This is the safety and public works committee. It is 6:45 council chambers and we have your mic on. It is. Thank you. We have nine items on our agenda. First of which being direction on active
code enforcement and uh community development director Kanic. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Staff is bringing three properties before the committee tonight for review and staff is looking for direction from the council as how to proceed with the cases. Uh so the first property is 507 1st Avenue Northeast,
which is an unlicensed rental. Staff recommends beginning uh to pursue legal action with the city attorney and issuing a $300 citation every month that the property remains occupied and unlicensed. Next property is 1106 Quinn Street. Um the pictures indicate uh um
certainly unlicensed vehicles and then potentially inoperable as well. So staff is recommending obtaining an administrative search warrant and towing the vehicles. And the last property is 11113th Street Southeast. Uh this one is for a tarp shed prohibited material. U
staff is recommending $300 citation every month until the accessory structure is removed. And I can answer any questions. All right. Thank you, James. Questions for for James. I've got just a few really quick ones. So 507 1st Avenue
Northeast. Uh we we have confirmed. How do we know that there's a tenant? We have confirmed um through the police department that that it is an unlicensed rental with multiple people living at the property. All right. Thank you. And then all three of these have I believe it was in the packet here, but they've
received the um the letter of uh of notification and then the three administrative citations. they have and then prior to um towing the vehicles what we do so after council action um we send another letter to the resident letting them know of what council's
action was and uh typically give then another 10 days as the warrant um search warrant process is being processed through our attorneys so they do receive another notice last question for me have any of them responded in any way um the first one
did respond but uh I think there's going to be difficulties with complying with this one So, um I still recommend proceeding uh with the the route taken or route recommended. All right. Thank you. Uh entertain a motion. Mr. Chair, do you want to take
these all together or would you like them separately? I I was thinking we should probably take them um I'll move that we do 50 or what the first one is. Um 507 First Avenue. Follow staff's recommendation on that. 11:06 Quintz. We
follow staff's recommendation on that. 11113th Street. We follow staff's recommendation on that. Second. All right. Motion and a second. Any discussion? Those in favor say I. I.
Those opposed? Same sign. Motion carries. All right. Our second item is uh adopt resolution approving the Lakes Area Drug Investigative Division Joint Powers Agreement. and uh Chief Davis. Yeah, thank you, Mr. Chair.
So, the city of Brainer, City of Baxter, and Crowing County are all current members of the Lakes Area Drug Investigative Division, commonly referred to as Lad Joint Powers Agreement. The latest board has approved adding Malax Tribal Police Department Investigator to the task force. Adoption
of a resolution supporting the inclusion of Max Band of Ojiway to the current JPA is required. Um, a significant amount of drug crimes in Brainard has a direct correlation to the Max Reservation and we've seen this increase over the last
several years with the pre prevalence of fentanyl. This has led to investigators working with Malax tribal investigators uh on a daily basis. A little bit of history here regarding our current laded task forces.
For the last uh 20 plus years, Brer Police Department has assigned an investigator to laded operations for this multi-jurisdictional task force is primarily funded by asset forefeiters. Uh due to changes in Minnesota's forefeiter laws over the last couple
years, the the task force will be receiving fewer proceeds from forefeiters and this model of funding will not be sustainable uh indefinitely. For 37 years, the majority of Minnesota task force have been grant funded. These grant-f funed task forces are identified
by the Minnesota Department of Public Safety as Drug and Violent Crime Enforcement Teams, uh, VSETS. Currently, the Department of Public Safety funds 70 Minnesota counties through this VSET program. To qualify for the funding, a task force must include two or more
counties. This encourages task forces not to operate independently but be part of a multi-county task force which is pro proven to be the preferred and most effective model throughout the United States to investigate drug crimes. Having Max Tribal Police Department
joined won't automatically make LED eligible to be grantf funded since Max Tribal Police Department isn't a county entity. However, the latest board has been in conversations with the Department of Public Safety regarding making LAED grant eligible with the
inclusion of Max Tribal. The feedback received has been nothing but favorable and Department of Public Safety staff have been giving late guidance and insistence in preparing themselves to be grant funded. One of the requirements for this is for Max Tribal Police
Department to be included into this JPA. The monetary amount of potential funding is unknown at this time, but based on past years, it would be reasonable to believe that the grant would fund 100% of operational expenses along with reimbursing the member agencies for some
of their expenses such as uh a portion of vehicle and overtime expenses for the investigator. And this proposed joint powers agreement has been reviewed by attorney Langel. Uh, so the recommended action I'm bringing before you is to
adopt this resolution approving the Lakes Area Drug Investigative Division Joint Powers Agreement. All right. Thank you very much. Uh, questions or comments? Uh, Councilman Jagger. Uh, yes, Mr. Dave. Um, Mike, a quick
question. What would it makes it what what happens if the if we approve this and then the grant doesn't come through? How does the money work or or is it possible to attach the grant funding to this motion to approve this? I'm just curious about what happens if we approve this and then the grant falls through.
