City Council - Regular Meeting

Well, you must have talked to me, but I hope well these sidewalks and people did it to someone else. Yeah, we are looking for people for all of But I do have like Kevin, the old city clerk, him and his neighbor, they mayor Mayor Ree here. Council member Os here. Gilbertson here. Gardner here. Baggerly here, Davis here, Butterfield here, Schultz here, and council member Nelson is excused. Eight present, one excused. Please stand for the pledge. To the flag of the United States of America and to the stands nation, indivisibley and justice for all. [clears throat] a motion to approve the so moved. Second. Somebody. Mr. Mayor, can you move your mic towards you, please? Thank you. Any discussion on the agenda hearing? None. Roll call. Council member O. Hi. Gilbertson. Hi. Gardner. Hi. Faggerly. Hi. Davis.

I. Butterfield. I. And hi. Seven eyes's zero nos. That passes. Consent items. I'll call on Verne Larson, our city clerk. Mr. Mr. Mayor and council members, tonight for your approval, I have the city council minutes of December 1st, 2025. The city council work session minutes of December 8th, 2025. The police civil service commission minutes of December 1st, 2025 as a draft. The Wilmer Municipal Utility Commission minutes of December 8th, 2025. The planning commission minutes of November 19th, 2025. The planning commission minutes of December 3rd, 2025 as a draft. The preliminary and final plat of Northwood Estates, third edition. The preliminary and final plat of Trentwood Estates, fifth edition. The reschedule of the public hearing for consideration to amend section 4.02, subdivision 8 of the city charter to January 5th, 2026. The reschedule of public hearing for consideration amendment section 4.02 subdivision 4 of the city charter January 5th, 2026. The reschedule of public hearing for consideration to amend section 4.06 of the city charter to January 5th, 2026. The reschedule of public hearing for consideration to codify the city of Wilmer zoning ordinance number 1060 to January 5th, 2026. The cooperative agreement for building official services 2026 to 2028 for Candyohigh. The cooperative agreement for building official services 2026 to 2028 for Atwater. The cooperative agreement for building official services 2026 to 2028 for New London. The agreement and consent to remove a hazardous building. The permission to negotiate an award bid to remove hazardous building. The consideration of designated polling places for elections in 2026. The Candyo High County Feeasants Forever lawful

gambling application. The premises permit for Wilmer Baseball Boosters Association at Foxhole Brew House, Inc. reappointments to boards and commissions. The resolution to authorize electronic fund transfers for 2026. The resolution to appoint official depositories for 2026. The safe assure consult safety program agreement for 2026. The accounts payable report from 1127 of 25 through 1210 of 25. And for your information tonight, we have the finance report through 11:3025. the November building report for 2025, the charter commission meeting minutes of October 2025 or 28th of 2025 as a draft, the municipal utilities commission and planning and zoning applications and the director's reports. Mr. Mayor, I would make a motion to approve the consent agenda. Second. A motion, a second to approve. Any discussion? Roll call. Council member Gilbertson. I. Gardner. I Baggerly. Hi Davis. I Butterfield. I should I and a hi. [snorts] Seven eyes's zero nos. Motion passes. Go to old business. Uh call on finance director Tom Wensen's open forum. Mayor, Mr. Mayor, we have two for open forum. I'm sorry. Yeah. Okay. We've got two people to speak to the open forum. And you get three minutes. You have to identify yourself and your address and you'll have three minutes. So, first Sherry Shock. Do I go up here? Yes. Hi. Hold the microphone towards you, Sherry. There you go.

Sherry Shuck. I've uh moved to Wilmer in 2013 and my address is 2409 8th Street Southwest here in Wilmer. [clears throat and cough] My concern is that uh my property taxes have gone ridiculously high and I already have two full-time jobs. I own a cleaning business and I work full-time at the school. Um, a lot of my customers, elderly, single moms that I am friends with, they everybody feels at a loss of where we can speak up and how, you know, what to how we go about it. But it it's devastating to try to pay the property taxes and my house is paid for and I'm still struggling. I don't I don't know how elderly people on a fixed income handle that. I don't know how mothers with young children trying to raise them and all the the school finances that they have to come up with and and now the taxes go up. My taxes in the last 10 years have gone up 97.28%. And I don't know, are are we trying to weed out the middle class in Wilmer? Because when I work at the school and I have parents, people calling that are interested in coming to Wilmer and and we we get around and we talk to these people and it's like I wouldn't encourage anybody to come to Wilmer to pay these taxes. It it's ridiculous. And I I think that um [clears throat] there has to be some kind of limit for

10 years for my taxes to go up that much. How am I going to sell my little very it my house is nothing fancy by any means. I don't live in a very wellto-do neighborhood. I live in a very nice neighborhood. But to sell my house, they're going to look at those taxes and go, "Are you kidding?" Cuz when I was looking in 2013, that's what I looked at was the property taxes. Made a big decision of where I went. And this is not this is not going well. This is not bringing people to Wilmer. It's making people look getting out of Wilmer. So that's all I need to say. I know taxes are a touchy subject anyway, [laughter] but I'm just that's that's what I wanted you to hear. Thank you. Right. [applause] [applause] Next is uh Bob Enos. Bob, you have three minutes to give your name and address and your time starts now. My time doesn't start when I start talking. Huh? Recently, you've been shown a map depicting about 800 municipal broadband schemes across the United States. The premise being that broadband is alive, kicking, and growing in America. filtering for those whose business models resemble the Wilmer scheme, open access citywide uh for populations between 15 and 50,000. That leaves three operations in a country of 19,000 communities, Chelon County, Washington, Ashland, Oregon, and a Utah consortium of seven

loces. What the three projects additionally had in common, they aren't covering operating costs. Their debt service required additional bonding over longer terms. Only one has been paid off and it took 30 years to do it. Not one has completed total coverage of the communities and 50 to 65% of the total subscribers in those communities don't even use the municipal programs. I got this information through publicly available data from conversations with a former city councilman who was in the thick of it and from a local newspaper reporter out west who has covered these developments on the ground for six years now. Let's talk about the Charter Communications whose recent proposal didn't get so much as a second glance here. Charter is the largest cable operator in America. Last year they posted $55 billion in sales. The owner of the railroad that goes through our town. Warren Buffett's own Birkshere halfway owns a $220 million stake in Charter. Charter doesn't do citywide fiber broadband in this in the city for one reason. It's not profitable. That the city council thinks it has a magic wand that charter doesn't have or that those other three municipal projects don't have. That's not just delusional, that's arrogant. The facts and the figures are clearly stacked against this project. The public is left with three questions. Number one, did the city staff failed to do the basic due diligence that I did at home in my spare time? If not, that's pure laziness and incompetence. Number two, did the city staff in fact do its due diligence and then withhold information that didn't support the desired narrative? If that's so, that's fraudulent. Or has the city council been fully aware of the financial damage other cities suffered,

