EVERYONE AND WELCOME. >> I WILL CALL THIS BLOOMINGTON CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS MEETING TO ORDER MONDAY, AUGUST 11TH, 2025. THANKS TO EVERYBODY JOINING US IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS. THANKS TO EVERYBODY WATCHING
ONLINE. THIS WAS ACTUALLY A WE HAD CALLED THIS IS A SPECIAL AND THE SEPARATE MEETING ADDED AN ITEM ON TO IT AND COUNCIL OUR AGENDA FOR THIS EVENING.
OUR FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS IS TO APPROVE THE AGENDA. WE HAVE TWO ITEMS THAT ARE ORGANIZATIONAL BUSINESS ITEM 2.1 IS A LOOK AT THE CITY MANAGER EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT AND ITEM 2.2 IS A CLOSED
MEETING FOR DISCUSSION ON EMERGENCY PROCEDURES. AS I SAID ORIGINALLY WE WERE JUST GOING TO GO TO ITEM 2.2. THIS WAS JUST GOING TO BE A SINGLE TOPIC MEETING TONIGHT BUT AFTER OUR DISCUSSION WHAT
TWO, THREE WEEKS AGO NOW AND OUR SELECTION OF A NEW CITY MANAGER, WE THOUGHT IT BEST TO TO GET THE CITY MANAGER EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT PUT TOGETHER AND WE DID WE WERE ABLE TO NEGOTIATE AN AN
AGREEMENT AND WE DECIDED RATHER THAN WAITING UNTIL OUR NEXT REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN THE 26TH OF THIS MONTH WE DECIDED TO MOVE IT UP BY TWO WEEKS AND TO GET IT DONE THIS EVENING AND
SO THAT WAS THE THE DECISION AND HOPING WE CAN HAVE A GOOD CONVERSATION ON THAT. SO THOSE ARE TWO AGENDA ITEMS TONIGHT. THE ITEM 2.1 THE CITY MANAGER EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT AND ITEM
2.2 OF THE CLOSED MEETING FOR A DISCUSSION ON EMERGENCY PROCEDURES. WAS THERE ANY CORRECTIONS OR ADDITIONS TO THAT? I WILL MOVE THE AGENDA AS STATED SECOND MOTION IN A
SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER TO ACCEPT TONIGHT'S AGENDA AS STATED NO FURTHER COUNCIL DISCUSSION ON THIS. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE SIGNIFY BY SAYING I OPPOSED MOTION CARRIES SEVEN ZERO AND
WE HAVE AN AGENDA. ITEM 2.1 IS THE CITY MANAGER EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT AND AS YOU KNOW COUNCIL WE OUR CITY
MANAGER POSITION BECAME VACANT AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS YEAR IN 2025 AND WE LAUNCHED A A SEARCH FOR A REPLACEMENT ON MAY 16TH CLOSED END ON JUNE
16TH ATTRACTED CANDIDATES FROM ACROSS THE COUNTRY AND AS WE DID THE INTERVIEWS FOR THE POSITION OF THE CITY MANAGER IT OCCURRED IN THE END OF JUNE AND TURNED INTO JULY AND ZACK WALKER WAS SELECTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND A CONDITIONAL
OFFER WAS MADE AND A IT WAS MADE AND ACCEPTED AND WE HAD PRE-EMPLOYMENT CHECKS AND THEY'VE BEEN COMPLETED TONIGHT WE'RE ASKED TO TO LOOK AT AND APPROVE THE EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE CITY MANAGER THAT DEFINES
THE TERMS AND THE CONDITIONS OF THE EMPLOYMENT AND COUNCIL. AS YOU LOOK AT THIS, THE WHOLE THE AGREEMENT THAT IS WITHIN
THE PACKET HERE, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF THINGS WE COULD TALK ABOUT AND WE COULD GO THROUGH A BIT BY BIT. I THINK THERE ARE TWO MAIN THINGS THAT ARE REALLY THAT REALLY DIFFER FROM THIS AGREEMENT AND THE AGREEMENT THAT A PREVIOUS CIT MANAGER
HAVE AND THE TWO ARE PRETTY OBVIOUS. THE FIRST OBVIOUS ONE IS THE INCLUSION OF A RELOCATION STATEMENT A $15,000 JUST TO MR. WALKER LIVES IN INDEPENDENCE, MISSOURI JUST TO HELP HIM WITH THE MOVE UP
