I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> All right. Does anybody have any changes
to the agenda? I know we're going to add a joint planning update under number 6B as well as a CMRP update and 7A. Greg is going to handle that one. >> Anybody else have any other changes?
If not, I would look for a motion to approve the agenda as amended. >> I'll make that motion. >> I'll second. >> We have a motion by Robin, second by Mike. Is there any further discussion? Hearing none, all in favor, please state I. I. I. And you want to post, state no.
And that is carried. Guests in open form. Is there anybody here to speak to council tonight? All right. We'll move on to committee reports, presentations, and awards. Chief Limblum, the 2025 Police
Department bodywn camera audit presentation. >> All right. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Council. Thanks for having me. um don't need any type of approval or vote for you tonight. Just wanted to present our annual audit. Um it's actually a bi-annual. So uh every 2 years the
police department's required to go through a audit of our body warrant camera program which encompasses our policies, procedures, uh how we retain data, how we disseminate data from our body warrant cameras, uh that we're maintaining our inventory properly and
that we fall under all Minnesota state statutes uh regarding body warrant camera um use by uh municipal police departments. So um that was provided in your packet. I wanted to just uh present that we did successfully complete our audit without any discrepancies uh in
each of the categories that were uh reviewed by our independent auditor. So that'll get us uh through another couple years and then we'll uh we'll do it again in two. I did think it was uh somewhat interesting. I took a look at our files today. Um, and somewhat
surprising maybe, but uh, our department currently has 24,000 just over 24,000 videos on file, which equates to 4,240 hours of video time and uh, is 7,547 gigabytes of data. So just thought
interesting numbers to to show that there we do retain a lot of data in the form of digital video evidence and uh those videos from our squad and body warn cameras and that we have to to maintain that at a pretty strict standard for the state in order to be in
compliance. So and which we are if you have any questions about the body warn camera program um feel free to ask. Otherwise I just wanted to take a minute to let you know about the audit. Did >> you say 7,000 gigabits? >> Yes. Is that a lot? >> That'd be seven terabytes. Yeah, that'd
be a lot. >> Sweet. Yeah, seemed like a lot. So, yeah, a lot of data. >> How long do we retain stuff? >> It depends. So, most things are retained for about 3 years. Some of like even an accidental. If I turn my body warn
camera on on accident, I can label that as unattended, that's that's saved for 90 days um as just an accidental. And then that goes up 5 years, 7 years, and then lifetime depending on what the call for service is. And that's one of the things that they check is to make sure that we have our retention schedule
appropriate. >> Are you able to take stuff out and get rid of it or >> uh Yeah, we do have the ability to delete things. No, but I mean like now after the audit, is there a bunch of stuff you can take out? >> Nope. So, it's on a retention schedule. Um, so our program actually
automatically deletes it from the system as time goes. So, um, every month I get an email stating, here's the videos that are due to be deleted. Um, most of them are from, you know, 3, four, five, seven years ago. Uh, they've reached that life expectancy or that amount of time that
we need to retain those and then the the system just wipes them automatically. Are they retained here or is there a company that retains them? >> Yeah, we they're retained on a cloud. Yep. And through Axon or service company. So, we don't retain any of that data here. >> We pay them based on how much they
retain. >> Uh we we don't pay them based on how much they retain. We have an unlimited data account with them. So, we could do more, we could do less, and it doesn't affect the payment that we make to them. >> Yeah. >> I don't know why I asked. Hey, I'm here
for questions, right? All right. No other questions. Appreciate your time. Thank you. >> All right. Thank you, Chief. >> Well, that's [Music] >> Thank you for the piano solo. >> Let's add that to the agenda next month.
I like that. Very calming. Uh, moving on to committee reports. Budget and finance committee. Budget and finance met on August 21st. Pretty typical meeting. Had some budget discussion. Reviewed standard
financials. Looked at past two utilities. 60 days plus. We're at 18,900 as of the 20th of August. And that was about it. >> All right. Any questions for Robin on budget and finance?
Move on to planning commission then. >> Planning commission, we met Monday, August 25th. um pretty uh what we thought would be a really short meeting, but we did have a lot of uh just discussions on developments and updates uh more or less updates um to planning commission for stuff that we've talked
about for months, but just kind of getting planning commission up to speed on that. So, uh no other actions uh taken. >> Okay. Any questions on planning commission? Golf committee. >> Golf committee, we met on the 25th of
August. Everything's going great over there. numbers are looking good. Um, just wanted to give you some things like pay attention to social media and stuff. They do have some signs up, but the meat raffle and bingo are starting up again. And just for a heads up, the signs they
say Friday, it's not Fridays, it's on Sunday. So, just that will get fixed. So, that's going to be happening. They're going to start doing um some Viking game day specials. So there's like different every week they're going to have a different special and then they're going to we they have some
signed jerseys that they're going to do at the end of the season to win and the breakfast is coming back on Sundays that I don't know for sure the date yet but more you know midfall. Yeah, everything's going to go good over there. >> All right. Any questions for Becky on
golf? Joint planning. >> Joint planning met a week ago tonight. We reviewed a minor subdivision and re plotting of a property. That was it. >> That was a quick one.
>> It was seven minutes, I think. >> Oh, wow. >> All right. Questions for joint planning. Uh CMRP, we met last Thursday morning. Um and we're still working on phasing out the joint powers original piece,
moving it to the new um nonprofit. And there was some discussion um as we look at the river crossing. Mindot um is I would say maybe requiring a little bit more or putting a little more scrutiny into the fact that the 25 and
10 project um is also going on at the same time. So they just were concerned and wanted to make sure that the cart wasn't before the horse. So um we're working through that. didn't say it was necessarily going to delay anything, but it was just
a concern that was brought up. >> Not by us, by by MDOT. So, >> did they question the locations of things? >> No, there was no discussion on that at all.
there. I just think the the planners from CMRP are in pretty constant contact and that was just some of the feedback they got back. Would that be pretty accurate, Greg? >> Absolutely. >> Yep. All right.