Yeah. Well, and and that's a good question. This um including Max Tribal Police Department um into our current JPA and that's really all we're doing. The JPA in front of us here is really the one we have in existence and have for a while. It's just really the
addition of them. Um it it's beneficial for two ways. operationally it just makes sense based on us working with them daily and especially with the prevalence of of fentanyl. Um the second reason of course is um the potential to
be grant eligible for grant funding if that grant funding fell through our operations would continue as they are now and actually um you know solidifying that daily investigative involvement we have with them within that joint powers
agreement. Um it makes sense for a lot of operational reasons. So So there's no fiscal dis there's no fiscal risk if the grant doesn't Okay. No, we would not be out anything. Chairman, uh yes, Chief, um if you guys uh have a drug bus and
you got $50,000 cash, do you have access to that through this task force? Well, if that if that money is eligible to be forfeited, which there are some instances where that's still possible, but it's less than what it used to be.
Um, and we go through the court process and the courts have determined that that asset forefeiter is awarded to the task force, then that remains within the task force to fund task force operations. such as really the funding model for us
up until this point for a lot of the operational components. The the tax forfeited issue was mostly on property forfeite, right? Where they the asset forefeiter. Yeah. So that very well um typically that's cash. Sometimes
it can be vehicles or firearms. Okay. I mean the the the the change in that forfeiture law where the counties aren't able to make a profit on forfeited property. Is that what you're talking about? Well, I I I guess what before
there was a longer list of eligible criminal violations that would allow for a forefe involved in that. That list of crimes has shortened significantly. So there's just going to be less
forefeiters now and in the future and therefore that was a primary source of funding and um fearfully that wouldn't necessarily support um the task force indefinitely over the years. Thank you. I didn't I'm glad you explained it that way. I didn't understand it. So
appreciate it. Any other questions or comments? I'd move that we adopt the uh resolution for this second motion and a second. Is there any discussion? Hearing none. Those in favor say I. I. Those opposed, same sign. Motion
carries. Our uh Thank you. Our third item is adopt resolution approving cooperative construction agreement for trunk highway 371B and Willow Street roundabout projects. And who do we have on this one? Uh public works director
Abigor. Thank you, Mr. President. I'm going to turn this over to Jesse. He's worked on this grant and knows the intimacy of uh all of this. So, Jesse. Okay. Are you doing the cooperative agreement first or are you doing Oh, did I jump one? I'm sorry. No, I just wanted to clarify. Wanted to make sure. Yeah,
I'm going to go back. I apologize. I clicked on the wrong one. So, our third item is to adopt resolutions for grant agreement and award bids improvement 2407 L Street uh safe routes to school project. Thank you, Mr. Chair. This one
is it? Yes, Jesse. Jesse, that's what I was referring to, the grant. Uh, so WSB went out for bids on the Low Safe Rails project. Uh, we did receive two biders. Um, the low bid being Dantel Excavating. Attached to the item is a letter of recommendation from WSB after reviewing
the bids. Uh, the low bid was in the amount of $432,624.79, which is almost $40,000 underneath the engineers estimate. So, that was a a very advantageous bid for us. Um, so attached to this is a recommendation for award to D Chantel in
that amount. Uh, as well as an adoption or recommendation for an adoption of a resolution that agrees to the terms of the safe routes to school grant agreement with MINDOT. Uh, that would lock in that funding for us. All right. Thank you very much. Any comments,
questions for staff? And looks like there are two items in here. I think we should probably do these separately because one of them is a resolution require a voice vote. I'd move to adopt a resolution. That's right. That's or in order to do
that first. Uh we got recommendation number one. Award the improvement 2407 contract to D Chantel excavating in the amount of $432,624.79. So moved. Second. Motion and a second. Any discussion? Uh those those in favor say I. I. Those
opposed, same sign. Motion carried. And then we'd be looking for that second motion to adopt the attached resolution approving the terms of the safe road to school grant agreement. So second motion and a second. Any discussion? Hearing none. Those in favor
say I. This is a roll call, isn't it? Oh, I'm sorry. We'll do that at the council meeting. Oh, yeah. Ours can be that. The ch will be the apologies. But that's why I separated them because knowing it counts a little bit. It's not m day. Yeah. Got it. Uh those in favor I I those opposed same sign and motion