the risk of this infrastructure becoming prematurely obsolete in an industry evolving at hypers speed and yet chooses to put the taxpayers at risk anyway. And if so, that's immoral. Ladies and gentlemen, you're at a crossroads. Public trust in America's institutions of government are at their lowest point in 60 years. Judging by what we've seen from this scheme so far, no one has to leave Wilmer to understand why public trust is shattered. [applause] All right. Next is uh [clears throat] old business and I'll call again on finance director Tom Odens. [cough] Good evening, Mr. Mayor and members of the council. Um, this agenda item relates to the 2026 tax levy and the 2026 budget. The city council held the truth and taxation public hearing on December 1st. Uh, since the preliminary levy, the proposed 2026 tax levy has been reduced by $717,482 and the city's tax rate is proposed to not increase for 2026. The tax levy was tabled at that meeting to allow further discussion and refinement. Following that hearing, the city council held a work session last Monday evening to further discuss the 2026 budget and tax levy. The consensus from that discussion was to reduce operational spending by $69,000 and to reallocate those funds to the capital

improvement fund. So that's a little bit of the history. So now procedurally there are three actions before you tonight where there was two on December 1st. The first would be a motion uh to take from the table the motion and adopt the 2026 tax levy from the December 1st meeting. The second there already is a motion and a second on the table uh or on the floor regarding the 26 levy. And then third uh council will consider a resolution to adopt the 2026 budget and to take this off the table. There's no discussion. That is correct, Mr. Mayor. Yep. And so staff is available to answer any questions as council um considers these actions. And if there are any other further procedural questions, um attorney Scott can maybe assist us if if so needed. I would move to remove the motion from the table. Second. A motion and a second. Roll call. Council member Gardner. Hi. Fely. I Davis. I Butterfield I should I O I Gilbertson I seven I's zero nos. That motion passes. Next is uh the tabled action to adopt a resolution approving the 2026 tax levy in the amount of 12 million87,33. It's already been moved and seconded. discussion. Steve, I wasn't there last Monday night. I apologize for that. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um, I was on an airplane that didn't go anywhere. Uh, went for a very short airplane drive and ended up back here in Walmart at 2:00 in the morning. Um but uh I guess only reason thing I want to say is

I I find it very difficult to believe that we couldn't find a nickel. All we did is reallocate. Nowhere in here could we find anything to come back and say we could probably do without that. Nothing. It's disappointing to me as I imagine it's probably disappointing to the taxpayers in here listening. You know, we we we tabled it. We went and we had a whole work session to see what else we could do and we came back empty-handed other than shifting money around. That saddens me. We've heard constituent after constituent come forward and say they can't afford their property taxes. And we went and said, "We'll go look at and we came back empty-handed. That's not awesome. Doesn't make us look very good. Do we need to approve the budget? Sure we do. We have to have a police force. We have to have a fire department. We have to do things. But the fact that we couldn't come up with anything is terrible. That what you're telling us is everything in the budget we 100% absolutely have to have. Can't get rid of anything. can't reduce a maintenance budget. Although at the end of next year, I guarantee you somebody comes along and says, "I'm going to move money from maintenance to buy this thing that I thought that I might want." Right now, just like we did this year, we reallocate money at the end of the year. That means there's money that can be cut and we're not doing it. That's it. This is It's terrible. Any other discussion? Justin. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'll uh I'll echo the feelings of Council Member Gardner. Um I'm disappointed that we weren't able

to do more at the work session. Um, I also am looking forward to being much more active and involved in making those changes for 2027, but I think it's a little too late. And it's disappointing that that we weren't able to achieve more um at a work session that I I I expected I expected a lot more out of. I guess I'll I'll leave it at that. Tom. [snorts] Yeah, I'll agree with Council Member Oscan Gardner on this, but I am very impressed though that we did come down from where we first were at down to a flat budget. You know, no increase. I voted no the past two budgets because of the increase. I'm on board with this one at a 0% raise, but next year I think we have to [clears throat] as a city council and city administration and department heads, we have to look at a 10% minimal to start helping these people out in Wilmer. That's where we get our funding from. I have a hard time. I'm working overtime. Not because I I have to. It's because I'm being forced forced to. But it's making my my payments. But the senior citizens that call me all the time, I don't understand on how they do that. We just had Sherry up here talking about it, too. I I can't imagine if my only income was social security and having to pay at least a quarter of that in property taxes. So, I think next year department heads and administration and the city council, we have a lot of work to do. And I would like to see it down 10% next year. Anybody else? Roll call. Council member Faggerly. Hi. Davis. Hi. Butterfield. Hi. Schultz.

Hi. Osc. Hi. Gilbertson. Hi. And Gardner. I. Seven eyes. Zero nos. That motion passes. [clears throat] Next, we need a motion to adopt a resolution approving the 2026 budget. So moved. Second. We got a motion, a second. Discussion. Roll call. Council member Davis. Hi. Butterfield. Hi. Child. Hi. O. Hi. Gilbertson. Hi. Gardner. I Faggerly. Hi. Seven eyes, zero nos. Thanks, Tom. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Members passes. Donation of fire suppression tool. Uh Frank, fire chief. Good evening, Frank. Good evening, Mr. Mayor, members of the council. Um before you tonight is a resolution and an kind of an introduction description of some equipment that the Wilmer Masons and the Grand Lodge of Minnesota has um graciously donated to us um and to the sheriff's department, but I think we lost her. So um first of all, I'd like to introduce the the master of the warmer masons, David Fry. He uh approached us two years ago, I guess. Yeah. He approached us uh couple years ago through some miscommunications. We didn't quite get on the same page. This year um approached us again and um it's some equipment that we are excited about um and and the program. So, if you want to come up, David, you want to talk about the program and then we can show we got a little video and then I'll be

asking for your approval for a resolution. Thank you. He's um just taken about three4s of what I was going to say, so I'm in good shape. Um and it wasn't anything to do with the fire department's lack of timing or anything like that, but the Masons were not in a position that we could actually go forth with this program. But uh my name is David Fry. I'm the master of the the Sharon Lodge. and we have gone together with the the masons of the Grand Lodge and also the Wilmer or the um Minnesota charities. All three of us are taking and putting money forward to these units. They start at roughly $1,000 a piece. This is a 10 pound grenade that when you pull the safety and pull the ignition, you've got eight seconds to get rid of this. Rather than talk about it, the video is going to show you what happens with one of these units in an open parking lot and then what happens with one of these units in a fully engulfed fire. Once those fires reach 1500 degrees, the entire area erupts. Anything that's combustible immediately ignites. Once that happens, if you throw this into the room the size of this room here, you'll see in the video, it can knock that fire out in about 30 seconds. And the Boomer Lodge has put together about $2,400 for the eight units we have out here. And afterwards, we're going to give three of these to the Wilmer Fire Department for the chief's car, the assistant chief's car, and they have a four-wheel drive truck. Those can be often times the first units to arrive on a fire. Talk with Sheriff's

