and yeah, I get more referrals. Yeah, it's that or an ordinance in place.

Yeah. Or if, when you guys go up to clean it and they see, you know, they see something that shouldn't be there, then they call us and say, we had this occur and then we can go and get the video footage from Matt and look at it that way. So it is more, I would say, and correct me if I'm wrong, more complaint based at this time or, you know, things that you guys see.

Is that, yeah, it's both. Um, usually if you see a dump, like you could tell if a dump trailer was in there that dumped a huge load of brush, I don't know a lot of people that own dump trailers in the city limits. So it's usually at that point then, um, we can look at the cameras, see who it was, see if it's somebody that we don't recognize or if there's a business on it and yeah, we might have Tim report it or look into it a little bit more. Um,

Yeah. There's a lot of obvious situations where it occurs, but I like a lot of other people are reluctant to say anything because you don't have, there's not an ordinance that clearly defines exactly. So you're on exact, but there's a lot of obvious ones out there. Yep. Um, can I add a couple of questions? I'd feel more comfortable if there's a definition of yard waste in the definition section. And I've looked at, some just because I'm familiar with the ones where I have my cabin in Wisconsin, but they have a definition that I thought I liked that refers to yard waste being biodegradable vegetative material generated from routine maintenance of residential properties. But that brought up a question. Is this written for just residential property yard waste or? a business owner can't put their branch in there?

Yeah. So we've only allowed, and Matt can correct me. We've only allowed residents to bring yard waste up there. It's never been allowed even for a locally owned, commercial contractor to dump, correct Matt?

No, no, I don't know. I mean that I met like when I used to work at first bank, could we have brought a branch from the bank? Oh, good question.

Yes. We've always said if you are a taxpayer to the city, then you can dump there. So if it's a, uh, this state bank wants to dump a brush there. Yes, they can. But as soon as they hire a contractor, they can not dump there anymore. It's now the contractor's responsibility to get rid of that waste.

I guess I can't find that. Is that clearly written in there? Because I guess I didn't read the business property owner part of it. And then, um, I don't want to embarrass myself, but clean wood, does that mean like without nails in it or something? Is that what, or what is clean wood?

Yeah. Now you're talking someone that, uh, I'm going to say clearing out their yard and then they are scooping up brush and then they're also scooping up, uh, dirt sod and all that. We will not take that. We can't burn that. It's gotta be separated. That's what we consider what dirty wood would be.

Oh, so it's not, it has a staple in it.

That's construction material, which is state that you can, that's clearly you can not dump construction material.

No, I mean, if someone pound a nail in a tree and,

Yeah, ideally no, but it's really hard. You can't define every single item.

So should we define what clean water is though? Because we specifically cite it?

Yeah, we can.

Because maybe just I'm the only one that doesn't know what that is. And then I'm not sure if it's spelled out here, but animal waste, if that should be listed or not. I've seen that in other ones. And I'm only thinking of that just to keep the mice and the rats away. We probably, I don't know if we have an issue with that at all.

Yeah, no, I.

We can easily add it to the list. And again, this is not exhaustive, but.

Right.

Yeah, it would fit right in the line of dead animals, animal waste, to that line probably.

Do we have any issue with, okay.

No, I haven't. been notified about any issues of animal waste being dumped there.

And lastly, I've always wondered about the ACE or the paper bags. Are those allowable?

Yeah. So those are, those break down. So yes, they are allowed, but you cannot dump plastic bags that do not break down as long as they're compost by gradable, I think is what they say on the bag. Then yes, those can be dumped there. Is there an official, a biodegradable bag is what they considered.

Right. Is there somebody that actually determines what that bag is that you could write that in there? Like is that a certified by somebody or is that just any brown bag would be okay?

No, it has to be, it has to say biodegradable bag on it.

Okay.

I haven't seen a bag that has been dumped out there, a paper bag that usually there's the ACE hardware on them. That's where a lot of people are buying it from and they say biodegradable on them.

Yeah. Instead of putting ACE hardware bags in the ordinance, I was wondering if there's a state certification paper bag.

No, you cannot dump just a grocery bag out there. It has to say biodegradable on the outside.

Certified by the biodegradable bag company. Mostly I see the ACE bags, but sometimes I just assume they're biodegradable. That's all I had. Thanks. I think it's great that we're doing this though.

Yeah, I think we should clean it up. I think we should also, I just hate doing penalties and all that stuff and then they don't pay them and then it just gets lost in the judicial system and that stuff. If we can marry it with these administrative fees type of thing, I think that might be a little bit more, give us a little bit more power rather than you know, someone's going to say, I'm just going to contest it. And then it goes to some judge and it never gets brought to the case. And it's like a type of thing too. You know, that's, that's what I, you know, want to avoid.

Yeah. Yeah. And we've lived through some of that already. Right. So yes, I don't, I don't disagree with you. It's it, it, it gives the council, I would say a little more leverage as to accountability that way, right. Rather than giving it to the courts. So, Yeah, or certainly we've Ken and I and Matt have talked about that. So it's something administratively that we can work on and, and create that list and have an administrative list and we can have that conversation another day, but you know, something to think about moving forward because we can have a list of certain administrative penalties and others that are not. So, right.

So Josh, do you know, have the four new charter members been sworn all sworn in?

Uh, I believe they have all of this point and now Alyssa was going to start reaching out to you guys to see what, what times you may be available. I've got to get ahold of Scott to see when he's available first.

Okay. Curiosity question. Can someone cuts their tree down? Where do they take the, the tree that's more than six inches in diameter?

Matt question. Uh, yeah, I have about six locations that we send our stuff to.

Um, Do we have that maybe on our website then?