HERE TO BLOOMINGTON, MINNESOTA . SO THAT THAT'S THE BIG ONE. BUT THE OTHER THINGS IN TERMS OF HOURS OF WORK INDEMNIFICATION THE THE THE
GOVERNMENT AND CIVIC AND PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS ALL ARE PRETTY SIMILAR AND PRETTY STANDARD PIECES OF AN EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY MANAGER. THE OTHER ONE THAT IS DIFFERENT OBVIOUSLY FROM OUR PREVIOUS CITY MANAGER WAS THE
SALARY AND THE THIS SALARY THIS EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT CALLS FOR THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON TO PAY MR. WALKER AN ANNUAL BASE SALARY OF $253,250 IN INSTALLMENTS AT
THE SAME TIME AS THE OTHER EMPLOYEES IN THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON. AND THAT IS A SIGNIFICANT INCREASE OVER WHERE WE WERE WITH OUR PREVIOUS CITY MANAGER
. AND I WILL SAY THE MAIN REASON IS BECAUSE WE ARE LOOKING AT A DIFFERENT MARKET NOW IN THE STATE OF MINNESOTA, THE STATE OF MINNESOTA FOR YEARS THE
PAYMENT TO CITY MANAGERS WAS LIMITED BY A SALARY CAP, A LEGISLATIVELY DIRECTED SALARY CAP AND IT ACTUALLY DID AFFECT RECRUITMENT WITHIN THE CITY
MANAGER COMMUNITY. IT WAS SOMETHING THAT THE LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES ARE WORKED AGAINST FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS TO TRY AND GET REPEALED BECAUSE IT WAS BASICALLY UNFAIR TO OUR OUR CITY MANAGERS IN THE CITY
IN THE STATE OF MINNESOTA AND IT KEPT US BELOW IN MANY CASES WELL BELOW THE NATIONAL AVERAGE FOR CITIES OF COMPARABLE SIZES AND IT MADE IT DIFFICULT TO TO RECRUIT TO TO BE HONEST.
SO WITH WITH THE REPEAL OF THE THE SALARY CAP, IT'S BASICALLY IT'S LIKELY GOING TO RESET THE MARKET ACROSS THE STATE OF MINNESOTA AS AS DIFFERENT POSITIONS ARE FILLED WE SAW IT
IN THE CITY OF WOODBURY I KNOW THERE IS A COUPLE OF OTHER CITY OPENINGS THAT ARE EITHER IN PROCESS OR COMING UP VERY QUICKLY AND FRANKLY THEY'RE GOING TO BE HIGHER THAN THEY HAVE BEEN IN THE PAST BECAUSE THE SALARY CAP HAS BEEN
ELIMINATED AND IT'S GOING TO BE IT'S GOING TO FALL MORE IN LINE WITH THE NATIONAL AVERAGES. NOW ONE THING THAT I DID WAS ASK ARE OUR CONSULTANT IN THIS
TO TO TAKE A LOOK AT OTHER COMPARABLE CITIES IN THE UPPER MIDWEST CITIES THAT HAVE NOT BEEN IMPACTED BY THE SALARY CAP IN PREVIOUS YEARS AND I ASKED YOU TO TAKE A LOOK
SIMILAR CITIES POPULATION WISE SIZE OF OPERATION, BUDGET SIZE A BUDGET JUST GENERAL CIRCUMSTANCES THAT DIFFERENT DIFFERENT CITY MANAGERS OR
CITIES HAVE TO FACE. AND IN LOOKING AT THIS AND COMPARING THE THE SALARIES FOR EXAMPLE WITH WEST DES MOINES, IOWA, PEORIA, ILLINOIS IS THE
LEAST SUMMIT MISSOURI FARGO, COLUMBIA, MISSOURI CHAMPAIGN, ILLINOIS. CEDAR RAPIDS, IOWA AND ANN ARBOR, MICHIGAN THE THE SALARY AND FOR FULL PACKAGE OFFERED
TO TO OUR CITY MANAGER CANDIDATE IS ACTUALLY RIGHT IN LINE IN FACT LESS IN A LOT OF CASES THAN WHAT THE THE TYPICAL COST THE TYPICAL
SALARY THAT IS PAID FOR A CITY MANAGER IN CITIES OF BOTH SIZE AND IT IS I SAID AS I SAID IT IS GOING TO REFLECT A MUCH HIGHER NUMBER AND I THINK IT'S
GOING TO BE THE FIRST AND WHAT WE SEE IN THE IN THE STATE OF MINNESOTA BUT I DO THINK FROM A YOU KNOW, A REGIONAL NOT JUST THE STATE OF MINNESOTA BUT A REGIONAL PERSPECTIVE, I THINK THIS IS
IT'S RIGHT ALONG LINES OF WHAT WE CAN EXPECT TO SEE IN MINNESOTA AND WHAT IS RIGHT ALONG LINES OF WHAT WE WOULD WHAT WE DO SEE IN CITY MANAGERS AND CITY ADMINISTRATORS PAID ACROSS THE UPPER MIDWEST.