TSON, and he has, I think, uh, four, five teams of member people with, uh, around the area. They're oftentimes the first people there. This is a community outreach project and once we get this started with this initial donation of eight units, we're going to be talking to additional people in the community, the businesses and the organizations, asking for their help in helping us come up with $300 to pay for one of these units so that we can equip the rest of the fire department and the rest of the sheriffs and also the Wilmer police. That's our goal. And so once you watch this video, I think it'll speak for itself. I think that's all I would need to say because it's gonna do it for me. Thank you. Thank you, David. [clears throat and cough] All right, we'll see if I'm smart enough to get the video to come up. mechanism. The aerosol is released and expands voluometrically, flooding the space and thus suppressing the flames within seconds. The FST is effective against Aclass, B-class, C-class, and K-class fires. First step, you pull the safety pin out. Then you take the activation pin, you pull it up and straight up. Once activated, you throw or place the unit into the fire. Then you walk away and safely monitor from safe distance. Once activated, the FST will flash for 8 seconds. And then through the ports on the side, the aerosol will expand outwards for up to 30 seconds. Electronic ignition happens through a battery. And these units have a shelf

life for 15 years and are guaranteed. Imagine that that unit was sitting in this room. Please do not remove the oxygen from the air. This is what So with that. Um, just a little bit of background. Um, David said each device is $1,000. Um, retail. That that's cheaper than what I found them. Retail. I found them

for about $13 to $1,400 a piece. Um, so we're excited about getting these. Um, for the fire department, we're putting them in each of our command vehicles. So, three of us will have them. Um, and the idea is we get there prior to the big red trucks and give us time to throw that into a house to give the people inside time, you know, more survivability time. So, we're excited about it. Um, excited about the partnership with the Masons. So, with that, I'll stand for any questions for myself or David. I don't know how to ask the question, but the what really extinguishes the fire because you say it doesn't starve it of oxygen. No, it's it's a pot up to the microphone, David. [clears throat] My understanding is very simplistic, but there's like a potassium powder in there and the electronic ignition puts forth a pressurization system and out of the side of the unit it takes and blows this powder into the room. So being like a potassium powder, you can breathe it and it's not going to hurt you. But the thing of it is it extinguishes the combustion cycle. So you won't get the flashover. You won't get the continued fire. In some cases once this goes out, they don't have any need for water. And so if you've got a computer control system, you know, all the the servers and everything like that, these things were developed to put out fires in a submarine. You couldn't touch something off that was going to wipe out the people in the submarine. That's how safe these are. Very interesting. Anybody got questions, Mike or Stephen? Are these a one-time use only? Are you fire and forget or are they rechargeable? Uh the situation is it's a

one and done. Hopefully you'll never have to use it, but if you do, it could save lives. And the process that we have, there's a form in here. Each of these units is registered with the Minnesota Masons. Once you touch this off, you get in touch with the Masons, they will give you another one. So, that's part of the program and that's how we want to make sure that they're they're available. This uh case is there's uh seven more of them out there. Three for the fire department and and five for the the sheriff's department. You put them in the trunk and forget them. And hopefully when you do use it, you let us know and we make arrangements to give you another one. Thank you. Vicki, I just have a comment. I want to say that is a really neat device and I'm grateful that you're donating them and thank you very much. Well, we're not actually donating them. We do have to pay for them. And so that's where we are with $2,400. We bought the first eight. And now what we want to do is I want to meet with the community, the various uh people that have businesses, the various people that have organizations that are willing to get together as a club and say, "Hey, we'll buy one." You know, our club will donate the $300. That's where we're going with this project. And then we'll do the leg work. the um information from the manufacturer. There's a website in here they can go to and you've got training videos and everything else, but uh it doesn't

matter whether you've ever seen one or not. In a few minutes, you can watch that and you can deploy it. Anything else? [snorts] Steve's thinking, "Oh, we get rid of some fire trucks and just have these." No, [laughter] not I don't think so. Thinking that [laughter] way. This is just going to help you get through the door the first time. That's right. After that, and if you don't get this, you know, in time and it's gone past the room that you're in, uh, I think about 5,000 square feet this will protect. And when you consider that the average fire extinguisher will protect about what's on this desk, you know, this thing will do a lot more. Well, thank you, David. Thank you to the lodge and uh we are greatly impressed with your assistance and the the unit itself. Well, we wanted to do this precoid and when CO came it pretty much shut the lodge down and so we're just now coming back to the point where we're able to to do this as a community project and so we want to catch up for lost time. All right. Thank you. Thank you and thank you for helping put it together. Thank you. I appreciate it. You got anything else, Frank? Others ask for the motion. Just asking for the motion for the resolution to accept the donation. Y I'll make a motion to approve the resolution to accept a donation from the Wilmer Sharon Lodge number 104 to the fire department of three fire suppression tool units with a retail value of $4,000. Second. We got a motion and a second. Any discussion? [clears throat]