No, I'm not sharing those spots that I take my stuff. Oh, okay. Like to make sure I can take the city stuff to those spots so they don't get filled up. It is on the residents or whoever to find their location. I will tell people this all the time. We are very lucky to have a compost brush pile that we do. Many, many cities have closers down.

Right.

So, um, I think we all should be very lucky that we have it. And I really push residents to try to police it as much as they can too. Um, Cause that day could happen that it gets closed down. I hate to have that happen, but no, the tribe does not take it. They'll take brush, but they do not take, I mean, we're talking like some people bring in these 30 inch logs. No, if they can't compose, uh, if they can't run it through the chipper, they will not take it. A lot of these places. So a lot of the places that I send mine to burn wood at their house. So they're the ones that are looking at taking the larger logs. So no, I don't have a list that, um, for every resident that needs to get rid of logs.

We have a lot at the golf course for training. I'm just wondering if a resident asked you, you just say, I don't know.

And no, I tell them that I have spots that I take it to, but, um, it's usually you got to try to find a farmer that's willing to burn it or try to find somebody that is burning wood.

Like dem con doesn't take it either.

Or I have never asked them.

Okay. Okay.

All right, so are we kind of in agreement? We're going to kind of clean up the verbiage and see if maybe we can get a charter commission meeting going and get those administrative penalties in our charter so that I just don't feel like filling up the court system with these $100, $200 fees because, you know, it's going to happen because we've run into it in the past, so. All right. Good. Next, Ken, you're going to take this regarding the UDC codes, some minor amendments.

So this one I am looking to have for the council to do a first reading on tonight. So a couple of very minor amendments to the unified development code, which is basically the zoning subdivision ordinance. In a nutshell, we had two changes that we noticed kind of right off the bat. We knew we would have

Number one was regarding reestablishing as a condition to use any assisted living facility.

Not sure why we had that in the ordinance that got adopted as permitted, but we do not want that to be the case. Number one reason is for the condition to use review on like a bra village, which is an assisted living, you have traffic, you have employees, that type of thing, which are not typical of a normal single family

Number two item we wanted to change right away is regarding accessory buildings.

We, for whatever reason, we were kind of changing up the wording a little bit, but we did not intend to say that buildings under 200 square feet are only subject to the six-foot setback.

We want that to apply to all accessory buildings, not just those under 200 square feet.

So we ran into that, somebody applied for a shed permit, and it looked to them like setbacks did not apply. When you're reading in the language, explain that it does actually read that way, and they said, no, they understood. Then we're going to put it at the six foot setback, but we want to get that cleaned up right away because we have a lot of people putting sheds up. So those are the two changes. The Planning Commission did have a hearing at their meeting.

Okay. Anyone have any questions? If not, I guess I'll make a motion to have the first reading of ordinance number 365 amending the various sections of the unified development code.

I'll second.

Got a second by Maggie Bass. If there's no other questions, all in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposition? Okay. Passes 4-0. Item 10, there is no ordinances for adoption. Now we're in number 11, Resolutions, Cannabis Cultivation Facility at 102nd Avenue Southwest.

All right, so do they have a PowerPoint? So we do have a Planning Commission summary from the June 24th Planning Commission meeting. This is a summary of Conditioning Permit C-1-2026 for cannabis cultivation in the mill. And the whole site overall is 100 2nd Avenue Southwest specific location for the cannabis cultivation proposed uses at 206 2nd Avenue Southwest. So the applicant is Bold North Hemp LLC. We do have representatives from them in the audience. and provided good insight. They were a great resource at the planning commission meeting and provided some really good information. So I'd welcome any questions you have for the representatives from Bolden Northbound. But the cannabis cultivations, a conditional use in the light industrial zoning district, which is what the mill was at the time they applied for the permit. As of now, to the Light Industrial District, but they currently do have a preliminary license from the State of Minnesota Office of Cannabigen Management for what is considered a micro business with endorsement for, I always get this wrong, micro business with a cultivation endorsement, so it's kind of a smaller scale cultivation at this point, and they're limited by statute on what they can have for obviously at the review of the planning commission meeting, we reviewed a number of topics, report info is in the packet, but big topic was obviously odor control, security, and then finally complying with all of the multitude of regulations that the OCM has and that other laws and rules and regulations that aren't even in effect. We did talk at length about how There is not a Minnesota rule established at this point for the odor control component.

We did work with the city attorney's office and the applicant to come up with a condition that would basically require that their odor mitigation equipment be certified by an HVAC engineer or comparable, and then finally,

where within a certain time period, if we have three staff go out there and document over about a three hour time period at different times, we could end up in a situation where we have a order issue documented and come back for a potential revocation based on an order concern. But other than that, big discussion occurred regarding security in the facility. There's very, very stringent our requirements for security and cameras and how they store the footage.

They have to have overlap on their cameras within the facility. Basically, there can't be hidden areas in there.

Again, very, very highly regulated facility and talked about that at length at the planning commission meeting. While we did have a public hearing at the meeting, we did not have any actual public hearing or public comments during that hearing. As I noted, we did have

And then I do want to point out, we'll pull up the plant oversight in a minute here, but there's a couple of loading docks that they do plan to keep. Out of the six, four of them will be filled in.

And the very south dock closest to it, I see Tactical, the gun range, will remain outside of the cannabis cultivation facility. There cannot be use by the cannabis cultivator and any other that can remain under the control of the mill and their users, which one of them was obviously the gun range for their deliveries.

Is that segmented then, those two docks?

There will need to be that work done.