Move on to public hearings. So, we have a public hearing for easement vacations. Mr. Larude's taking that. >> Mayor Coinger, city council members. Um as part of the replat project that Bo Bogart is doing uh in a uh conjunction with our uh land exchange um with Potter
Trucking uh there are some existing drainage and utility easements along the existing property lines uh that need to be vacated in order to do the replat. So there's clear title um once this is all done. And at the uh at your last meeting on August 29th, the city council called
for a public hearing tonight. Um because it is a uh public right ofway or public easement, public property, uh statute requires that we hold a public hearing to vacate it. And so um the the lines to be vacated were included along with the
exhibit A that was in your packet. These are just on the on the preliminary on the existing lot lines. When the plat is replplatted, those will be reestablished on the new law lines, the draining utility easements. Um uh all the mailing was done in
accordance with statutory requirements. Um all the um utility providers responded. None of them had any utilities in these easement areas. And I spoke with Jacob at 4:30 this afternoon. No public comment was received um either um regarding this vacation. And so with
that um I'll be happy to answer questions. Otherwise, we should just open the public hearing and and um take it from there. >> Okay. So, it's 5:10. We'll open the public hearing for the easement vacations. Is there anybody who would like to speak
about these easement vacations? >> He already did. >> Yes, he did. >> You were not a testifier. >> Nope. >> All right. I'll just close Close public hearing.
>> I'll second. Sorry. >> I think Robin won. She got it. That was correct. So, we have a motion by Rick, second by Robin to close the public hearings. Any further the public hearing? Any further discussion? >> Hearing none. All in favor, please state I. >> Anyone opposed, state no. Okay, the
public hearing is closed. Now, we have resolution 2562. And Greg already talked about that. So this would just vacate multiple drainage and utility easements in energy park 9th edition.
>> Uh I do have one question. Um so these are vacated. Is there new ones established then? >> Yeah. Once all once the survey and the replatting is done, they'll all be established on the on the either side of the all the all the lot lines in the new plat
>> because it drainage is always an issue. >> Yep. Yep. All right. Any other questions? Not. I'd entertain a motion adopting resolution 2562 vacating multiple drainage and utility easements and energy park 9th edition.
>> I'll make that a motion. >> I'll second. >> Rick one. That'll be quicker. Becky, we have a motion by Mike, second by Rick. Any further discussion? Hearing none. All in favor, please state I. I. >> Anyone opposed, state no. That motion
carries. All right. Moving on to administrator and staff reports. Highway 10 Liberty Lane Railroad Crossing Repair. Mr. Listen. Good evening, mayor and councel. Uh, so on August 26th, the city received a
phone call from a driver stating there was an issue with the crossing at Liberty Lane and Highway 10. Shortly after that phone call, we got a call from the railroad stating that yes, there was an issue at that crossing. Um, I include a picture in the RCA so you can kind of see what what the railroad
found. A couple of the panels had came loose. So, those are concrete panels. They made repairs with wooden planks. Um, and actually I went out and took that picture and the panel, not where the number two is, but the one just uh above that or to the left of that is also extremely loose. The truck went
over it and it bounced a couple of times. So, um, crossings get used a lot. Uh, so the railroad reached out basically stating that yes, there is an issue there and explained kind of what their position on that and doing the repairs to that crossing are. Um, I
included a copy of that email in uh the packet so you could see that. Um, so they're looking for a cost share to do those repairs. Um the cost share estimate that they submitted for their portion of the repair or the city's portion of what the railroad will do uh
was $70,400. So that'd be the actual uh uh panels that go around the tracks themselves. And then the city would be responsible for the asphalt patching that goes around the crossing and for traffic control uh since it is our crossing of their tracks is how I
understood it to be. Uh so I did work with SE and our engineers to get an estimate from them on what they thought the cost would be uh for the pavement patch and that traffic control. Uh their estimate is included in the packet. It was $64,000 for that. Um so uh what I
put in the packet proposed was either you know look for funds from either a future improvements or a railroad CIP. I did confirm with finance that we do have money available in the railroad CIP that could cover the cost for this repair. Uh so what I would be looking for tonight
would be a motion and a second to approve staff to spend money uh from the railroad CIP fund to pay for the city's portions of the repair to the crossing at Highway 10 and Liberty Lane as described in the RCA. >> And with that, I'll stand for
>> CIP supposed to cover the street crossing or I thought that was for the maintenance of the tracks and ties themselves. >> Uh well, for our spurs generally, yes. But I mean, this is kind of our portion of a railroad crossing, so it seemed
like it would make sense to use it for that as well. >> I did put future improvements in the RCA, too. So, >> street improvement money for it instead. >> Well, it's already allocated, though. >> Mhm. >> What's allocated? >> The street improvement list, like street
CF or something. Yeah, I I realize that. But I So what happens if we have to do some repair on the railroad before we before we get rid of it or whatever we do with it? Um where we where will we
get money for that if we have to do that? >> Uh so I did speak with finance uh just before the meeting actually and we were discussing that a little bit. uh we you could move funds from say future improvements into the railroad CIP if we did have a shortfall. So right now the
amount we have in the C in the CIP would cover these repairs and we would still have remaining money in that CIP. So let's see where's my note because we did didn't we do stuff last year with the railroad? >> Yes we did and we did an inspection this
year and we have a recommendation from them on what repairs we should do this year. Uh currently that railroad CIP has about $388,000 in it. >> But it was short long term though when we looked at the >> if we followed everything that the the
inspection company had suggested then eventually we would be short in that fund. Yep. >> Yep. >> I think that initially that was set I mean we're talking about the you know the term railroad being used two different you know same way. Hey, it's got they both got the trims railroad in it, but I mean that was initially set up
for our own spur. So, I guess I would I would prefer to leave it with what it was intended for, even though we are talking about a railroad crossing. >> Sure. >> Um I'd be fine taking it out of um future improvements. I guess I mean if we had it we had >> You're talking about repairing the crossing.
>> So, in other words, you're saying the same thing I'm saying. >> Are we okay? Is this normally a cost share anytime there's issues at a crossing? >> From everything I could tell in my correspondence with the railroad, yes. And Randy did mention that the railroad
is starting to push this a little more. He said in Sock Rapids there they have several pedestrian crossings of the railroad that the railroad is now asking for an annual fee from the city to maintain those crossings, which they haven't done in the past. So, >> I would I would not say it's uncommon.