Roll call. Council member Butterfield. I should. Hi Mosque. Hi Gilbertson. Hi Gardner. Hi Baggerly. Hi and Davis. Hi. Seven eyes, zero nos. Your motion passes. I think David has one more thing. One more. There is a slight uh change, Tom. There's eight units. Uh we're giving five to the sheriff's department and then three to the the fire department. So, that's the $2,400 for all eight units. Okay. Thank you. [clears throat] All right. Next is approve the hiring of Shane Stefanic as city of Wilmer public works director. Leslie. Good evening, Mayor and Council members. Following a comprehensive recruitment and interview process, I'm bringing forward the interview committee's recommendation to appoint Shane Stanic as public works director. Mr. Stavonic brings more than 10 years of progressive experience in public works, utilities, and municipal operations. He has served in supervisory and management roles with responsibility for capital improvement [clears throat] projects, regulatory compliance, staff leadership and operation of complex infrastructure systems. His background includes serving as a wastewater treatment supervisor for the city of Gillette, Wyoming, where he managed license [clears throat] operators, insured EPA and state compliance, and delivered capital projects up to a million dollars, as well as lending leading largecale facilities and maintenance operations. Mr. Stavanic holds a executive master of business

administration and a bachelor of science business administration from the University of Wyoming. and maintains multiple professional license in the wastewater treatment and collection systems. He is known for his collaborative leadership style, strong operational expertise, and strategic approach to public service. He was identified as the recommended candidate following interviews conducted by the initial committee consisting of council member Schulus, myself, city operations director Box, and planning director Christopher Corbett. through a second round of interview panel including superintendent Kyle Rodun and superintendent Jason Lindall and parks and recreation director Rob Bumgard based on his qualifications leadership and alignment with the city's operational needs and interview committee and second round panel unanimously recommended Stan Stefanic as appointment as Wilmer's next public works director. I'll stand for any questions. Any questions or motion? Move to approve the hiring of Shane Stefani as our public works director. Second. We got a motion and a second. Discussion. Hearing none. Roll call. Council member Schelers. Hi. Os. Hi. Gilbertson. Hi. Gardner. Hi. Baggerly. Hi. Davis. Hi. And Butterfield. I, seven eyes, zero nos. That motion passes. Next is a resolution adopting the 2026 fee schedule. I call on operations director Kyle Box. Good evening, Mayor, Council. Uh, tonight before you is uh [clears throat] the resolution to adopt the fee schedule for 2026.

Uh, this has been updated, reviewed, and updated by city staff. Um and in your packet is a red line and clean version of the document. Uh few changes that are being recommended for uh updates for 2026. Um starting on uh the second page of the redline document, there was a THC license that the city uh would collected the last couple of uh two years. Um at $2,000 uh per license that has now gone down to $125. That is the maximum that we are allowed to now collect in state statute. Moving on to administrative fees. Uh these are for nuisance abatements, snow and ice removal, uh grass mowing, um removal of trees. Uh these are just the administrative costs that go with it. Really, John is just to cover the increased cost of bailing and staff time that goes into that going from $75 to $85. Uh ultimately we try to include uh every fee that the city uh that the city would charge out is included on our is included in the uh the fee schedule uh from every department. Um a couple of new ones that were added were tea hangers at the airport. Now we do have contracts and leases for our uh rentable tea hangers at the airport, but we wanted to ensure that they were included in the fee schedule. So, those are new additions uh as well as uh new additions for the outdoor covered ice rink at the civic center would be uh new for this fee schedule as well. Uh other than that, Mr. Mayor, I will stop there for any questions. U but we are recommending approval for the 2026 fee schedule. Any questions? Vicki, I'm just wondering um because the DOAC costs us a lot of money to run. I'm wondering if we should raise the fees

for that. Um, also the pool rental, how long of a period is that $100 for? Might asked Director Bob Garn to help with that question. Good evening, Mayor Mayor, and the councils. We did raise the pools fees up from last year from $3 to $4. Um, we talked about that at the park and rec board meeting and the pool rental is for two hours. It's for two. Okay. I'm just noticing that like the [clears throat] four season shelter, all of the shelters cost based on the day, but I think typically people are there for two or three hours and they're paying, you know, at least $130. I just wonder if we could raise that rate. What the pool rate? [clears throat] Yeah, the pool rental to kind of match the shelters. It's totally up to you. We discussed all this at the park and recck board meeting, but you guys are the policy makers. If you want to raise it, we can surely raise it as well. Anybody else? Steve, glad that uh Councilman Member Davis uh and I was at that meeting. I probably should have asked this question then. Um, do we know what it costs hourly just to provide lifeguards for the pool? Um, it's a range because if we had to have 12 lifeguards on duty and 12, yes, to suit everything from the pool uh um the kiddie pool to the um diving well to the channels to the plunge. So it takes 12 12 ranging from anything from 15 $17 an hour up to $21 an hour. So So would it stand and end reason then if

somebody is going to reserve the pool for their own private party that they should at least cover the labor cost? They do. Yes. Of the pool. Yes. So they play for the pool and the and the lifeguards. Okay. And some there's going to be times where some people will just want the kiddie pool. So they get charged for just the kiddie pool access knowing that they cannot get into the diving well or the plunge slide areas. So that's two separate they get have to pay the lifeguard fee and the pool rental. Yes. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Wesley, did you want to say something? I was going to That's what I was going to point out that on your uh fee schedule here, it does say $100 plus labor. Thank you. Any other questions? Roll call. Council member Os. Well, I I don't have a motion yet. Yeah, we don't have a motion. Don't have a motion. I'll move the motion. Second. We got a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Roll call. Council member O. I. Gilbertson. I. Gardner. I. Faggerly. Hi. Davis I Butterfield I and shoulders I seven I's zero nos motion carries while you're there for information only Kyle Wilmer connect thank you Mr. Mayor. Uh, so I wanted to take an opportunity, mayor, uh, members of the council to provide you with an update on Wilmer Connect. Uh, and, uh, on October 20th of this year, the city council had authorized staff to release bids for the phase one of Wilmer Connect. Um on December 2nd of this

year, we did receive uh bids for the project. Um however, um we'll step jump right into it. So, we did receive bids for phase one construction on Wilmer Connect. A total of 10 bids were received ranging from 7.3 million to 17.6 million. The apparent low bidder was received by FiveStar Energy Services uh from Wacaaw Wisconsin in the amount of 7.3 million 7,333,5 during the review. Um the apparent low bidder requested to withdraw their submitted bid because not all line items were accounted for within their initial submission. This withdrawal prompted staff to begin working on the next uh with the next lowest bid received um with NC3 uh out of Clearbrook, Minnesota. This amount was in 7 was for 7,627,49963. This bid still remains within the estimated project cost provided to the city council on October 20th at approximately 7.8 million. Uh as well as there is an updated engineers estimate at the bid opening was just over 8 million but still under the dollar amount that was provided at the October 20th council meeting. So due to the timing of the first bid withdrawal and the work required to meet and discuss uh with the new apparent low bidder staff are not prepared to recommend a bid award at this time and expect to take that action at a later date as early as January 5th, 2026. Within the bid document, city council does have uh 90 days from bid opening, December 2nd, to award or reject bids. Uh so on your screen here, you can see the 10 bids that were received uh with the highlighted NC3 uh contractor out of uh Clearbrook, Minnesota, and their bid amounts. Uh Mr. Mayor, members of the council, I did want to take an opportunity to