So at this point they haven't done any finishing on the inside of the... We'll show that in a minute here, and actually their plan doesn't reflect that in detail, but

of uses within that area so uh map on the overhead here in red uh kind of outlines the area that was a warehouse loading dock area that is fortunately renting uh or planning to rent if approved for the cannabis cultivation again directly north of gun range moving forward so again at the time of the large commercial B3 district to the west and as you go north and south of the mill you have other industrial properties followed by the downtown and then southeast you have the residential properties so not anything directly adjacent to being so residential. Here's the floor plan of the site kind of look down and

again, will be sectioned off from the remainder of the building. Right now, it looks like there's double doors there, but it will be sectioned off, not as shown on this plan. Again, they cannot have other uses utilizing that dock.

And they have four flower rooms, one mother room,

I will not try to explain the ins and outs of the cannabis cultivation.

Probably one of their representatives will provide more insight into that. But again, even the deliveries for the product are through an OCM-licensed company that would pick up product. There's a security badge tag that kind of follows the price. Even the wastewater, they will hold on site and bring off site so it won't go down the sanitary system for anything that was involved within the cannabis growing process. So again, very, very regulated on this. So we might come back to this in a minute. But again, the look of the building, the portion outlined in orange as best we could. So the docks, the masonry unit block, and then lots of, Docs 1 and 2 will remain available. 2 will stay with the cannabis cultivation. Doc 1 would be for other users of the mill. Ultimately, staff and the Planning Commission do recommend, with the Planning Commission recommending a 4-0 vote, approval of the Conditioning Use Permit with the findings and numerous conditions within the drafted resolution in the packet.

I'm gonna go back to this drawing here. And again, I'll stand for questions.

And a number of representatives from the applicant are here tonight as well.

So to date, OCM did not issue any regulations or statutes as far as how far this type of business needs to be from, for example, a school or a residence or...

Correct, there is not. If you recall,

we were able to set back from a retail location, and we did do that to schools at 250 feet.

There was not an additional regulation set from a cultivation or other cannabis business at that time, only from the retail.

Okay, is that something that we should look at for future?

I would have to check.

Okay Okay, yeah, I just find it interesting because You know for the the gun range to if I see you know it couldn't be near school or a bar or residence and you know and so in a with a cultivation I would hope that there would be similar restrictions and just because I don't think students should be in that situation.

I thought that issue did come up and 2-5-C was allowed to be close to a bar.

We issued a variance for them to be, we had a thousand foot setback and we ended up giving them a variance for under 500 feet.

Okay. Okay. Just something to look for in the future. you know, so that if more of these cultivation sites pop up that we do, you know, hopefully have some restrictions of.

Right. And a lot of these statutes change quickly and have changed quickly.

Yeah.

I'm constantly trying to figure out what, where we're at with the current statutes. And I know some things, again, took effect this summer. I'm just trying to keep track of that.

Yeah, I understand. It's rather.

Yeah, I understand. We will definitely look into that. Okay. As of right now. other than the retail setback.

Okay, yeah. Now I understand OCM is a little chaotic right now.

So is this warehouse part, is that connected to the gun range?

Well, right now it would be, but they will have to completely cut that off, separate it.

Right, but I mean physically it is, and it's also physically connected to those other buildings north?

Correct. Yeah, they share obviously walls.

Yeah, okay. Okay.

One of the conditions is to meet, obviously, building code, fire code.

So as they build out the space, they'll have to meet those requirements.

We've not reviewed the building permit yet at this point. Wanted to go through the review here if the land used to be.

What's the square footage of that?

I will call if one of the representatives would like to get into some of those details. Hi guys, I'm Robbie Seeley. Um, I'm the CEO of board north. Um, so it's roughly around 11,200 square feet give or take. Okay.

And I'm fine with the, the operation that's going in there. But my bigger question is, is it, we had had an agreement with the owner of the mill, when they got to, I believe it was 30,000 square feet.

So, uh, we addressed this at the planning commission meeting actually.

So it was actually over 30% utilization of the entire mill site.

Oh, thank you, Robin. Um, and this was reusing a portion that was already within that calculation. So it wasn't adding to that total. So we did address that topic and I addressed that in the staff report for the, um, uh, planning commission meeting at that time. So, Yeah, this is not a new portion of the mill being used. It's still under that threshold that you're referring to. What's this from? I think when we did the gun range review actually at that time.

Well, the reason was as we wanted the owners of the mill, once they were starting to cash flow it with these businesses, that they would come with a plan to clean up that whole. Correct.

Yep. And that's still under that original threshold because, it's taking as they noted, you know, 11,000 square feet that was used for warehousing previously and not using a underutilized or unutilized portion of the building prior. So yeah, we, we did address that. We did look into it.

Okay.

Cause I'm still looking for a overall plan to clean up that site. And I think this will obviously help and I don't want to speak for Rick and bill obviously get some, some additional, um, rental money coming in. and I can't speak for Rick or bill, but maybe they want to address that.

Well, this would be the only leverage that we have to kind of force that issue is if we weren't to approve it and I'm fine with the business and everything else. This is really about when are they going to invest in the mill property and clean it up? Yep. And I can't, I can't answer that question.

I know.

So, and if we're not at the 30,000 I think that was kind of the agreed upon Yeah, we're not... Utilize square footage. No, we're not at this point. We should have made it 20,000. It's a general question. Yes, sir.

So, you take the plant all the way to the final form for wholesale sales then?

Yes, correct.

Is it in a bulk form or how much is the packaging?

Well, usually, yeah, correct. It usually goes in packages where usually by pound. Okay. And is distributed by pound, typically.

Okay.

But, I mean, you know, when it goes to wholesale and or manufacturing is when it then gets distributed into eighths or your pre-rolls or whatever the market may consist of, maybe gummies or drinks, extraction, and so on and such.

When it leaves your site, then, it's not necessarily in final retail form. You're not bringing the product to retail form yet.