It sounds like it's becoming more common. I think this is the first time I've encountered this because yeah, I was that's my first I was like, how did we end up getting this? I think this is the first time I've encountered this where we've been asked to >> my first time. >> The only other city they do a quiet
crossing, we pay the tab anyway. >> Yeah, that was 100% ours, but that was at our choosing, >> right? But so it's still our crossing basically. It's what they're saying. I'm guess way I'm looking at it. >> Yeah, I think that's why they use the term cost share. They wanted to try to make it feel like we're sharing in the
cost of the repair. Yep. >> And is this going to be a permanent repair? >> Yes. >> So it's not just a temporary >> temporary word. >> Well, down the road it'll have to be done again, but you know, they tear them up about every what, 10 years on that
concrete ones. >> I feel like this one was redone not that long ago, but I couldn't find any records in ours of when it was done last. So, but at the same time, you think about the traffic that goes across that crossing, it's a lot. >> Yeah, we need this for the industrial park for sure.
>> What is the traffic control? When they say traffic control, what are they talking about there? >> So, basically, they have to close that crossing for 3 days. So, it would be up to the city to close that crossing and or provide a detour for traffic. >> So, okay. >> Yeah. When we looked in there, we kind
of suggested, you know, up to 11 and down to Sherburn South. There is another route in there, but we try to not direct city traffic to roads that aren't ours. So, yep. >> Okay. >> So,
where are we taking the money from to do I mean, I agree we should we need to do this. I'm not disputing that. My only question is where is the money coming from then? Well, >> it sounds like you guys would prefer future improvements. So, that's where >> what is that fund usually used for?
That's a good question. What is that fund usually used for? >> Future improvements, I would guess. Right. >> So, so we don't allocate a lot of our interest to each of the separate funds because we really look at for the levy to provide support. So, future
improvements will kind of the the residual interest that's earned off a lot of the cash. And then, um, in the past, like we've talked to budget and finance where we've had a surplus of general fund over our fund balance policy, we'll transfer some of that residual. gives us the flexibility where when some of the capital improvement
plans need an influx based on, you know, one-off projects and things that we can pull some funds into there. Um, you know, the the u the railroad CIP was funded. We had uh a couple years back, 2024, we looked at um some of our other reserves. We had an environmental
reserve that was residual. um we transferred a portion of it over to I think the uh I think the enterprise funds to support some stuff and then the remaining 230,000 was transferred to this railroad railroad capital because we really didn't have a we don't have a levy that goes in there specifically. So
this is a way to bump that up. Um so like you guys have t Chris had mentioned there is you know about 35,000 a year that goes into maintenance and things within that railroad CIP. So, if we do pull from future improvements, it will allow that fund to last a lot longer and
be able to provide a lot of that uh over the future years. So, um >> where would we fund um the quiet zone that I know we have some upgrades we have to do there? >> I don't know. Has that been out of the railroad or >> Well, right now we we rolled so some of
the some of the repairs for the quiet zones, the painting and that was included in our street project. So, it was added on the street project. uh we haven't fully gone through the the changes to make those uh medians longer to to uh adhere to that. We have a
little bit of time. So, we're talking about next year's street project potentially including that uh those repairs in that because you always have the contractors there. So, uh might get us a better pricing for that. So, those would kind of go into streets kind of as you guys had alluded to. Yep.
>> Okay. Future improvements we typically it wouldn't be something we would budget for. It would be almost like this type of scenario where something comes up where it's um um maybe uh trying to think of stuff that we've maybe done with it, but it's like it's like stuff
that was not budgeted for um but came up like this um for future improvements, but I mean if it like but like with the that stuff we would we would budget for it so in streets so that that would not
>> right in future years we wouldn't we wouldn't budget for anything to come out future improvements. I guess it's more for we've used it in the past for stuff like this to where something comes up and it's a larger expense like that. And >> the other question I have, are we going to have to set up a CIP for the quiet
zone crossings for uh because we're going to be going through this whole thing again in another 10 years where we'll be replacing all that stuff again. >> Well, that was my question, Mike. Is a railroad crossing part of the railroad fund or are we going to consider it something? >> I don't think it should be. It's
actually streets. >> So even upkeep of the quiet zone would go into street CIP. >> Yeah. But we might want to put a line just for that. >> Yep. >> For the future, >> right? Yep. >> Yeah. If it's something we know is it's an expense. It's a
>> because it's going to happen every 10 years or whatever. >> You can the rail will tell you how often they average they do it >> with the zones. They just started doing their inspections. They hadn't really done their inspections. So, it's a lot
of signage, striping, stuff like that. >> Got it. >> So, you're going to see probably every two or three years. >> Hey, stop talking. >> You're getting yelled at. >> Oh my. >> At least he didn't throw it at you.
>> Light himself on fire. So the the uh rail inspections for the quiet zones uh throughout the state um will are are going to get stepped up. So we're probably going to see that every couple of years, three probably at the at the outset. But a lot of that requires uh reflectivity on the signage, the
striping and the median lengthening. So unless they change those standards, it's really going to come down to the signage will go into our sign package. They do, you know, streets department does the inspections uh throughout the city all the time and we're ongoing. We're replacing that. It's in our operating budget, probably two grand a year,
$2,500 a year. Uh, so we keep up on that. So, it's going to be there and the other stuff we can probably look to absorb in the street projects once they call them out. So far, they've been understanding that we can't just come out there and jump on it. We we don't have the staff, especially for traffic
control. I don't want our our guys on Highway 10 running traffic control. So, we'll hire the professional companies to come in and do that and then we'll just push that into the future year into our uh street CIP. So, I don't think it's going to drain uh or or be a huge burden
on the street CIP unless we have major in the rail spur uh when we got to replace all those ties and and the uh the uh um iron itself. So that's why I think it was $600 and some thousand dollar if we replaced everything they
recommended but it was over like a 10 or 12 year plan. So I think keeping it what you're talking about and then using this one you know temporarily during future improvements because it's a surprise uh makes a lot of sense. And then hopefully now that we're seeing BNSF doing these types of things. I know the county just
mentioned they had a similar thing on County Road 8 uh that they're working with. I think it was XL uh their spur but it's the county road. So, I think they're really delineating that and saying, "Okay, yeah, it's our lines, but it's your street. So, you got to pay. That's your shared portion is is
covering the line that that we allow your street to cross our tracks >> because if they had their way, >> no crossings, >> not great crossings, >> right? Yeah, we know that. >> So, >> okay. So, Mike, to your to your question that So, look, so like this picture
right here, we're talking about these are going to be replaced roughly every 10 years." It seems to me about every 10 years they but >> like I said the railroad would be able to tell you how often they average have to do it. >> Okay. And so if they're going to be replaced every 10 years and we know
especially going forward now that this is going to be asked of us of a cost share thing then I guess that's that's what you're >> Yeah. >> I don't I don't think the quiet zone stuff so much will be because I mean we extend the curb that's a onetime thing. >> But if they're going to make us pay for that where they used to pay for it all
themselves. If they're going to make us pay a portion of that from now on, we need to we need to put a line item in our budget for it. >> I would concur. >> Yeah. And we have the second crossing too at Hancock as well. So, um you can count on both of them. >> Yep. Hopefully, we have a third or get
rid of one. One or the other. >> Yeah. So we could, it sounds like there's kind of consensus to pay for it out of future improvements and then we could just direct staff to come back with a a plan moving forward since we know what's
going on with this. >> Is we do we have enough in future improvement funds to handle this? >> Okay. >> All right. Any other questions for Chris? If not, we would entertain a motion on the crossing repair to come out of
future improvements and direct staff to come back next year for budgeting with um some further recommendations for ongoing maintenance on the crossings. >> I'll make that motion.