provide you with just a project update as well um and provide you uh with some program uh finances. uh just the conversations that we've been having with our bond council, municipal advisor, uh progress that we're making on our ISP master agreements as well as uh just wanted to uh update the council and uh look for some guidance on some outside program interests that we've had the last oh four probably the last within the last four weeks. Uh so as of this evening uh December 15th there is 984 total orders uh within the program uh this was up from I believe 567 uh when it was presented to council in October of this year. Out of those 984 940 are within city limits. So we do recognize uh that we are collecting 46 of those orders outside of city limits and there is no current plans to expand beyond city limits at that time. So really that 940 is where we're that um going to be breaking our phase numbers down. Within phase one, 368 uh have signed up. Phase two is the same 368 with a phase three coming up at 185 users. Again, tonight's or this action that we're working towards construction is for phase one only. Uh but we are collecting information for all three phases across the program. Uh, next I'd like to go into a little bit of program financials um to give the council a very clear picture um on where the project is at. So to date u we're expecting to spend um we're just uh pre-construction cost we're estimating will come in right under uh 1.21,250,000. Uh to date we're at 1,170,000. And so as we continue to clear wrap

things up, uh if council is to award a bid, we do expect to spend additional dollars before that bonding period uh begins before the construction. Uh the phase one construction bid is included in there at 7.6 million as well as the network operations center which is right now estimated to to be between two and 300,000. Uh when we look at the anticipated network revenues, these would be per user uh per month. uh working with the ISPs um when we adopt these or establish these master services agreements anywhere between 55 and 60%. So the city would be collecting anywhere from $40.20 to $43.86 is what we're anticipating at this time. Now we have to be mindful when we uh when we move that number around. there is a set dollar amount or really a dollar amount that the provider is going to want to capture uh to make sure that they're being profitable and and can cover their costs on their side. But understanding that the city needs to be able to bring in dollars uh to offset the best it can uh for the network and it's its operational costs and its debt service payments. [clears throat] Now, when we look at phase one uh standalone by itself, the project does fall short. So when we look at phase one again just by itself uh we're looking at anywhere between uh just over a million dollars and $2.1 million uh before the city would be cash flow uh positive uh anywhere from 9 to 13 years. Um again this is phase one all by itself. Our peak risk year is in 20 would be in 2029 if a project was approved. Um that would be when the uh debt obligation payments, the principal payments on the bond would come into effect. Um and it would peak anywhere from our estimate is from 2 to

2.4% for property taxes. So just to put that in comparison on an annual property tax bill out a $200,000 house is roughly $4846. A $300,000 house $76. A $400,000 house $106. so on from there. Now, we do have um when we when we turn on phase two and updating with uh now we've got uh phase one construction numbers um in being able to estimate estimate uh our take rates based off the information that we have now as well as projecting out into the future as conservatively as we feel is possible. Um this picture changes dramatically um in a in a good way. Um, so it's it opens up the opportunities to connect with a lot more users, a lot more subscribers. Uh, and there's equal interest in phase 2 as it stands right now with the with the pre-order signups. Um, so we do anticipate a uh if the council was to uh if the council does consider moving this project forward and awarding bids, it would be very uh advantageous or uh highly recommended that phase two is also being considered for approval as well in the near future. uh just because we do not want to anticipate or see a long um return on investment or impact to the tax roles any longer than we would need to. So again, this snapshot on your screen is a phase one project only. The community investment fund on the the bottom of your screen is something that we've uh lightly touched on um over the last couple of months, last several weeks. Uh right now there's estimated uh $5 million in the community investment [clears throat] fund that is not allocated for any specific projects at this time. Now the other half there's about 10 to 11 million sitting in that

fund right now. About 50% of that is um restricted or allocated for uh principal or bond payments that the city currently has. So, an option that the council could consider is in uh if if the project goes forward, if revenues fall short, uh instead of property taxes being the backfall or the back stop for this um for this project, the council could look at using community investment fund dollars to u fill that gap or fill that void as it would be needed. [snorts] Uh this is where staff would really like um to have this continued discussion with council if there's uh any favor or any um any support to continue to look at that. Again, if it's a approved project, knowing what we know now, these numbers will continue to be refined. Um but this is with the data that we have at this time and we do see an opportunity to um uh make up the the balance that we would have with existing dollars that the city has already without impacting the tax role. Lastly, I wanted to uh make the council aware of two different um uh interested parties in within our project. uh we have been approached by two different entities uh uh offering or suggesting uh two completely different models from what they're from what they're uh proposing. The the first was a partnership model. Uh this would be uh an opportunity for the city to engage with another entity or a partner to expand uh open up the opportunity for outside investment, future growth, expanded growth and project reach. Uh the this organization is very interested in the Wilmer market and highly supports municipal uh municipal ownership. [snorts] uh we haven't received any formal

reports from any of these companies or any of these organizations. So I I I do want to continue to have those conversations with both of them before they're publicly named um and just confirm their sincere interest other than just a quick me or a one-time meeting and and phone calls that but uh these are offers that have been extended or conversations that we have had. Uh the second is from a a private organization. Uh this firm had reached out um a couple of weeks ago. Uh this would be a private firm uh that was is interested in building Wilmer or portions of Wilmer with fiber symmetrical speeds. A very similar uh not open access but a direct fiber to the home or direct fiber uh project in Wilmer. They're uh heavily interested in the Wilmer market as well. uh and at this time would um again having would need to have continued conversation but had stated uh they would require no investment from the city. However, that could be dependent on the scope of work if not area all areas of the town are being connected. For example, maybe uh this organization might not be interested in developing the industrial park u but the city really would like to see that happen. Um, I think there would just be continuing conversation that we would need to have if the city [clears throat] council wanted to seriously consider um, uh, that op that offer opportunity as well. Uh, so I don't have an action item for you uh, council mayor tonight. I just wanted to provide you with this update. I'll stand for any questions. Um, but we would anticipate staff will staff will continue to work on this um over the next few weeks and provide an update to you with a potential action item at your first meeting in January. Any questions for Kyle? Justin. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um, Kyle, you certainly heard the comments during open forum from Mr. Enis. Um, surprised that him and his group left before this came