No, we do have the ability to, but our group also does have a wholesale distribution license, so we will be utilizing that. Our headquarters is actually located in Minnetonka, Minnesota.

So everything leaving New Prague is really going to be wholesale packaged? Out correct, okay, and then I'm just trying to understand the relative size What size would this operation be to others in Minnesota?

Very very very typical size most Licensors have a micro license the next available license above that is a mezzo license now we do have five micro licenses So, yeah, in the future, if the city allows for expansion, we're here. Maybe that helps Sean with the cleanup thought, you know, in the future. But, you know, that is a goal that we do have without, you know, speaking further on it. But, yeah, right now it's a very basic license. I mean, as Ken said, it's 5,000 square feet of canopy. So it's not very big, but it does produce a good – pretty much manage up to one to two stores in volume. Thank you.

Any other questions? Clarification? Okay. I guess I'll look for a motion to approve. Resolution number CC26-07-06-01. So moved. I'll second that. So I have a motion by Sean Ryan, second by Chuck Nicolai to approve the resolution CC26-07-06-01. If there's no other further questions, all in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposition? Okay, passes 4-0. Good luck. Number 12, POPs programming agreement.

All right. So again, uh, kind of coming back to a topic, the city council last looked at back on April 7th when the RFP was approved by the council for issuance. Uh, we did have proposals due on May 8th. Um, had a little, uh, lengthy review process, unfortunately, mostly on the legal review end and drafting the agreement that's in front of you tonight. with the city attorney Scott Riggs office, but we only had the one proposal from, uh, the new preg arts foundation, uh, which is headed up by Dan Gardner. Obviously, uh, one of the individuals involved with the pops facility. But, uh, we did have criteria that we had and a scoring system within the RFP. Uh, the proposal, I believe from a staff perspective is solid. Um, they scored 88 out of a hundred possible points. And, um, just wanted to highlight some of the main points of their proposal, which have been incorporated into the agreement that, um, Scott rigs drafted. So there is no compensation, uh, that they would have, uh, from the city, uh, for the programming in 2027. And I do want to be clear only for the 2027 year, it does provide an opener, but we would need new discussions and a new agreement for any year beyond 2027. Um, they would provide 25 programmed events that includes eight as part of the continuation of the summer concert series. They have programs they plan to have, including concerts, but also including theater events, art events, movie nights, et cetera. So that kind of covers the wide range of different topics that the park board and ultimately the council was looking for. uh, at the facility to try to get that, uh, wide ranging community uses at the facility. Um, they will have to provide by April 30th a schedule of their book dates so that we know what's available for unbooked dates and they also are required to keep track of booking for the general public. So if somebody wanted to just have a, um, smaller event out there and utilize facility, there will be no charge for the 2027 year. and they take care of keeping track of who will, uh, who has signed up for the facility. Now, after one year of operation, we might want to have these for daily use like we do for picnic shelters and want that. But the idea was to really get the use going, have people try it out, see what they can utilize the facility for. And then finally the, the other big topic was making sure that a new peg arts foundation has liability insurance for all of the events that they would be holding and programming at the facility. uh, which they will provide. So again, we just have the, the, uh, attorneys, uh, agreement that is in front of you. The new Prague, uh, arts foundation, uh, did look at the agreement and including their, attorney Eric Brever and are in agreement with everything as it's written. So just looking for the council's approval on the agreement for the 20 to 27 year, uh, for the pops facility, which is still obviously under construction. So, um, I don't have a completion date at this point. They had a little delay, uh, some things out there, but they're back working on that facility again. So,

So are they going to be able to charge fees, or is there no fees charged for anything?

They are planning on not charging any fees at this point. The agreement does allow an opener. Let's say they wanted to have some kind of an event where you would have ticketing and maybe even liquor. They would have to come back and get a liquor license as a nonprofit, and then we could consider, obviously, in the approval of that event, allowing them to collect a fee to kind of offset the cost for that. But this time they're not.

Okay.

That would be like a one-off thing.

So they're just doing it for one year just to get interest in using the facility? Correct.

Okay.

Any other questions? So there's no compensation from the city in 2027, but that's the door opener that they are going to come in 2028?

I don't want to speak for them. I guess it would probably depend on how difficult they find it in fundraising and actually coming up with all these groups over the course of the winter and booking. I would tend to think, and just based on discussions I've had of other cities, most cities are paying a portion of that. I'm not saying I agree with that or that we should, but a lot of cities do budget for that. And whether that be paying a group like New Prague Arts Foundation or like, I'll just use Bell Planning for example. They have a budget and they'll pay, you know, $400 to $600 for a band to play. I don't know what their overall budget is, but it varies among different cities. So I think in, in the case of our facility being new, trying to just get the users out there, I think we're, we're, um, uh, should be very thankful that we found that they had interest in providing this at least for a year. Without that, um, I don't think we have the bandwidth from a staff perspective to, you know, go seeking bands and performances and you know, the whole nine yards. But um, there are cities that do do that.

No, I understand. I just look at it from a budget standpoint and where is it going to lead to? Um, and we're not committing to anything. No, I know. But you know, and I'm, I'm for the, the facility and the way that it was presented, but it was really a small group of people that took it upon themselves and not come to council and raise this money for it. And all of a sudden now all these things are getting tacked on that we knew and pretty soon we're going to be in the show business, uh, business and we're going to have to hire a staff person or something to book this thing or it's going to take time from staff. And uh, that's going to be a, on the budget line item. And I'm sure we're not going to want to pull anything from the parks, uh, even though I believe this falls into the parks budget. Um, so I'm just concerned about where, where the rabbit hole is and where we're going. Yeah.