Be the resolution for this. >> I don't think there was a resolution. >> No resolution. >> Resolution. Okay. Yep. Then I'll make that motion. Okay. Second. >> Have a motion by Rick, seconded by Mike. >> Oh, wow. >> Just calling it calling balls and
strikes as I see them. Uh, is there any further discussion? >> Angel Hernandez over here. >> Hearing none. All in favor, please state I. >> I. >> Anyone opposed, state no. Motion carried. >> I do no after that.
>> No. >> All right. City Hall landscaping. Mr. Larude again, >> Mayor Coer, city council members, when we prepared the plans and specs for the city hall police department project, we kept out the landscaping uh part of the work uh because we have the expertise
and the ability on staff to do the work cheaper for than what it would have been bid for. And so, Jacob uh we are at the point obviously our project is done. Jacob prepared the landscape plan uh along with the uh schedule and estimated budget uh for the project. Yeah, it has
gone through um quite a number of re reviews internally. Public works has looked at it project. The scope is also to clean up the south side and the the west side is really kind of timed out and and needing repair. Um and so along
with that I included had finance prepared sources and uses the project. So far, um, right now we're about $110,000 under what we expected, uh, at this point. So, there is sufficient funds, uh, to do this work. Um, if
approved, the, uh, the public works department, we would get the trees in likely this fall. The rest would probably wait until spring given the availability of plants in the fall. Um, and just the timing with everything else that's going on. And so, uh, I'd request that, uh, the council approve the work
as presented, uh, for an estimated cost of 31,15. That does include a 15, uh,% contingency, uh, as well. And I'll be happy to answer any questions. >> Um, where are the pine trees for the Christmas lights?
>> Uh, we don't have pine trees now. >> Bill, I'm trying. Greg, did you want to go through the Latin names for all these or Okay, you can lead us on that. You're you're Well, you're English major. >> Yeah, I I don't know about that, but
>> Echania, I saw that. I'm like, I know what that means. So, all right. Does anybody have any questions for Greg? If not, we'd entertain a motion to approve the city hall landscaping plan.
>> I'll make that motion. >> Second. And we have a motion by Robin and a second by Becky >> the love I'm here. >> Is there any further discussion? If not, all in favor, please state I. >> I. >> Anyone oppose, state no.
>> That motion carries. Tell Jacob. Thank you. >> We'll do. >> Nice that we could do that in house. >> Very nice. And county road 53 certification. Mr. Larude again. Mayor Cobinger, city council members. after the project was completed uh kind of road 53 and turned
back to the city last year. Uh we did that with a motion along with the resolution with Sherburn County, excuse me. The county received a Teddy grant to do their part uh of the work on Ky Road 53 and that required uh the county to
certify that the road would be maintained as a road um throughout its useful life uh with no changes unless they approved. when they transferred the road to us or we got it on the turnback. Um it was recently we recently had a closeout visit and they said, "Well, now
the city also needs to adopt that same language since the road is yours." And so um they uh staff had a meeting with uh DED along with the DOT and the resolution was revised to to reflect the city taking uh that on along with the
form uh that was included uh in the packet. Both of those the certification form and the resolution will be sent to the to the state. It doesn't change anything that we were planning to do with the project. It is purely a paperwork um requirement on the part of the state. And so with that that I'll be
happy to answer questions and if there aren't any um request that council adopt resolution 2566. All right. Any questions for Greg? If not, we'd entertain a motion adopting resolution 2566. A resolution approving certification with management and budget
state of Minnesota for 115th Avenue. >> I'll make the motion. >> I'll second. >> I have a motion by Rick, a second by Robin. >> Any further discussion? Hearing none. All in favor, please state I. I. >> Anyone oppose, state no.
>> That motion carries. Consent agenda. Mr. Larude. Again, >> Mayor Cobinger, city council members, items for review, approval, or adoption on tonight's consent agenda include the revised hiring and termination report, payment of the bills as presented,
minutes of the August 19th, 2025 regular meeting, minutes of the August 19th, 2025 executive session, the following committee meeting minutes, the July 21st fireboard, and the July budget and finance committee. Partial pay request
number three in the amount of $300,98.17 to OMG Midwest for the 2025 street improvement project. McDow invoice number 657970 in the amount of $26,870 for the 2025 library area air handling
unit and ACCU replacement at the community center. And I'll be happy to answer any questions. Any questions on the consent agenda? If not, we entertain a motion to approve the consent agenda.
>> A motion. >> I'll second. >> Motion by Becky, second by Rick for the consent agenda. Any discussion? Hearing none. All in favor, please state I. >> Anyone opposed, state no. That motion carries.
Anniversary announcements. Couple part-time employees, Gary Kala at golf maintenance, seven years. Jessica Spear at the community center, five years. And some full-time employees. Troy Dawson, maintenance coordinator at the
community center, two years. Rhonda Klein, kitchen supervisor at the golf food and beverage department, six years. Christopher Lindblum, uh, police chief, 12 years, and Sarah
Schaefer, seven years as public works as the admin assistant. Congratulations to those employees, and thank you for your continued work. Anybody says 12. Is that right? Was that 13?