up. Um, how would you respond to some of the the comments and concerns that he voiced? Um, with yeah, with all due respect, um, I I appreciate the the opinions and the point of view uh that any member of the community would have on the project. That's why we're at this public forum or public setting to have these conversations. Staff can provide you, the council, with the information that you best that you feel you would best need to make these decisions on moving forward and setting policy decisions for the city. um you know staff have been I feel um and I can uh absolutely take the criticism if I need to but I feel we've been very um we've done our due diligence. We have been very conservative in all of our uh project for uh funding. Uh we've tried to keep this as as tight as we can uh without having to slow the project down too much where we lose interest. Um, you know, there is a lot of data out there on successful and failed projects. Um, I can probably go back and count every single meeting I started with over the last couple of years that's saying there is we're never going to have zero risk with this project there. No matter what happens, if no one signs up for this project and the city approves this project, the city of Wilmer is responsible for making those debt payments. we will be on. There's no if and or but about it and that is the risk that the council will need to consider. It's been our approach to provide you with the answers um that we feel best uh that we feel best sits with this specific project. We've gone out, we've done the community surveys, we've looked at other examples for unsuccessful networks. We've looked at other networks that have failed or or have come up short. I wouldn't even call it a failure. um but have come up short and are making those debt obligation payments. But the one thing that never

left was the fiber. The fiber didn't leave. And so that value and that that utility is still available for those residents. So, at its core, I still believe that this is a this is a policy decision that the council will need to needs to make at um needs to make whether they have an interest in owning a utility, municipal fiber, having control of really what that future looks like at at a municipal level um or is there interest in another partnership model or to work with a a private firm or to abandon this altogether. Um but no, I I will say that staff I I do feel that we've done our due diligence. We have not ignored uh any project failures. We've tried to learn from them the best we can. Um and at the end of the day, we're we're working to make sure you have like I had mentioned, we're working to make sure the council has the information it needs uh to make that final decision. So, I hope that answers some of your question. Are you or our friends from hometown? I see in the back, too. Um, are either of you aware of these specific communities that he's speaking about in in um Oregon, Washington, Utah? I am not, but I wrote them down and we'll be we'll be researching them. I don't know if Kyle if you were familiar with any of those organizations, but not those specific ones, but okay. There's a common theme in ones that have succeeded and failed and we've reviewed that over and over, but we'll definitely take a look at the ones that were specifically asked about as well. Wonderful. Thank you. And then my last question is with how vital phase two is to the success of phase one. Is there a value in considering building both at the same time? Does that exceed our capacity? Is that something we could do? It's absolutely something we could do. It would take more time and more dollars to make that happen. Uh so right to date uh we have spent our engineering dollars and our network architecture dollars

have been for phase one only. Um it would take Kyle and I just had this conversation earlier today on on what this estimated time would would look like and it would take several months. Um but we think we could do it faster. [clears throat] We had learned a lot and had worked with our partnership with Bolton the mink and hometown fiber to align and streamline the best we can. We think phase two and phase three will go much quicker. Um but not not um likely not achievable and I don't want to speak for Kyle but likely not achievable for phase one and phase two to be done with the spring construction cycle. Yeah. Thank you. Any other Tom? I'll take it. Thank you. Um, you mentioned uh you've uh used a conservative approach for this uh the analysis and so forth. Uh now that we've received these bids back, uh what was your initial dollar amount for phase one and where has it come in? Have you been pleased or disappointed with where that's come in? I know that I've was disappointed to see the first one uh fall off, but uh where where has that come in from your figures of being conservative as you said? Yeah, we were right around that 7.8 million. Uh so it is coming in a little lower um than what we had estimated. Um I'm pleased with the bids. I'm this we had a opportunity to meet with the contractor this morning uh via teams uh and just introduce ourselves and we're going through that vetting process with with hometown and with Bolton and Mink. Um uh they are very capable. They're doing projects in other larger municipalities in the state and as well as in North Dakota. Um they seem very capable of the work. So the the I have no concerns with that. And I know in a lot of projects we

typically have contingencies. Uh is there a certain dollar amount for a contingency in this? I believe it's a 10% contingency and that's built into the 7.6. Okay. Thank you, [clears throat] Kyle. On that the $7.6 million. I just kind of Googled what the interest payment would be at a 4.5% divided that by the $40 uh for our fee. I'm coming up just with the principal and interest would be about 968 customers to sign up for this. So to keep it off the tax roles. Does that sound about correct? Yeah. So with principal and interest we're anticipating at a 4% interest rate which is maybe just a titch high but pretty on par. Uh it's about 620,000 a year that the city would be paying in debt obligation payments and get my right numbers here. I would say council member Butterfield that might be that number might be closer to about 1,100 and then then we would still have to add in uh the hometown fiber fees onto that. All of that would be included. So, 1100 would be break point where around approximately I'm Yeah. So there's a lot of variables with that too. I mean these is this is just our best guess until we lock in contracts until we all of that is finalized. I mean we are giving you ranges here on the screen what we think it's going to come in at. Um but yeah, that's fair between them and say, you know, I think the citizens will kind of know exactly, you know, where where we should be at to move this forward. About,00 people just for phase one. Yes. Just off property taxes. We've heard

enough about property taxes going up. And if we get to get to,00 I would be voting yes. We're under it. I'll be voting no. Thank you, Steve. Thanks, Mr. Mayor. Uh, Cal, you said that there's including that 7.6, there is a 10% contingency in there, or is is there a 10% contingency on top of that 7.6? Sorry, council member. I'm Oh, that's trying to just verify that for you. that would likely be on top of the bid amount, but I don't know if Kyle if you know that that's on top of the bid amount. So, another 700 um which puts us theoretically over budget then, right? Unless you're you had 10% figured outside of the April that was already factored into the performer plus 10%. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. My next question, I have three questions then. So my second question is, is there any reason to believe that this bid is going to the second place bid is going to get thrown out like the first place bid did? At this time, no, we don't believe that. We haven't haven't finished our vetting yet, but have at this time we've met with the contractor. They've provided all the documentation. We have we'll continue to go through line by line, but have no reason at this time that we would not be recommending them. Okay. And then my final question is your line on anticipated network revenues 55 to 60% $40.20 to $43.86 seems to imply that the average customer needs to have an internet bill of $73 in the $73 range.