And I guess from my staff perspective is I'm not pushing for any of that. No, I know. I, I just may be in a, uh, there may be some people in the public that would like to see that. I don't know. I guess we'll see kind of how that year runs, but, Yeah, I know, obviously, budget is an important topic to the council and taxpayers and everything.

Right.

Like anything else, you know, there's costs to run it, there's costs to run the baseball field, and yeah.

Yeah. Probably something similar like the community band type deal.

No, but you look at the baseball fields, for example. I mean, they pay the association. I mean, to sign your kid up, you have to pay, and everything else. And now it's, you know, who are you going to actually, I just wish this was thought out a little bit better in that a small group of people didn't come, um, and kind of force what I feel is like they forced our hand because of all of a sudden they have a million dollars and let's build this thing. And you know, I've raised this question before. I know that eventually the whole plan is going to turn it over to the city and then we'll have to add staff or, well, we will obviously when they're done with the completion and per the donation agreement, we will be the owner of it.

we've agreed to that. Right.

Um, but yeah, nothing, nothing more we committed to other than to, well, I was very hesitant to on the, when the pickleball group went and bought all this pickleball equipment then wanted us to build them a shed so they could store it in or give them a shed or whatever. You know, we were like, well, you guys decided this wasn't the council's decision. You went out and did this on your own, raised your own money, but then ultimately you want to turn it over to the city. And that's really not how it's supposed to work. It's supposed to come to the city council with a proposal and then see if we can work together, build it in. And this is the longterm plan and everything else, but it just kind of is always changing. And that's why I'm a little concerned from a budget standpoint where, where this is going to go. But, um,

Anyways, okay. That could be the other way. It could be positive. You get a lot of booking and things like that, and we start charging fees. That could pay for someone full-time job. I hope that's it, too. Right. No, I agree.

I hear your concerns, and I agree. You raise good points, and those are very valid points, but this isn't something that just came up. The council, we have a legal agreement. that the city will take it over. So it was a very thoughtful process involved legal representation. Um, so it wasn't a fast moving thing that we just, that it was dumped upon the city and the city could have said, no, we don't want it, um, on more than one occasion. So it's, but I do agree that there is a cost like any public facility. Uh, when we built the, The monument on the park going out of town there, we gave it to the city when we built it, and the city maintains it. We raised the money for it for the chamber. There's other examples like that throughout the community too. Very valid point.

Okay. Any other questions? Okay, I guess I'll make a... motion to approve the pops programming agreement for the year of 2027.

I'll second.

I got a second by Maggie Bass. There's no other questions. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposition? Okay. Passes four zero. Next future city hall proposal recommendation for architectural

Yeah, when we were kind of going through this process of purchasing 1201 First Street Northeast, I'd kind of mention that there were really, from what we could see as staff, probably two rooms that really needed some work. But we certainly recommended hiring a professional that knew how to design those, hopefully, so that that design would... last for 20, 30, 40, 50 years, however long, um, we would need that building. So as part of this process, I did reach out to three firms, um, SEH, uh, as our city engineer does have an architectural arm, um, old architects because we'd worked with them with the police station as well as OHA, who is the architect that is working with the utilities department on their new facility over there on the west side of town. I did include all three proposals in your packet. Ultimately, in terms of I did discuss with each of these firms that we were looking for more of a flat fee cost because we were hoping that once we got into the construction, there was certainly some of it we could do ourselves to save funding. And so all three firms did submit that. the various amounts I included there in the memo, um, SEH at 52,000 world architects at 28 and OHA at 43. And then the other big item that, um, they all kind of discussed, um, would be kind of taking the city from the design phase through the construction management phase. Um, and they did all give kind of various timelines on the project, though each of them was pretty clear that really, how long we go through a design phase and then ultimately the construction phase were kind of the two big deciding points as to how long this process would take. Ranging anywhere from OHA said it could be done in two and a half months to Wold saying it may take up to nine months depending on those processes. So I know looking through these, Matt and I did meet with each of them. provided each of them with the same copies of the floor plans, had asked very similar questions of them and all that, and these are the proposals they gave back. And ultimately, looking through these proposals, not only based off their price, but just off of the thoroughness of the proposal, I guess I would recommend going forward with World Architects to help us kind of design out both of those two rooms, as well as maybe take a very high-level look and say, hey, is there something you guys aren't seeing here for security and safety and maybe just general use of the facility. So I'll certainly stand for any questions. That would be my recommendation to go forward with it.

My question is, that I have is, design, is there, I mean, they say, like, well, nine months, that's from start to finish. Yep, yeah. And I guess, you know, what are they looking for the design? Are we looking... Two months. Are we looking three months for just the design portion?

I think that comes, that's really dependent on us. Um, it would be, um, them certainly meeting with us. What are we looking for? This is what they would see in terms of, um, how to lay this particular space out. When you think about flow of people, when you think about technology, when you think about security of the facility, that's if there's lots of discussions and the council wants to think about stuff and come back and all of a sudden, it's going to take longer if they kind of come forward and say, you know, this is what our ideas and the council and staff are like, yeah, we could really see that this will work for us. Obviously that design phase would go much shorter and they could jump right into drafting up your documents for permits. So that was, like I said, that was kind of the same across all three firms. I think they just all have various estimators. I know we've been working through with world, um, They like to certainly be conservative, so that way they're not under-promising. And I think they were kind of the same way when we were going through the police station as well. So.

I wouldn't call it conservative, but.

No, timeline.

No. He's talking about not price.

Well.

Um, so with this design, is this going to come out of the, what did we approve? Six 25 or something for? So, so I don't think we've approved any.