carried. So all right number four this one is the adoption of resolution approving cooperative construction agreement trunk highway 371B Willow Street roundabout project and I know it's listed as you uh but yeah I'm going to turn it over to Jesse also let this
one let him handle these two. Thank you Mr. Chair. So, we have the cooperative agreement from Mandot now that we're kind of wrapped up with plans and getting ready for bidding. Uh, this just kind of lays out the state's share of the cost of the project as well as kind of long-term maintenance of the project
after construction would be complete. Uh, a lot of this stuff is uh things that we've already discussed with like the RF RFBs that MDOT would participate in construction costs, but that would turn over to the city for uh long-term maintenance owner ownership of. Um and
everything else is very uh very typical in regards to like maintenance uh responsibilities long term. Uh but staff is recommending adop adopting the attached resolution that accepts the uh terms of the cooperative construction agreement with mind for the roundabout project.
All right. Thank you very much Councilman Chzik. Yeah. Uh there's a project engineer on-site management and then a environmental consultant or are they the same? This they will not be. Uh
so the project engineer is going to be the engineer over the entire project. SH is going to be helping us with that. Uh we're also going to have an environmental um engineer on site as well because there is going to be at some point some um excavate uh some
excavating of some um petroleum soils right near the gas station. Uh we've verified that through some soil boring. So uh during that time during that excavation we have to have somebody on site. Do you know who that's going to be? Uh not at this time. Okay. Do you have to go out for RFP for that
or No, that's part of uh uh SC's proposal. Thank you very much. Any other question? Excuse me. Questions or comments? If not, we'd be looking for a motion. Got a recommendation to adopt
the attached resolution and which enters into the cooperative construction agreement with Mindot for the trunk highway 371B Willow Street roundabout project. Do we have a motion? So second motion and a second. Any discussion? Hearing none. Those in favor
say I. I. Those opposed same sign. Motion carries. Mr. Chair. Yes. Um thank you Jesse. When I mean this has been on our agenda there's parts of this for is it been significantly longer than a year that
we've been talking about the roundabout? Do you remember off top of your head? Yes sir. It's been probably a year and a half since or maybe two years since we were granted the HIPP grant originally. So, we've been developing it since then. These things don't just happen overnight, do they? No, they do not.
Okay. Thanks very much. And what's the year of construction for that? This year. All right. Thank you. And uh item number five is to approve event parking lot closure farmers market application with
DDBC public works director Havagor. Thank you, Mr. President. Yes, a local business in the downtown area would like to host a farmers market on Fridays from May 16th to October 20th of of this year, 2025. The location will be at the
city hall parking lot. The city uh Brainer leases seven parking stalls to a local law firm. Staff has asked them to park in the north end of the parking lot to allow the farmers market to use the remaining of the parking lot. And I have uh reached out to that law firm and uh
we're going to be giving them uh seven parking stalls on on the north end and they've agreed to this. And we are also the city of Las Vegas, our city of Brainard staff will be um they will be sorry the city of
Brainard staff will be parking at the library location or either at the north end of the the the jail down the road. And at that I can take any questions. Mr. Chair, Councilman Chzik, could you uh help me out a little bit? What's the
letter? Um, of course I'm limited with not being able to see the map, but there's two letters. One's about the city parking lot. The other is about Front Street. Correct. Explain what's going on there so I understand it. So at Front the Front Street, the farmers market wanted to get the some exposure
from the 210 uh highway and they thought Front Street would be the best location with that. A few business owners were objecting to that closing down that front street. So, they didn't want to upset the apple cart and they just came to us and they said, "Hey, can we use the parking lot?" There's some there's
some good exposure from our parking lot and they think that this location will be good for him and and I we think so, too. So, there's really nothing going on between 6th and 7th. That's that letter confuses me. Yeah, it that was it was either that location or the parking. Oh,
okay. So, it's either Okay. Yep. I understand. Thank you. Either or. And it's now settled on the on the city hall parking lot. Did we get a confirmation, some sort of verbal confirmation or in writing that their the law firm's okay with the parking situation? Have an