That's correct. Where are people signing up at and is it in that $73 average range? So uh thank you for the question council member. Uh so the way the performer is built is on an average monthly buy. So it anticipates all of the packages that are available and divides them out or shares them out amongst the anticipated um packages and who who will be signing up for those packages. So this includes all the way from your $50 plan to maybe a few hundred plan at a commercial or industrial level. So that's how we get to this average buy of $73. Um it that's how that's how we got to that. Yeah. But you know who's signing up for what right now, right? Are they all 50s? Are they all 150s? You get where I'm going there? I get what we figured. What's reality telling us? Um I honestly don't have that breakdown. So out of the number I gave you earlier. Uh we can figure this out as close as we can. Um out of the 940 pre-signups, 322 have not committed to a provider or a package at this time. Uh so we would not be able to give a we could take the information that we have with the cider the providers that have signed up or the subscribers that have signed up but there are still 322 individuals or uh potential signups that have not chosen a package or provider. Uh so again this number is just using the average buy that we have factored into the perform. All right thank you. Anybody else? [snorts] All right. This was for information only. This was for information only. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you. Thank you, Kyle.

All right. Next is uh Glacial Lakes Curling Club Terminate build to suit lease. Call on recreation director Rob Bomb. Mayor, member of the council. Uh tonight I'm seeking a motion to approve terminating the build to suit lease agreement with the Glacial Ridge Curling Club. This original agreement was for us to build uh the Curling Center at the Civic Center location. Now with the Curling Club being in their new facility, um we met we met with the group and it's in our best interest, both groups um believe it's their best interest to terminate this lease agreement. And when it comes down to it, um, if it's 5 years, 6 years, or whatever, a new agreement would be put into place if we go down that path. So, just seeking the motion to terminate the agreement with the Glacial Ridge Curling Club. So, move second. I got a motion and a second to approve the termination. Any discussion? Roll call. Council member Gilbertson. Hi, Gardner. I mely I Davis I Butterfield I Shel I and I seven I's zero nose. The motion carries. Thanks Rob. Next is uh in regards to sale of low potency hemp. Um call on city clerk Verie Larson. So expanding on what director box talked about with the change in the fee schedule for low potency hemp edible retail registrations. Our role as city staff and city as a city of Wilmer has changed from a licensing agent to a registration only. So, their licensing now comes from the state of Minnesota

and the new law states that they must first get their license from the state which many op uh current providers are in the process of doing and then re re um reach out to the city or municipalities for registration only. So, our fees went from the 2,00 to 125 based on statute. But currently, I have three uh retail operators that have received their state licensing and are asking for registration approval from the city so that they can continue their uh which is now considered low potency hedible retail stores and that is the DND smoke shop, supervalue doing business as Cub Foods and Supervalue Doing Business as Cub Foods liquors. So, I'm looking for a motion to approve those registrations, and I do anticipate more registrations to come in as we get more applicants. Move to approve. Got a motion. Second. We got a second. Discussion. Justin, just a quick question as I mean, I think this is appropriate as as things have been changed. Um, my suggestion, and I'm just wondering if there'd be consensus from colleagues here, is that in the future this could move to a consent agenda item, take their silence as agreement. You think it's similar to how we um I think it's exactly similar to how we do a lot of those other Yeah. Go ahead. I we probably would have had it as consent agenda if you would have known that the license had correct. No. And that's why I'm I'm grateful that it's not tonight, but I'm saying in the future it would. Yes, it certainly will be. Thank you. We got a motion and a second. Roll call. Council member Gardner. Hi. Bagger Lee. Hi. Davis. Hi. Butterfield. Hi.

Shel. Hi. Osk. I. And Gilbertson. Hi. Seven eyes. Zero nos. Motion carries. Next, Sunday liquor license renewals for 2026. City clerk Bernie Larson. Again, annually, we send out applications to those license holders that have Sunday liquor licensing and renewals are due at the end of this year. Those that have applied are the American Legion Post 167, Applebees, the Eagle Lake Golf Club, Finsteads Week Po 1639, Foxhole Brew House, Green Mill of Wilmer, Grizzlies Grill and Saloon, Intuition Brewing, Jimmy P's, Ruffs Wings and Sports Bar, Spurs Grill and Bar, and the Wilmer fraternity order of the Eagles. I'm looking for approval on those licenses. Move. Second. Got a motion and a second to approve. Any discussion? [snorts] Hearing none. Roll call. Council member Faggerly. I. Davis. Hi. Butterfield. I. Chelese. Hi. O. Hi. Gilbertson. Hi. And Gardner. I. Seven eyes. Zero nos. Motion carries. Next is a proposal to hire consultant Dave Enmach for a joint session with the Wilmer Municipal Utilities. Lesie, good evening again, Council. Um, this started back in September of 2025 here where you council had directed me to work with uh, general manager Jiren Smith from the Gen U Wilmer Utilities to discuss creating the RFP proposals for a joint facilitating u work session. So tonight I'm bringing forward a recommendation that is really about relationships, specifically

strengthening the working relationship between the city of Wilmer and Wilmer Municipal Utilities. As you know, the city and WMU share a long history and a responsibility to work closely together in serving our community. Over time, several complex and important topics have emerged, including emergency planning, annexation, candy power cooperative coordination, and the agreements that guide how we work together. This engagement is intended to create space for open conversation, build trust, and ensure we have a strong, respectful partnership moving forward. To support this work, Wilmer Municipal General Manager Jiren Smith and I are recommending the hiring of Dave Anmach to serve as an independent facilitator for a joint engagement process between the city council and WMU Commission. Mr. Anmach's role would be to help guide thoughtful, productive conversations, ensure all voices are heard, and help both bodies work through issues in a structured and conservative way. Mr. Anmach's proposed processes include meetings with the city NWM staff, interviewing council and commission members, reviewing background materials, ultimately facilitating a joint work session between the city council and WMU commission. Throughout the process, he will work closely with myself and WM general manager to make sure the effort is focused, respectful of everyone's time, and aligned with our shared goals. Many of you already be familiar with Mr. Amachch. He previously served as executive director for the League of Minnesota Cities as well as county administrator for Scott County, deputy county administrator for Dakota County and city manager for Prior Lake. He spent his year spent his career working with elected officials and staff on