Yeah. So that was an approval. I was like, yeah, well we thought a general estimate was, yes, this would be the same amount pot of money. So this is an addition to, yeah. So in world world and their one proposal, they were the one of the three that they said kind of looking at what we had estimated and then kind of what was talked about that. I think they estimated that they thought this work could be done for around $400,000. Um, But yes, any three of these, this would be worked into that budget that we thought made sense when we were taking a high level look at it.

CHRIS JERRAM, And then is this, we're locked in on that, right? I don't want to give Will an incentive

locked in on raise their prices because they get a certain percentage of the correct. No, not that. That was important of the, I wanted a flat fee from beginning to end. This is what we're going to charge. Um, I would guess as we get into it and I don't know what it would be, they may say, Hey, we're not really providing that service, but if you'd like, we can add this fee and that would then be up to us. But I can't think of what that would be because I feel like Matt and I were very thorough with all three of these as to what we were looking for out of them. So,

Okay. Well, when we did our walkthrough, I thought we were going to be able to rehab it for 200,000. Then all of a sudden two weeks later we buy it and two weeks after that a meeting comes up and now it's 600,000. So I'm, there's, I want to make sure that we're, we all understand where this is going and what is it. Yep.

And that's where, yeah, whoever we select will work with us on that design to certainly give us estimates. We won't know until a hammer goes to nail as to exactly what that hammer is going to cost us. But, um, like any street project we have, they'd give us estimates and go from there.

So furniture and everything else will be moved from here.

Over there? To use as much as possible, yes. Yeah, because some of the furniture is only a couple years old. A lot of our desks, we were actually talking about that. Like, yeah, a lot of desks are in very nice condition. There might be some things, and I know we've got a few of these chairs that are in rough shape, that sort of thing, but using as much as possible, yes. Okay.

When I saw the timeline, I guess I was very surprised and disappointed that the length of time that we're talking about that this might take... So I'm very disappointed in that part of it, but I understand the thoroughness, and it's probably in the best interest to do a good job of it. I just didn't expect that we're going into that level of detail of possible remodeling that's going to require that kind of level of detail permitting, mapping and things like that, versus just trying to come up with a layout plan But here we're talking about actually remodeling plans.

I'll say yes and no. I think I know a big part of even when Wold was walking with us, he was popping out security ideas. Like, you're going to possibly lay it out this way in the room. And so I think for Wold especially, they were really trying to think of security throughout all of this process. And so... my hope is it's on the shorter side just as we kind of get to design. Cause it feels like there's only so much design you can do with the facility, but I'm not an architect, so I can't really speak to that. Right.

And I know when you walk down this road through this, uh, process, there's going to be required and desired things that come up and you discuss. I'm not sure if you can, sometimes when you say you're going to put a wall here that automatically, uh, provides limitations on the direction that you're gonna go with the next wall and things like that. So I'm not sure by the time we see it that we're gonna know what was the desired and what was the required parts and elements that were added to it and subtracted to it. And so that's why I guess I'm really relying on staff and you to try to come up close to the $400,000 number by your decision making as you progress from that because we're not gonna be able to see some of that part of it, nor do we have to, but I just know, because I've been involved in a lot of these projects, how that can go. And we just, here again, I'd be disappointed if we don't have staff in there in nine months from now. Really disappointed. I would agree. I mean, there's an opportunity cost, as I said, for the lack of, and I wish, We agreed upon a very short closing date, which I can have a discussion about that later, but a lot of this could have been done if we had a better situation when we bought it as far as the timing of it. But I support the idea. I think if we're going to do it, we should do it right with a third party helping us through it.

So if it gets approved tonight, When will they start?

I would call John McNamara probably tomorrow and then just see when they want to start rolling on this. Because even their timeline had approval in July and start in August. We don't have to wait that long. If we're approving it being in July, why can't we start in July? So I would hope to start the process as soon as possible.

OK. Any other questions? All right. I guess I'll look for, I guess I'll make a motion to, uh, accept the, or approve the, uh, bid by wold architects for $28,000 and with a, um, timeline of nine months on the long end.

I'll second.

Okay. I got a second by Maggie Bass. Any other questions?

I just want to, are we going to just see one final design then? Or is there alternatives?

Uh, I'm not sure. That was one of my questions with John as to whether he even wanted to, I'm assuming we're going to come in and have some sort of talk with council and like little talk through this would be my assumption through this whole process.

Okay. So it's not just one and done.

It's not just showing up and saying, approve this.

Well, just be judicious about that because that would be great too. We all want the warm and fuzzies of it too, but that takes a lot of time if we're waiting for council meetings. Yeah. You know, just where we're going to put the outlet.

I'll make sure the USBs are right in the outlet.

Okay. I have a motion and a second. If there's no other questions on favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposition? Okay. Passes four zero. Next is a cooperative agreement. I read, I do recall that this is something that we pulled out of the agenda consent agenda. Um, at the last meeting, um, And I think Maggie, I think you were kind of the one that had some questions and issues on that. Uh, mainly, um, do you recall? I do not. Please.

So, so if I recall, and I know that neither Matt nor I were here, um, which is why I think it got pulled. Yes. If I recall the, there was kind of the question of, well, the work's already been done. Why is the agreement coming to us now? If I remember correctly, and I'm, I know that's something that even Matt and I talked about and that's kind of just how the county ran this project a little bit. Um, but I know Matt had a little bit more background kind of on the whole project and so if he wants to speak to it, I certainly will pass it off to him.