>> Give a year. take a year, >> right? >> Well, it says here you started in 2013. >> Math is good. All right. We will recognize you next month if we were wrong. How's that?
>> That's right. Exactly. All right. Anybody else have anything they want to bring up? Uh question on the uh the post office boxes. Is that a done deal? Were you
>> um >> Sorry. >> Done deal. Well, we did receive a call today from someone at the post office who appears to be able to make a decision and we think it's we don't have
anything in writing, but I we think it's pretty close. that we would temporarily I don't know what that means um house them at the community center outdoors because they won't put them indoors. Um Phil might
have more information. Do you >> Well, the reason I I'm not real excited about having that at the community center. I don't know why. I just How about where the old post office used to be across from Charlie? >> Where was that from Charlie's? It's a
cement slab you put down >> or what? >> That's pretty busy over there though. >> It It is. It does require cement. >> Well, no. It'd be right on There's No, there's nothing there. >> I guess I don't know where you're talking about. Mike, you
>> talking across from Charlie's? >> Yeah, across the street >> on Hancock there. >> No, on First Street. >> It's where I wanted to make parking >> where mis used to be. Huh? >> Where Mastonies used to be. >> Yeah, >> there you go.
>> Um the the reason we chose this was because um it's an area at the the community center that could benefit long term from the concrete. And we thought >> it would be reduced maintenance costs in the future. And if if the post office
was paying for that, we didn't want it to be somewhere where we just wouldn't have a use for it. No, that's a valid reason. I can go along with it. But the problem is what if that becomes permanent? Is that
>> I'm never going to say it's never going to become permanent. But um every indication they gave me two weeks ago is they are still exploring the permanent location of either retail or retail and
operations in Becker. And there has been another recent counter proposal, but um in order to maintain the confidentiality of those negotiations between the >> person and the post office, I don't want
to say more, but there has been some renewed interest, more than I've seen since January 1st, that they are taking it seriously and looking for something. So, um, Senator Smith and Clolobachar did send a letter, um, two weeks ago and
they had a deadline of last Friday, so I haven't heard what what happened. I know both offices reached out after the, um, shooting at the private school in Minneapolis and said that was obviously taking some of their time, but I I think we'll we'll find out more here in the
next month. Um, we don't I don't know how long this will be for. Uh >> when will this have to be done? >> Well, there the lease expires the end of October. So, I did talk with the person today and they said that um once the
concrete is established, it has to sit for 7 days and then the post office would be ready to put them up right after that. They they would like a a welllit, you know, area that, you know, as secure as it can be. So,
And like I said, my criteria was if they're going to put something in, let's get something out of it. >> But we don't have any written I mean, we just literally got a phone call from a person we've never heard of today that works for the post office, which is not the person that I was told was the
decision maker. Um, but when I called him back today, he said he had already talked to Phil 20 minutes prior and they had a good plan worked out. So, um, that's what I know.
>> Are are people okay with that? I mean, >> yeah, >> for sure. >> We do have businesses that have told me um they will have to leave Becker if they don't have >> No, I'm not. >> No, I know. I know that. I'm just saying it. >> I just was questioning doing it at the community center, but you got a valid
reason for doing it there, so I don't have a problem with it. I'm like, "Wait until September 2nd for me to get started." >> I was impressed this guy could make a decision. I thanked him. That was pretty cool. >> Yes. So, I gave him dates. So,
basically, we'll work with public works staff um tomorrow morning. We'll go through that. Uh the goal would be to have concrete put in place by the end of next week. Uh that gives them basically the week of the 22nd they can have at it to to do their installs, giving them as much time. So, we're going to try and
ram this thing in in place. Uh, I did confirm that he saw a I said, "Have you seen the quote?" I'm going off the quotes that the mayor had. I don't know if you've relayed those. And I said, "So, you're paying for this?" >> And he said, "Yes." So >> So, do we have to approve anything?
>> I don't know. I think eventually we're going to have to have an agreement with them for sure. >> Yes. >> Yeah. Because it'll be their property and we'll have to >> It's our property, but they're >> they're going to be responsible for it maintenance. Yeah. So, we will have to have some type of written agreement.
>> So, we'll come back to you. >> Could we in the interest of having this done, could we agree to it tonight and entrust staff to finalize that agreement? Empower you to do that? Cuz if we got to wait two more weeks, there's
>> I don't think we would slow them down. I think we would make sure we had some type of a lease agreement in place that it would give them a little time to get us something. Okay. >> If not, we can propose a lease agreement, send it to them and say somebody signed >> and I can work with budget and finance.
I we can probably the the cost of the the concrete if we do it internally with staff, we can pull it out of our operating budget and then work with with finance to get an invoice pushed back out to them and just replenish those funds. So, it would come operationally. I think we can absorb it there. It's not going to be a huge expense and it'll be
staff time which we're billing them for as well. So, if you guys are comfortable with that, we we can move forward with this very very quickly and then a long-term solution as far as the lease or the who's holding, you know, who who's maintaining those or whatever. >> So, >> and I don't see them relocating delivery
to these until the end of the lease at the post office, which is the end of October. So, there is some time to get it in place. >> Sure. >> Yeah, I'm sure they're going to run that out to the very end. >> That's all. >> Okay. So, do we need any further
direction, Phil? Do you feel like you have enough? >> Because you guys are okay with us moving forward, we'll get after it right away. >> Okay. >> All right. >> Yep. >> Anything else? >> Satisfied. >> Okay.
>> Not entertain a motion to adjurnn. >> I move we adjourn. >> Second. >> Motion by Mike, second by Rick. All in favor, please state I. >> I. I. >> Anyone opposed? State no. Meeting's adjourned at 5:42. Take a couple minute hiatus and then get
started with the exact session. >> Like my Angel Hernandez reference there. Not everybody will get that one. >> I thought you were like a medical. >> I know. I thought you like were burning yourself. >> I did. I knew what was happening. I was like, "Oh god, >> I just had a reaction
and I was like, I need to stop this right now." RC with it. >> Yes, that'd be awesome. >> Set up a stand right here, but like I'm afraid that people still >> How about you put Nerf on the end and launch it at people?