SO THAT'S THAT'S WHERE WE HOW WE GOT TO THE DOLLAR FIGURE THAT WE DID GET TO WE HAD A SUBCOMMITTEE OF COUNCIL MEMBER CARTER AND COUNCILMEMBER AND
MYSELF THAT WORKED CLOSELY WITH OUR OUR CONSULTANT TO TRY AND WORK THROUGH THE THE TERMS OF THE AGREEMENT GOT TO A PLACE WHERE WE WERE COMFORTABLE ULTIMATELY AN AGREEMENT WAS MADE WITH MR.
WALKER AND THIS IS WHAT'S IN FRONT OF US THIS EVENING SO THAT'S KIND OF A LONG INTRODUCTION AND WOULD OPEN UP TO COUNCIL DISCUSSION ON THIS
. YOU'RE IN NO DISCUSSION EITHER COUNCILMEMBER LOWMAN OR MERRITT SARS AT THE SUBCOMMITTEE DID A GREAT JOB OF GETTING THIS TOGETHER AND REASONABLY GIVEN YOU KNOW,
YOU'VE GIVEN THE EXPLANATION AS TO WHY WE'RE IN A NEW MARKETPLACE AND WE KNEW THIS KIND OF GOING INTO THIS YOU KNOW, THOSE OF US WHO'VE BEEN THROUGH THIS CONVERSATION BEFORE SO THAT THE NUMBER
ISN'T SHOCKING TO ME AND IN THAT REGARD IT IS HIGH. NOBODY WANTS TO PAY THAT BUT YOU KNOW, IT'S IS THE PRICE OF POKER NOW AND SO IT'S IT'S
IT'S INCREASED AND AND THEN THERE'S TERMS SEEM REASONABLE IN TERMS OF WE HAVE AN EVALUATION AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'VE WANTED TO
HAVE ON WITH THAT'S THAT'S WRITTEN IN THERE AND THEN WE'VE GOT THIS FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS HERE SO YEAH SO I MEAN I MEAN CERTAINLY I MEAN I
WANT TO BE CAREFUL ABOUT WHAT I ASK YOU KNOW THOUGH THIS FORM BUT THE I'M READY TO SEE AS ANYBODY ELSE WAS GOING TO HAVE A CONVERSATION WE CAN
MOVE THE VOTE. I'M SURE WE WILL HAVE CONVERSATION COUNCILMEMBER DALLESSANDRO THANK YOU MR. MAYOR. APPRECIATE THE DILIGENCE BEHIND WHAT YOU DISCUSSED. I, I DID SOME INDEPENDENT
RESEARCH MYSELF AND IT IS COMPARABLE IN WHAT I CAN TELL WITH MOST OF THE UPPER MIDWEST CITY MANAGER POSITIONS FOR
CITIES BETWEEN 75 AND $125,000 AND THERE'S NOTHING WE COULD DO ABOUT THAT IF THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE TO PAY IN ORDER TO GET PEOPLE HERE. OKAY. QUESTION ABOUT I DIDN'T SEE ANY LANGUAGE IN THE CONTRACT
AROUND A PROBATIONARY PERIOD LIKE YOU KNOW, 90 DAYS EVALUATION JUST CHECKING TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S A GOOD FIT LIKE THAT KIND OF THING IS THERE I'M CURIOUS TO THE PANEL
WAS THERE A REASON THAT YOU DID YOU DISCUSS IT? IF YOU DIDN'T DISCUSS IT, WHY MAYBE NOT AND IF YOU DID DISCUSS IT, WHY DID YOU NOT CHOOSE TO PUT IT IN THERE? THAT'S JUST AN OPEN QUESTION.