Yeah. So the city and county is all cities and counties all are part of a, um, cost partition part to see, Participation. Participation policy, sorry. We've been going back since 2018. That's what we've always worked under with Scott County. So when we seal coat that walking path on Coney Road 15, they paid 50% of it. I gave them notice a year at a time, let them know that they will, this is my rough estimate on what it's going to cost. They would pay up to 50% of that. So when they called me about a year ago about doing a mill and overlay, and at that time it triggers the ADA policy, to meet a code. Uh, they let me know about that and I said, yeah, absolutely. That's part of the participation policy. Um, let's move forward. This is the cost estimate they gave me at that time was 15,000, um, which was completely fair in my mind. Uh, project came along and they kept me aware of the bid process and everything. And then all of a sudden projects over with, they send me the invoice for 13,000 and then they also added this cooperation agreement with it. I called them and I said, okay, I'm a little confused. This cooperation agreement is exactly same thing as our policy that we follow. Why are you sending me a cooperation agreement that needs to be signed now? They said, actually this should have been done last year. Um, so anytime they do a new project with another city, they are moving from the written policy to a cooperation agreement. It's just another form pretty much that's signed by the mayor and city administrator. So I will say yes, they dropped the ball on, then moving to this process of giving it to me after the construction project, but nothing would have changed. We have been following the policy from day one from 2018. Just like I, um, like I said, we do projects on that road and they, I send them a bill, they send me a bill. Um, so it's just moving, like I said, moving from a policy to an agreement, cooperation agreement.

Is there anything in this cooperative agreement that, um, deviates from the policy.

Um, I think, uh, one of the questions was about striping was one of them that if I remember right from a couple of weeks when I watched the council meeting back. Um, so really all the striping that's done on that on this project is on or that would be part of this, um, uh, sidewalk slash walking path would be at the roundabout that we would do anyways because that's in city limits. So that would not be in that, that's such a small dollar amount that, uh, wouldn't even be worth the administration time of sending them a bill for $15 to do one stripe. Um, so that's part of our, uh, that we just do ourself. Um, in the agreement and also in the policy, it does say the county does not participate in applying the, or any ice removal. The city is responsible for that. It's, it's pretty much almost word for word, the policy and agreement. It's just now it's being signed by the mayor and city administrator, if I remember right.

Okay.

Thank you, Matt.

Yep.

Okay.

Any other questions? Okay. I look for a motion to approve the cooperative agreement. So moved.

Second.

A motion by Maggie Bass, second by Bruce Wolf. There's no other further questions or comments. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposition? Okay. Passes 4-0. Audit. Didn't we just get done with an audit?

It's just a good topic year round.

It's an account, there's never a good topic year round.

This memo and... Following page just shows the proposal from ABDO for services for the 2026 year that would be presented in 2027. So it is an 8% increase from 2025 to 2026. We would anticipate that for the 27 audit year, that, um, we would go out for RFP. We had some other RFPs that, um, we feel like took precedent, uh, the IT RFP and our insurance consultant RFP. So we anticipate conducting an RFP for audit services just out of a, um, rotating process after so many years of being with ABDO, but we've otherwise been very happy with ABDO. So if council would rather not as to RFP, that could be considered as well. But in front of you right now is a one-year proposal to work with ABDO again for the current 2026 year.

So what is the total? Adding all those together? Robin?

Sorry, I'm just getting to that page.

My computer is being 46, 5, 11, 6, 11. Yep.

All of those would be individual.

Um, okay. Those are all things that we do during our audit process.

We don't always have a single audit. Um, so that just depends if we're awarded a certain amount over the threshold that warrants that over 750,000 in one fiscal year that we would potentially have that $6,000 fee. Otherwise every year the common ones are the audit and then the public utilities pay a separate portion of the 11,000 though OSA reporting form is annual and then the TIF reporting form is annual. So the only one that would be pending is that $6,000 not just if we meet that criteria or not.

Okay. So it's roughly $65,000.

Right. And that's split among all funds, except for the public utility. That's their own.

OK. Any other questions? I do agree with maybe next year going out with RFP. Never want anyone to get comfortable.

I agree.

Okay, if there's no other questions, I guess I'll make a motion to approve the 2027 audit proposal for the fiscal year in 2026.

I'll second.

I got a second by Maggie Bass. If there's no other questions, all in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposition? Okay, passes. Miscellaneous. We're at the miscellaneous section here. Bruce, do you have anything?

I have nothing.

Sean?

Just a reminder that the fireman's fish fries tomorrow night. And I don't know, Tim, if what officers are on duty, but they are certainly invited to. I just told him I'd pass it on to you guys.

So you are official invitee?

I got the email, and I mentioned at the last meeting, I don't know if you guys put it on your calendar or not. Okay. What time does it start? 6 or 6.30, whatever it is. six 30 I think is when they eat or start eating or start cooking. I should say.

Okay.

Anything else? Uh, yeah. The, um, uh, I saw the lecture notice in the paper and I was just curious that they have to make a appointment to come in to fill out the paperwork. I, I've never seen that before. I just know we've any, we'd come in at any time. When I ran and just filled it out, I didn't want to make it extra.

Are you talking for people to file?

To file for the candidacy.

Oh, OK. Yes, I'm sorry.

It was in the newspaper. I didn't see it. Was it in the newspaper? Where did I read that?

I would have to look real quick. I saw it somewhere, too, from July something.

I think it's been on Facebook.

It was in the paper, too.

Was it? Oh, it was.

OK, that's where I saw it then. Yeah. What? What is your question? So any candidate that wanted to sign up was supposed to call and make an appointment to fill out the paperwork, which I just found kind of odd because it had never been like that before. And maybe there's a reason why now, or maybe state laws change, but. I'm trying to pull it up real quick here.

That went to the paper. Do they have to be notarized or something?

Um, I don't recall.

I believe they do. I don't recall having a long time since I did.

I don't remember either. I'm just saying it does have to be normal. And so, I mean, usually like Alyssa downstairs is a notary. So if you filled it out, she'd be able to notarize it right there for you as you're doing it.