governance, communication, and organizational relationships. He is well known for his ability to build trust and navigate complex conversations. The proposed cost is an hourly rate at $190 with a not to exceed total amount of 12,500. This includes reimburseable expenses. Time and expenses will be tracked and I will be consulting [snorts] with WMU general manager if we approach that limit. Ultimately, this recommendation is about investing the time and resources needed to strengthen communication, improve outst understanding, and set a positive foundation for how the city council and WU commission work together in the future. Based on the importance of this effort, the commissioner's prior approval, and Mr. Amachch's qualifications. I'm recommending that the city council authorize me to enter into an agreement with David Amachch to facilitate this joint engagement process in the amount not to exceed $6,250 for the city. With that, I request a motion to approve and stand for any questions. A motion. So moved. Second. We have a motion and a second. discussion [snorts] to um I hope uh the council will support this. I think it's a a good step forward uh between the two uh two organizations and um but at the same time I um in the event that it reaches that uh $6,250 limit uh that you bring that forward to the council and not a u for us to to discuss. I I don't want to see it go beyond that uh financial level

uh going forward uh unless there's a significant reason for that. So um you appreciate the the ceiling on that uh dollar figure. The experience that I have with David is he's a stellar individual would do a great job. Rick and I were in some retreats that he before he was with the League of Minnesota Cities and he did a good job. So, we got a motion in a second. Any further discussion, Carl? I I'm a little out of the loop, I guess, on have things deteriorated to the point we need a facilitator between municipal utilities in the city. [snorts] I don't I guess I don't understand why we need to spend $12,500 on can't we just sit down and talk? I I [snorts] maybe I'm being overly simplistic or I guess I don't understand exactly what what his point is. What what would he do that we can't just do ourselves by sitting down and talking? Well, he can bring things out that maybe a participant cannot and make them realize what they're saying. That's been my experience. I say from my exper from my point of view, the reason I'll support the motion is I think that there's a lot of really complex things on the table and and bringing someone in with his experience um seems remarkably helpful as we try to

navigate that those conversations with the utilities and the commission. I think it could be really helpful. [snorts] Any further discussion? Rick. Thank you, Mr. here. Well, the one thing I see is we don't communicate with them. We did when we had committee meetings. They would come four times a year to finance and we discussed the manager would come and their accounting person. We always work together. So, where I see it is when we quit having committee meetings and we're going to workshops. Carl, I don't see how spending $12,000. We just need to communicate with them. So, we have a leazison in council. They're supposed to tell us what's going on. So, that hasn't been happening a while. I feel like we we do need the help to get the discussion going um to figure out where each side stands and then once we get on a good track then we can stay in touch and keep good conversation I'll just say the uh the same comment was asked at the utilities commission as well uh do we need to um hire somebody just to talk as well and so they've discussed it as well. Um, and uh, I think there's it it's worth asking the question. I think this will set us up on the right foot going forward as well, though, especially after a uh the uh the work

that was done on the site and and some major uh major dollars are at stake here. Um, I think it's it's a good time to involve that that outside person and you're feeling the 125 could actually save us potentially. I think it'll lead us more than that more right more right decisions. Yeah. Okay. Any other discussion? Roll call. Council member Davis. I. Butterfield. I. Shoulders. Hi Os. Hi Gilbertson. I Gardner I Faggerley no. Six eyes's one. No. Motion carries. Any announcements council staff. Rick. I got a call on Friday about our new sewer line from a realator. They had uh their line videotaped and the report was fine. Brought it to the city to Sarah. She saw part of it had cast iron. That's not permissible, I guess. So, they got a bid to replace their sewer line. The house is selling in January for $17,000. There's no cracks, there's no leaks, there's no nothing. I haven't heard anything from our administrator. I did report on that to council um through my weekly update and um I spoke to um Mr. Lindal this morning and they did research that

one that address that you gave me again and in their letter they only said that it was just because of cast iron but it actually does have some failings. It's not leaking, but cast iron is very uh corrosive in our toxic soils. And so it will in the near future start failing. And so um my direction to staff was that if it is functioning and working well then it should not be we should not be asking our citizens to replace it. We should be telling our citizens what they should be expecting and that in the near future that if they are doing any work that they should consider replacing that line. Um this particular line has uh HDPE which is a plastic form of um sewer line and on one end it has cast iron in the middle of it and then on the other end which is going out to the main it has PVC which are both acceptable on each end but for some reason they did not replace the middle part of it and why we don't know but it is also So, um, their rust areas are very, um, extensive and so you can see this in the piping. And so, I also instructed staff that they need to be clearer on why they are saying this needs to be replaced. And in that, they need to also show pictures of what the issue is so that the resident can have a clearer understanding of that. In some regards,

they have had uh the homeowner is there and they are able to watch what the contractor is videotaping and seeing what the contractor is saying. Now, our contractors also should not be saying that this looks good because this is up to the uh wastewater department to review the uh pipe and make sure that it's to the standards that the wastewater department is looking at. So, it's the contractor should not be giving opinion also on what they're taping. That doesn't help. Well, it wasn't their opinion. It was what was written on the report. It said it looks good. What What else are you supposed to say? Oh, it doesn't look so good. I don't recall that. But Sarah had al Sarah reviews those two and so to make sure that it is, you know, up. Yes, it wasn't leaking, but it is also looking close to like just Jason Lindell had said, it was like a ball of corrosion occurring. So, so what's going to happen with this one? Because it supposed to be closing in a week. I just They were going to go back to the homeowner and talk to the homeowner. That was this morning. Well, we're going to have an issue in town with homes selling because 90% of the homes have cast iron. So, I think you want houses to sell. If not, well, then our property taxes won't be going up because there won't be any changes in valuation because there won't be any sales. I think there is a medium here like I

had said that staff will if there if it's working it's fine but they need to be clear on what the expectations are for the future. Better let the realators know then. Any other announcements or Tom? Yeah. Uh just a bit of information for the um uh folks that I believe the civic center at the center from 4:30 to 6:30 on Thursday. They'll have uh some information on 4th Street there. So parties want to check out. I'll try to make that one see what uh anything else otherwise we're going to uh go to closed meeting. Ashford. This portion of the regular meeting of the city council will be closed pursuant to Minnesota statute section 13D.05 subdivision 3C. The following real property will be discussed separately in closed session. One parcel of land located under First Street Bridge between Benson Avenue and Highway 12. We had a motion to close the meeting. So moved. Second. A motion and a second. Roll call. Council Barasque.

Hi. Gilbertson. Hi. Gardner. Hi. Faggerly. Hi. Davis. Hi. Butterfield. Hi. And shoulders. Hi. Passes. Motion carries. The city council is now in close session pursuant to Minnesota statutes 13D.05 subdivision 3C. The time is 7:56 p.m. In addition to the city council also present at the close session.