NO JUDGMENT, JUST CURIOUS. YOU JUST MENTION MAYOR MEMBERS DRAW YOUR ATTENTION TO PARAGRAPH FIVE BECAUSE OF THE START DATE BEING IN THE LATTER
HALF OF 2025 AND WE DRAFTED IN A PERFORMANCE EVALUATION TO OCCUR IN FEBRUARY OF 2026 AND THEN A SUBSEQUENT PERFORMANCE EVALUATION AND IN DECEMBER OF 2026 IN PART TO ADDRESS
THAT BUT ALSO BECAUSE THE END OF DECEMBER SEEMED TOO SOON BUT FEBRUARY 2026 SEEMED LIKE ABOUT SIX MONTHS. SO I DON'T KNOW IF THAT DIRECTLY ADDRESSES YOUR
QUESTION BUT THERE WAS SOME INTENTIONALITY WITH REGARD TO THAT. YEAH, THAT IS ACTUALLY HELPFUL. THANK YOU. I I DIDN'T THINK OF THAT NECESSARILY AS THE SAME AS A PROBATIONARY PERIOD IF YOU WILL AND SO I WAS MORE OR LESS
THINKING ABOUT THE LANGUAGE THAT MIGHT BE IMPLIED BY THE TERM PROBATIONARY PERIOD OR YOU KNOW THAT KIND OF THING. SO THAT WAS MORE MY QUESTION BUT THAT MAKES SENSE TO ME NOW FROM WHAT I UNDERSTOOD BY THE
CONTRACT TERMS THAT THIS CONTRACT GOES THROUGH DECEMBER OF 2026 HOWEVER. SO IT'S LIKE HAVE A 18 MONTH CONTRACT WHICH THERE NORMALLY 12 MONTH CONTRACTS, RIGHT?
NORMALLY BUT THIS WOULD BE MORE OF AN YOU KNOW, 1517 MONTH KIND OF DEAL DEPENDING UPON START DATE. SO WHAT IS WHAT IS THE WHAT IS
THAT PERFORMANCE EVALUATION IN FEBRUARY WHICH IS KIND OF OUT OF PLAN WHAT IS THE EXPECTATION THAT COULD COME FROM THAT DISCUSSION IS THAT UP TO AND INCLUDING
TERMINATING THE CONTRACT OR IS IT JUST LIKE CHECKING IN I THINK A PERFORMANCE EVALUATION IS ALWAYS OPEN TO THE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF THE COUNCIL AND AN EVALUATION
OF WHAT WE'RE SEEING. THE CITY MANAGER WITH HIS PERFORMANCES, HOW THE COUNCIL IS RESPONDING TO IT, HOW WE THINK IT'S GOING FOR THE COMMUNITY, HOW IT'S GOING WITH HERE WITHIN THE WALLS HERE AT
CITY HALL BASICALLY A PERFORMANCE EVALUATION IN FEBRUARY AND A PERFORMANCE EVALUATION WHETHER IT'S IN FEBRUARY OR AT THE END OF THE YEAR OR WHENEVER WE DO IT OR FOR THAT MATTER PERFORMANCE EVALUATION THAT
COULD BE CALLED AT ANY TIME COULD THIS COULD RESULT IN THE TERMINATION OF A CONTRACT? I IT'S CERTAINLY A POSSIBILITY BUT IT'S NOT I GUESS I'M I'M
NOT ANTICIPATING IT BUT IT'S SOMETHING THAT CERTAINLY COULD TAKE PLACE. I MEAN IT'S NOT IT'S NOT BEYOND THE REALM OF POSSIBILITY. >> NO, I APPRECIATE THAT, MR. MAYOR. AND I'M NOT ANTICIPATING IT EITHER. I JUST WANTED TO BE SURE THAT
WE WEREN'T NECESSARILY BOUND BY SOMETHING DIFFERENT BECAUSE IT'S HAPPENING OUT OF BAND FROM OUR NORMAL BECAUSE NORMALLY IF WE WHEN WE DO OUR DECEMBER EVALUATIONS IT'S A TWO PARTER.
IT'S A PERFORMANCE EVALUATION AND A RENEGOTIATION OF A YEARLY CONTRACT. I WOULD ASSUME THAT THERE'S NOT THE OPTION TO RENEGOTIATE THE CONTRACT IN THIS FEBRUARY 1ST.