Alyssa and Maddie are both.

Yeah.

Notary. So while they're looking for it, I would assume it's for the intent to make sure that a notary is here.

Yeah. So, well, just because we've had lack of candidates in the past, I don't want to make it any more harder for them by no, that's fair. Pigeonholing them in a certain time.

And is it still $5? Yes.

Yes.

Can you get the form on the webpage or do you have to, Do you have to be present?

I don't see it.

I don't think we wrote that. You can just come in at any point. At least on our website, we didn't write that.

I don't remember writing that. I'm scrolling through the paper real quick to see if I can find it. Yeah, I remember. We just showed up. Yeah, that's what I remember. But I remember this one said you should make an appointment to...

I'm just curious. I think the only thing I would do is if you're coming in and say, hey, is Alicia or Maddie there to notarize it if it needs to be notarized so you don't come in and then someone goes, well, I got the form here. Can you get the form off the website?

I'm clicking on the link here.

I think it's right next to the dog permits.

Yeah. We have a link to the secretary of state and the affidavit of can candid candidacy.

Okay.

Um, and then, yeah. So everything is on the website that you can get to.

Okay.

Yes. If someone wants to just come in, I think the appointment, if it was in there, it was probably more to make sure that we actually have a notary here. Um, but okay. And I, again, I, it,

I don't recall ever having.

I'm just looking at what we submitted to the newspaper. Ken and I were reviewing, and I don't see it on our draft.

That does not say that anywhere. Patrick, what did you guys do to us?

Must be a long ad, Josh. Yeah. OK. Great. I guess I'll just read the ad. So the ad says.

Oh, never mind. It does say that on a line.

It's referencing to be notarized. So it says should call City Hall to set up an appointment as the filing documents need to be notarized.

We can't require that legally, though.

What, to make an appointment? No. Okay. So you can just show us. Right. Stop on in. Yeah.

We can just drop the form. I'm not running, so I'm not worried about that. You can just drop the form off. Well, you've got to have it notarized. Any notary can sign it.

Well, yeah. We do have multiple notaries, and we will make sure that they're scheduled around having one here.

You can even get notarized at a bank, too.

Yes, I suppose you could go find your own notary if you have a favorite notary you like to use.

Which we already have discussed schedules to make sure that a notary is here when other people are not.

Okay. Well, and the problem would be is that another, if you went to it, other notary, they're going to charge you. So now you got to pay. Well, it depends on,

Depends. Yeah.

You've got connections. We'll have to go to the bank. Yeah.

Well, that's true. My daughter.

It shouldn't be an issue, Sean. We should have somebody here. Um, it would just be in the case of an unplanned absence that maybe in a moment.

Okay.

Somebody wasn't here. Yeah.

And I'm not looking at it again. And then the clarification was that it's a two week period from a Monday through the following Monday, Tuesday, Tuesday to Tuesday. Was it? Okay. Okay.

And that starts the 11th.

Did you say maybe 14?

14th 14th or a week from tomorrow.

I was just trying to look. I wrote it down on my calendar.

Yeah, a week from tomorrow is the 14th.

And then somebody had mentioned that it goes against what our charter actually says in there. So maybe when our charter commission meets.

So that is something I've already talked to Scott about. And he said that some cities update it, some cities don't because it just follows state. So I said, well, let's at least update it just to, if it's got to follow state law, when our charter commission meets, let's just update it to say follows state law and then we don't have to worry about it anymore. Okay.

All right. Okay. Anything else, Sean? Um, just where we had on the police station and the open house and house construction going.

I just Michael was out and he's doing a punch list. Who's Michael? Michael with those that don't know. I'm sorry. With world architects. He's the main contact here. So he's kind of their project manager. Um, they're waiting for a boiler inspection on Wednesday. So they had to repipe some of the air conditioning and then, um, part of the boiler is part of the dehumidification system. So they can't turn the air conditioner on unless the boiler is working and those two work in unison. So, um, one, and I haven't talked to Steve about this yet, but he, a couple of the firemen discussed having an open house at the same time that the fire in October. And I realized that October's a ways out, but it'll take us some time to get things operational and organized too. So I don't have a date yet, so it's hard for me to plan a showings or anything like that until I have, uh, get our staff over there and moved in and operational. And then I, I'm looking forward to doing it. I just don't have a date for you right now.

So if it's operational though, that, that won't limit what the general public can see what they're paying for.

No, no. As long as we're supervised, the only, the only, secured areas are the evidence area. Right. That's, and I understand. Yeah. And you know, just given evidence management and time and things, we may have to move things over there just because of rules. And if we're not going to be here, we're not going to have things sitting here unsupervised for long periods of time. So something that's kind of out of my control at this point. So, okay.

Thank you for the update.

Thank you. Anything else? Oh, that was Maggie.

I don't have anything this evening.

Josh, anything else? Excuse me? Nothing right now. Oh, I guess I should note, if you lose on the schedule, this week you guys will be receiving budget packet items for our first official, we had a pre-meeting here about a month ago, so our first official meeting will be after the next meeting here in July. So we will be trying to keep that agenda just skinnied up, so that way we've got more time to discuss the budget afterwards.

Okay. Ken, anything? No. Robin? Tim? No. Matt? Mitch? Kenny? Brian? Patrick? You got a new, okay. Make sure you get that into minutes here, that Patrick got a new used car. So what'd you do with the old one?

That was like an institution.

All right. I don't have anything, so I guess I'll make a motion to adjourn.

So moved. Second.

Okay, I get a motion by Maggie Bass, second by Bruce Wolf to adjourn. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposition? Okay, we're out of here. Thank you, everyone. Give us five minutes to clear the room, and then we can go into our closed meeting.