>> Yeah. Yeah, just a little reach out insert and we'll >> you know like >> it'll be a good time. >> Practicing her chairs in the mirror. Are you kidding?
>> Practicing what? >> Cheers. >> Okay, that's adorable. You got to look at yourself. >> I'm not going to lie. That was me as a child. I'm not going to lie.
>> I know what her future is. >> That's adorable. >> We're ready to go. I think You ready? >> Yep. Mhm. >> Great. >> Let's do it. >> All right. We'll call the executive session to order at 5:44.
Uh first item up on the agenda is Mr. Ebansteiner with the budget discussion. >> All right. Thank you, Mayor and Councel. So kind of a in in prior years we have brought the prelim budget to the first September meeting but based on timing
with tax capacity numbers and and things we thought a good opportunity just to present some preliminary information tonight and then circle back um on the 16th with the the formal uh preliminary uh levy adoption. All right. So, with that, um, the agenda
as in front of you. Um, I'll give you an update on some of the previous, uh, presented budget, some changes that have been made. We'll look at a a levy summary. I'll update you on some of the tax capacity information that we do have now. Uh, and then included in that levy summary is a levy rate summary. And then
we can uh, answer any questions and discuss and get any additional guidance as we roll into that preliminary um, levy adoption. So um got five items I'll touch on with some changes from previously presented budgets. So we had
discussed the police sergeant um and the discussion that came out of there was to include half of the police sergeant uh position in the 26 budget. So that has been added. I think that's around 701 >> 71,000. So half included in 26. Um and
that was just a net addition of expense and the related uh levy. Uh second item reduced the revenue projection for the building permits as well as the cost related to providing the building inspection services. So there no net levy change but it's an adjustment to
both the revenue and expense on that side. Uh we did update the EDA budget uh for a higher level support and professional services with the loss of the coordinator. Um so a net addition of expense um the levy is still a reduction. So went from 234,000
in uh 25 it'll decrease to 200,000 in 26. So a net decrease but still added a little bit back um as we look through that budget there. Uh the remaining energy transition aid for unit 2 uh we changed a little bit of
how we allocated that. just looked at where 26 and 27 were rolling out with some of our assumptions on overall change and felt we could use a little bit more in 27 a little less in 26. So you'll see that as we look at the next summary um where we made uh those
changes. So 100,000 in 26 and then I think the remaining was like 230,000 and 27 and then uh we did make uh recently we made an adjustment to the admin capital um spend. No change in the overall levy but we did pull 10,000 back into 26 um
looking at a uh fuel system upgrade over there as we're coordinating with the school. Uh we also coordinate with the fire department. Um the s the fuel system that's there is definitely old and antiquated um and almost end of life to the point where the system might just
stop running. So thought it it best if we're going to especially work with other organizations just to have a really good system in place. So Chris worked on some of the numbers um pulled 10K in admin CIP and then you'll see some of that as well in the enterprise which we haven't talked yet but the water and sewer funds would also pay a
portion of that upgrade as well since they do utilize those fuel systems. So those are really the changes that uh were made from those previously presented budgets based on um feedback we had received um from the council and then as well as additional um
discussions. Um with that we can look at the levy uh the rate summary um so all the all the figures on the uh on the summary there. So we have a couple years of of prior data with 24 and 25. Um and then do have
the preliminary 2026 information there. Um currently the community center just an item to community center is part of the general fund but we we still separate it here just for analysis kind of get a feel for where that levy is at. we may consider um absorbing that, you
know, into the general fund um line item in the future, but since that is fairly new, we'll continue to include that. Um there you can see under that operating on the top section, the EDA, that's where we we decrease the 200,000. Currently, we do levy that under the
separate statute for EDA on your tax statement, you would see it come through as a special taxing district. We are considering as we're rolling um you know forward into future decommissionings about just absorbing that into the general levy and then we could still recognize the revenue there. Really
there's not a great reason. I mean we always levied under that specific statute but we're really not required to. Um and then as we are eligible for future transition aid amounts that would be included in the calculation currently since it's a special taxing district. we
would not be provided transition aid for that levy amount. Um so future discussion but just wanted to kind of tee that up um for there. So there you'll see the energy transition aid of 100,000 total operating levy of 6.231
million. That center section there has all the capital improvement levies total capital improvement levy of 2,767. Um and then the debt service levies just just shy of 1.5 million.
So overall total levy amount 10,498,579 thou $799 that'd be an increase of 2.45% from uh 25. So there's the summary of the preliminary levy
increase of 2.45%. Uh update on tax capacity. So, I did uh I did reach out to the county uh today and they just ran their prison reports earlier today. Um NSP did settle early.
So, we had thought that we wouldn't get numbers until either this week sometime or even in the next week. They did settle I think uh early early last week we got revised numbers. So, the county grabbed those numbers. They started incorporating them
into their into their uh reports. Um what we did learn and I didn't include the the full detail because I was still looking at some of the data. So initially as we discussed in budget and finance Rick we had looked at NSP and um
I think you between the two unit three had decreased um which was Southern Municipal they had decreased around um I think it was around $6 million of overall market value. um they were down about a percent or so. Um but then NSP,
the Northern States Power units one and two had initially gone up with the initial assessment had gone up like 10%. So we were thinking, okay, they went up 10%. Um there's always the appeal they were going through the appeal process over the last bunch of years. We're trying to wrap our head around what
happens to that value. Um in prior years they had gone up 15%, settled at 7, gone up 12%, settled at four. Um this year they had initially gone up that 10 um overall it was around 5%. Um the final
numbers um they ended up uh northern the units one and two actually decreased um decreased I guess overall the number I have they went uh overall circle 1 2 and three went down 1.8%.