SO I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT OUR ACTIONS WOULD BE. THAT'S ALL BUT A POTENTIAL ACTIONSCRIPT MAYOR ONE MORE THING JUST TO DRAW EVERYONE'S ATTENTION ON PARAGRAPH 16 THERE ARE THREE DIFFERENT
PROVISIONS IN THERE WITH REGARD TO TERMINATION BASED ON WHO INITIATES AND WHEN IT AN ISSUE IS INITIATED. SO 16 A SPECIFICALLY ADDRESSES EMPLOYER INITIATED TERMINATION
PRIOR TO THE END OF THE CONTRACT TERM AND LAYS OUT HOW THAT HAPPENS. THE VOTE AND THE TERMS ETC. SO IF IF IF FOR ANY REASON THERE WAS THAT DISCUSSION AND AGAIN
TO YOUR POINT I'M NOT ANTICIPATING THAT EITHER WE WOULD BE LEVERAGING THAT PARTICULAR CLAUSE IN TAKING ACTION AS OPPOSED TO THE NORMAL COURSE OF LIKE YEARLY BUSINESS THAT WE DO IN THAT PARTICULAR CIRCUMSTANCE FOR
THE FEBRUARY FOR FORM VALUATION. YEAH. OKAY. YOUR MEMBERS YEAH, THAT WOULD BE MY UNDERSTANDING. THAT'S THE WAY TO READ IT. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. APPRECIATE THE QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS COUNSEL COUNCILMEMBER NELSON YEAH. THANK YOU MAYOR AND THANK YOU FOR THE TEAM THAT WORKED ON ALL THE DETAILS OF THIS. I'M SURE IT TOOK SOME TIME SO I APPRECIATE THAT EFFORT.
I WOULD JUST NOTE FOR PEOPLE THAT THIS POSITION BASED ON WHAT WE SAW IN THE MARKETPLACE WAS POSTED AS TO 42 TO 90 AND WE'RE ACTUALLY KIND OF TOWARDS THE LOWER END OF THAT RANGE THAT WE HAD PUT OUT THERE
PUBLICLY WHEN WHEN WE POSTED THIS JOB. AND FROM WHAT I'VE HEARD AND WHAT I LOOKED INTO, IT SEEMS REASONABLE IN COMPARISON TO OTHER POSITIONS THERE.
SO AND IF I RECALL CORRECTLY, THIS IS MAYBE SOMEWHERE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF A 15% INCREASE OVER WHERE WE WERE BEFORE. SO SUBSTANTIAL BUT NOT
ENORMOUS. YOU KNOW THAT GIVEN WHAT'S HAPPENED IN THE WORLD IN THE RELEASING OF THE CAP. SO I'M COMFORTABLE WITH THAT PART OF IT AND I THINK I THINK YOU DID A GOOD JOB OVERALL.
SO THANK YOU. THE COMMENTS COUNCIL COUNCILMEMBER RIVAS, JUST ONE QUICK COMMENT I THINK WE
SHOULD NEVER ADD ANYTHING TO THE AGENDA ON FRIDAY ANY MORE . IT COMES OUT ON WEDNESDAY. LEAVE IT ALONE AND IF THERE'S SOMETHING URGENT THIS MAKE IT HAPPEN THE FOLLOWING AT THE
FOLLOWING MEETING GATES IT IS KIND OF DISRUPTIVE TO DO THAT. I IMMEDIATELY GET TO THE AGENDA ON WEDNESDAY AND I FOCUS ON HOW HE GETS ON
WEDNESDAY. IF ANYTHING HAPPENS ON FRIDAY I'M FALLING BEHIND THE BALL. I WOULD BE GREATLY APPRECIATED IF THERE ARE NO CHANGES TO THE AGENDA ON FRIDAYS ANY MORE SAID THANK YOU.
THANKS FOR THE FEEDBACK. COUNCILMEMBER ARE THE THOUGHTS COUNCIL YOUR NON COUNCIL I
WOULD LOOK FOR ACTION ITEM 2.1 THIS EVENING COUNCILMEMBER FOR YOU MAYOR HAPPY TO DO THAT I FIND IT HERE QUICKLY HERE MOVEDO APPROVE AN EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY MANAGER AND THE CITY
OF BLOOMINGTON. THERE'S A SECOND SECOND SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER LOWMAN MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER LOWMAN TO APPROVE AN EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY MANAGER AND THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON.