>> They went from up 10 to minus one. >> Well 10 was a part of it. So 10 was NSP. Um, initially they were up they were up that and then I don't have my calculation here but it ended up uh Northern States Power sold units one and two went from 394 million down to 390
million. >> So about the 10 down from the plus 10. >> Yep. So they were up 10. Now they went down pretty much flat. So in all actuality units 1 2 and three are down
1.8%. 8% from last year and we had projected around a 5% increase with a combination of units one and two you know some of those PIDs are separated the properties but so in the end they went down 1.8 so overall um we did see some increase on the residential as well
as other commercial industrial um so as you can see on your on your sheet preliminary total net total tax capacity 21.261 261 million. So an increase of 3.89. We did include an assumption. We took
off another 50,000 between now and the end of the year. Um Kexus is still appealing their values. Smaller dollar amount, but Kexus Energy still has their appeal. And then we always see some remaining bankruptcies. Um you know, just just some unique things that come in where that tax capacity does decrease
a little bit. So looking at just shy of a 4% increase in overall tax capacity which is good um considering you know with with the shutdowns of of unit 2 lot of moving pieces. We have seen some some
um additions over there you know be it the you know um some of the uh you know power lines um you know some of the stations and things. So we've had some investment as they're transitioning from what they were to what they will be. um but did see the the decrease. So
>> this this increase is that primarily from residential then or is it commercial? >> Well, we're seeing values, you know, it's um with with the the purchase of the land, you know, so land purchase Amazon and and Microsoft with purchasing
those land parcels that, you know, they're they're a top 10 taxpayer within the city just from purchasing the land. So that helped. Some of those land values went from, you know, three million to 15 million. Um I I forget what the specifics are, but some of it
is commercial industrial. You know, it's >> because I I was under the impression that the commercial or industrial was was going down rather than up. >> I would say a lot just from clicking around, you know, on the Ps. I was doing
something that my evaluation a lot were holding steady. um was didn't see a lot of big decreases. I would say I would say other commercial industrial had increased as well as some of the bigger ones with the land purchases >> because of the land purchases. >> Yep. Those with the land purchases and
others, you know, if you if you go in the industrial park and look on Beacon, they're very consistent values, you know, up up 3% up 5%. But didn't see any drastic decreases on the commercial industrial side. I don't have the breakout yet. I usually request some additional information
>> at our border review that we had in April that they had said that the industrial commercial was down.9%. >> Yeah. And that's what I pushed back on, Mike, too. When we did um when you look at the uh the meeting that we had back
in April, they had they had um had information that the estimated market value was going to go up uh like 15%. So, I'm looking at I'm looking at the county and going, "Well, 15% these aren't the numbers that I'm seeing with this tax capacity." Well, what you hear
is a lot of those estimated values don't have all the pieces to it. You know, they don't include all the new like the new properties there. There's variables that are buried into that data into that data that don't necessarily you can't say estimated taxable taxable value
equates to tax capacity. They don't they don't quite run in the same they don't run parallel. So that's where you see the inconsistencies. So when they present in the spring and they give you, you know, figures of this is what's going to happen when it comes to fruition and they're actually doing market value, you know, true market like
taxable market value and then the related tax capacity, those don't quite jive with each other. So I had the same questions as I looked at the data is why why are why are these preliminary numbers not I I would have expected our values to go up more based on what they
had mentioned at that April meeting. um at least as a whole. So um so overall um right around 4%. So if you look at tax rate um you know estimated tax rate with those
assumptions tax rate would go down. 693% from our 50.071 down to 49378 and that is as a whole. So that's the EDA and the and the general um tax capacity rate um as well.
So any questions on the data or any observations? Good question, Mike. on the on the tax uh capacity side. Um you know, as as I mentioned, we included that prelim adjustment just as uh you know, kind of decreasing a little bit, but um you know, a lot of times these
once they run that prism report and all that data is there, like this is a good snapshot of where we're at. And then now from now to the end of the year, it's a lot of just the homestead stuff. They'll they'll keep taking stuff until the end of, you know, December 31st and then they'll run those numbers and then kick
it out back in March. I'm wondering too that uh the 15% um that they gave in April, April's usually behind cuz it would be up until what September 30th or October 1st of the year before. So, and if you Well, that's when it ends
and then it goes a year back from there. So, if you think of in that time frame, we were still we were still on the very tail end of it, but that's when we were seeing the pretty rapid inflation in houses. So maybe that's why cuz the numbers in April 10 are behind and play catchup on it. So maybe that's why we
were seeing that why we're looking here more at current day and that's talking about starting last October and going back a year. So >> yep, really a data point, but they just don't quite correlate um with each other as well. >> Yeah.
>> All right. So just a reminder as as I mentioned in um just the notes, you know, we uh you know, this is really just the baseline. So um this will be our our our max levy. Um can go down but can't go up. Um
really just have, you know, as we get closer to untaxable market value, we'll have some better numbers. We'll ask for the county to provide better better data as we're getting getting closer to the end of the year. um do will finalize those utilities and get that information
over to over to the county. Um yeah, so from there um you know, incorporate any additional, you know, council input. >> Um we'll incorporate any of those those changes in values and then we'll seek
approval on the 16th and then get that to the county by the 30th. Any further questions for Mark? Any other items to highlight that I maybe skipped over? Sometimes you get so close to the data
that you forget pieces, but >> very good. All right. Thank you. All right, chief is up next. Mayor and Council, just wanted to provide a update on the police department full-time hiring um and kind of the steps moving forward. As you know that we had posted for a position for
full-time. We received four applications. Of those four, three were selected to be interviewed. And of those three, we did uh present an offer to one candidate uh who initially accepted and then a few days later had contacted me
to withdraw that acceptance to uh take another job offer in the county. So, uh that kind of brings us back to where where are we now and how do we want to move forward? Uh we've talked internally about the couple candidates that we did have along with the candidate we made
the offer to and didn't feel that they were um in a position where we would want to extend an offer to them. And so therefore um looking for guidance on two aspects of this. One would be um moving forward with re uh opening and reposting
for the full-time position. And then additionally, one of the discussions that we had uh was referencing our city of Becker recruitment uh incentive, which is a policy that the city of Becker has to try to bolster some
candidates for a position that's typically harder to fill. Um and in this case, uh we've obviously struggled. Um the job market is saturated uh with employment opportunities and uh additionally it's not the best time for
hiring a police officer. There's no schools really getting out right now. Families are kind of going back to their lives and things like that. So first and foremost was to gauge interest uh or thoughts on moving forward with uh
posting that position again through the Minnesota Post Board for hiring. Um, if that's something that the council thinks that we should move forward with as of right now, um, then I would, uh, present, uh, offering that recruitment incentive. And if you're not familiar with it, um, we haven't used it before.