NO FURTHER COUNCIL DISCUSSION ON THIS. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE SIGNIFY BY SAYING I. I OPPOSED A MOTION CARRIES SIX ONE WITH COUNCIL MEMBER RIVAS
IN OPPOSITION. THANK YOU COUNCIL AND THANK YOU TO OUR SUBCOMMITTEE THAT WORKED ON THIS AND THANK YOU COUNCIL FOR THE GOOD DISCUSSION ON THIS AND WE HAVE
HAD CONSIDERABLE DISCUSSION ON THIS OVER THE PAST COUPLE OF MONTHS AND I DO APPRECIATE EVERYBODY'S PERSPECTIVE AND THE THOUGHTS THAT YOU BROUGHT FORWARD TO THIS AND I APPRECIATE THE WILLINGNESS TO LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING TOGETHER WITH MR. WALKER AND
FIGURE OUT WHAT'S NEXT FOR THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON. SO AN EXCITING TIME. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ITEM 2.2 ON OUR AGENDA IS A DISCUSSION OF EMERGENCY
PROCEDURES AND THIS WILL BE A CLOSED SESSION. WE HAVE JUST A HANDFUL OF REASONS WHY WE CAN CLOSE A MEETING HERE AT THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS ON THIS MATTER. SO WHY DON'T YOU GIVE THE SPIEL?
>> I'M SURE I'LL MISS SOMETHING IF I TRY TO. MAYOR MEMBERS THE LAW SETS FORTH A COUPLE OF REASONS AND WE OUTLINE THAT PARTICULAR REASON FOR THIS CLOSED SESSION
IN A RESOLUTION WHICH YOU ALL ARE ASKED TO ADOPT WHICH LAYS FORWARD NOT ONLY THE GROUNDS FOR CLOSING THE MEETING BUT ALSO SOME OF THE MORE NUANCED ISSUES FOR EXAMPLE THAT IT'S
RECORDED, HOW LONG THE RECORDING IS KEPT. THE FINANCIAL ISSUES HAVE TO BE DECIDED IN OPEN MEETING THAT SORT OF THE NUTS AND BOLTS OF IT.
I THINK THE MOST IMPORTANT THING FOR THE LISTENING PUBLIC IS THAT YOU ALL INTEND TO RETURN TO OPEN SESSION ASSUMING YOU PASS THIS RESOLUTION AND YOU WILL ADJOURN THE FORMAL MEETING
IN OPEN SESSION. >> THANK YOU MS. MANAGER SHADE AND MORE SPECIFICALLY AS IS LISTED IN THE ORDINARY THE THE RESOLUTION THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE DISCUSSING YOUR VOTING ON HERE SHORTLY ACCORDING TO THE
MINNESOTA OPEN MEETING LAW MEETINGS MAY BE CLOSED TO RECEIVE SECURITY BRIEFINGS AND REPORTS TO DISCUSS ISSUES RELATED TO SECURITY SYSTEMS TO DISCUSS EMERGENCY RESPONSE PROCEDURES AND TO DISCUSS IF SECURITY DEFICIENCIES IN OR
RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING PUBLIC SERVICES. SO WE'RE GOING TO BE THAT'S THE FOCUS OF OUR CONVERSATION THIS EVENING. SO IT STANDS WITHIN MINUTES OF THE OPEN MEETING LAW TO CLOSE THIS MEETING FOR THAT DISCUSSION.
SO COUNCIL UNLESS THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS I WOULD LOOK FOR A MOTION TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE CLOSURE OF A PUBLIC MEETING IN THE CITY COUNCIL SO MOVED MOTION BY
COUNCILMEMBER LOWMAN SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER DALLESSANDRO TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE CLOSURE OF A PUBLIC MEETING. NO FURTHER COUNCIL DISCUSSION ON THIS. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE SIGNIFY BY SAYING I OPPOSED MOTION CARRIES SEVEN ZERO SO
WE ARE IN CLOSED SESSION WHICH MEANS WE SHOULD PROBABLY CLOSE THE DOOR SO THAT WE ARE BACK
IN OPEN SESSION AND AS WE ARE IN OPEN SESSION WE HAVE COMPLETED OUR CLOSED SESSION BUSINESS. WE THERE WAS NO THERE WAS NO DIRECTION TAKEN OR DECISIONS
MADE DURING THE CLOSED SESSION BUSINESS WAS INFORMATION ONLY. SO WITH THAT COUNCIL I WILL LOOK FOR A MOTION TO ADJOURN TONIGHT. MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER DALLESSANDRO SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER CARTER TO ADJOURN THIS EVENING NO
FURTHER COUNCIL DISCUSSION ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE SIGNIFY BY SAYING I OPPOSED MOTION CARRIES SEVEN ZERO WE ARE ADJOURNED. THANKS COUNCIL THANK YOU TO STAFF FOR THE PRESENTATIONS TONIGHT AND EVERYBODY HAVE A
GOOD REST OF THE WEEK