Um, but the city does allow for a recruitment incentive for positions that are hard to fill. Um, it's up to $2,000 incentive for employees to uh refer somebody for a position and then that in turn gets um incentivized to the person
who's hired as well. Um, and I would propose uh moving forward with that incentive for somebody with full-time um experience as a law enforcement officer in that full amount and then considering a half of the uh amount for $1,000 if
it's a new hire. It's not something that they get paid out day one. Uh here's your money. >> When is the >> Yep. It's incremental steps. Um I I don't know the exact specifics. Shannon might be able to throw some of that in there, but um it's after they've stayed a certain amount of time, then they'll
get uh payouts as they go. Um so it's nothing that would be an instant instant payout, but um I think considering the circumstances that we've been having with trying to hire full-time, um this might incentivize uh some of our staff
to try to work hard on getting people to to apply to to work here. and and if we can get somebody with experience, that's even better. Uh because that reduces our, you know, training time and they come with a lot of knowledge and experience as well. So that's what I got for you.
>> This this person that accepted the offer and then withdrew, did he just he just get a better better offer someplace else or? >> Yeah, I don't know the specifics of the exact reasoning. I know that at the time that we offered him the position, he was in um he was in the background phase
with um another local jurisdiction and initially said that he was going to go with us and then called back few days later and said that he was going to go with the other jurisdiction. So I don't know the specifics. >> Is this incentive package is that
enough? Is that is it enough that it'll make a difference? >> Um I don't know. Right. I we we haven't had to use it before at the PD side. Um I'm always trying to get our guys and gals to try to reach out to people that
they think would be a good fit for our department. Um whether or not this we find somebody new, I'm not sure. Um this wouldn't be a hey, if we don't find candidates now, we're just going to post again. I think in that case then we've
talked we'd probably wait until um spring uh just to try to gather some of the the new recruits that are going to be coming out of some of the um >> Yeah, but you're looking for a sergeant, right? >> What was that? >> You're looking for a sergeant though. >> Nope. This is just the already the fulltime cuz we're short right now. So,
we're short because of my promotion. They we're short a body right now. So, we're just trying to get that filled. Um and we were optimistic there with the offer that we had made and it it fell through. So now we're kind of back at the starting point again and trying to
come up with ways that we can get somebody in here that's qualified and can provide that, you know, that good service to the to the citizens. >> Okay, now that's now I understand better. >> Yeah. Yep. So we're still we're still
down one as of right now. We're just trying to get that >> bolstered back up and then go from there. I think it makes sense. We haven't tried it before. >> We're not out anything if we try it, >> right? >> I would say go ahead. We're a body
short. We need to >> Yeah. So, normally this process so the the as far as the incentive goes, that would normally go through personnel, but obviously with kind of the time time constraints and things like that. So, the plan would be then if if if I have your blessing, then we would just uh get
that all sent to the post board tomorrow for reposting. We'll keep it open for that time period. I'll probably leave it open a little bit longer than normal, which is usually 3 weeks. Um potentially go a little bit longer and then um if we're comfortable with the recruitment side of it, I just wanted to get your
blessing on that just because that's typically something we have to have approved prior to the um position being advertised. So, >> I'm sure we've saved way over that by not having a position filled for >> as far as the Yeah, I think as far as
the incentive um payout, we we're fine budget wise on any of that. Yep. >> Yep. >> Any objections? >> All right. Well, I'll move forward then with uh posting that tomorrow. Thank you for your time. Appreciate it. Thank you.
Look. >> All right. Prong table. >> Nothing. >> I created enough ruckus. >> I don't think I have anything. >> Um, I got just one thing. Um, drop a pen. Um, so Coalition Utility
Cities, uh, that we're a member of. Um so a small subset of us u met last week um kind of talking about getting a little bit of a head start on the um kind of what are the agenda items
that we want to carry forward in the 2026 session. Um when that comes about um the discussion about nuclear power has at the state level right now there's a nuclear moratorum so no nuclear can't
even be considered in any um any plan that Excel proposes other than extending a other than extending one of the existing plants which they have extended both um the political climate right now has probably never been better for Nuke if
you want to say there's um used to be kind of um you know you had certain groups that would really take it and run with it. Um now it's it's um you have um some of the labor union the bigger labor unions. So you're um um uh Leuna and
such have kind of taken this and are starting to run with this. So it's it's getting a lot more um steam probably than most people have said they've ever seen it at the state level. So um this is something that the uh coalition would
be considering um but I wanted to start the discussion amongst us first. So I just wanted to throw it out today for um uh going to be getting some info back to um for probably our next exec session. So I just wanted to kind of prime the pump for not really to have a discussion
but I just want to kind of prime the pump that um there'll be some info coming which will we can get disseminated to everybody in the next you know before the next meeting. So just kind of um and there could be different facets of it. It could be micronuclear only. It could be um you
know it should be say just um uh Microsoft and other states has done that where they've proposed where they say we're going to build a plant that or we're going to build a data center that needs um 850 megawws of power and we're going to propose that we build a micronuclear plant on site that only
services us. So kind of like we did with the diesel generators but um strictly only for them. they they could turn around and sell it, but they would be building it primary. I got a friend here. Um, so I mean it could be micronuclear only. That's been one of the discussions that's kind of has been
seen as maybe a compromise um at the state is like okay we we can maybe not another prairie island but how about something smaller that can be more um you know and why why would that uh discussion care for Becker is because
most of the likely they would want to deploy those at locations where um with in terms of the power grid they're going to want to be deployed at spots where um they have the interconnect ready. So, of course, Becker being one of them and we
will have power to give uh very likely um and if the EPA um the way they calculate that stuff changes, we'll have even more power to to give in terms of the interconnect. So, um something that potentially
there is a possibility of a be of Becker hosting one someday. So um >> so just wanted to prime the pump for discussion on that. So um next couple weeks maybe the next exact session um uh we can take the material I have maybe
discuss it and see if that's um something we feel strongly about then um that's something that the coalition um being that this is gaming steam the coalition would basically become one of a number of voices then that would uh um be championing this at the um in the
next uh legislative session. Sounds good. >> Anything else? >> All right, we'll adjourn the executive session at 6:11.