email. Okay. Because that was that was going to be my question. Okay. Sorry to step on you. No problem. Um All right. A nice uh apple cart analogy with the farmers market, right? Um all right. Any other questions, comments? Hearing none, be looking for a
motion to approve this one. So move to approve the uh farmers market on Fridays beginning whatever dates. So April or May. Yeah, I'll read it here really quick. So um approve the farmers market request to conduct a farmers market on Fridays 9:00
a.m. to 2:00 p.m. from May 16th to October 10th, 2025. So moved. Second. Great. Motion in a second. Any discussion? Hearing none. All in favor say I. I. I. Those opposed, same sign and motion
carries. All right. Number six, award bid uh improvement 251 2025 chip seal project and uh public works director Habagor, please. Thank you, Mr. President. Attached to these items are bids received from the improvement for
the chip sealing project. The city received three different bids. the lowest bidder being the Aztec in the amount of $151,676.20. That was our base bid. The council, if you remember, asked us to ensure that the project was going to be
under budget that we put some streets as a ad alternate. So, we did that. They also added the ad alternate it streets and those were 10,000. a total of their bid is $162,337.90. And so this is well underneath uh the engineers estimate for
this project. And so the staff is recommending awarding award of this improvement for the chip ceiling uh project to asphalt service technology court in the bid amount of $16037.90. With that, any questions? Thank you.
Questions, comments? Whoever worked with this company before? I am not uh sure. Normally, it's Anderson Brothers that get a gets a lot of this, but they did not get the bid. Okay. All right. Thank you. Um, one other
thing. Um, I I I don't know if it was in the documents. I is our price stayed pretty flat from last year on the unit prices and everything on it. know the oil has really gone down and that's why we were concerned with our bid amount and we're not we weren't the bids were
going to be way higher but uh oil has come down so a lot of these coming in under bid yeah it was really good 15% nationally was kind of the number well that's far better than it coming in too high right right we'll take I'll move to approve this
second motion and a second any discussion Those in favor say I. I. Those opposed, same sign. Hearing none. Motion carries. All right. Item number seven. This one is consider transit consultant services.
And again, Mr. Hagor. Thank you, Mr. President. The city of Brainard provides administrative support for the transit services and a third-party contractor provides operational coordination for the transit service. Several key operational functions have fallen short
and have forced staff to res review the operational services. Currently, the city of Brainer cannot be involved in the operational aspect as uh we have a third party contract that we have a contract very specifically that guides them with that. So, we really can't
interfere with that. The third party contractor will will build bill the city of Brainard monthly ranging from $80,000 up to $100,000 on services performed. The city staff can find them for failed performances and the past fines have
ranged from $4,000 to $12,000. Staff has asked MDOT for suggestions as these key functions are now critical and need attention. MDOT is paying for a consultant to uh conduct
operational review of the transit services. The consulting kickoff meeting was on April 10th. The overview of the consulting services is in the council packet and covers the scope of work, timeline, data, information, and outcome scenarios. Outcome
scenarios. At first, I'm just um uh going off script a little bit. At first, the uh outcome scenarios were just for in-house operation. I added to that scope uh continue contracting out to a third-party contractor. Whether we go
out and get a new thirdparty contractor, the city of Brainer takes over the operation administratively and operationally. The Crowing County takes over all aspects of the operation. Our number four, a hybrid, a combination of all those different scenarios.
staff is just seeking approval of the consulting services to continue and that we provide uh uh recommendations in June for city council to give staff direction for the transit operations for 2026. With that, I'm sure there's a few
questions. Thank you. Questions, comments for for Mike. Yeah. Um you had mentioned there's a deadline. I can't remember exact. It's in May. There's something that has I forget what it is. Can you remind me or else? Right. And it's in the packet. Um,
boy, I just went through all of this. There's one in May. It's that we got to give them all the information that they're asking for for them to give us a timely review and recommendation. And then in June, that's when we want council to give us solid direction
moving forward. And then the termination time is 90 days with the third party. Is that correct? Correct. Okay. Councilman Jagger. Uh, yes. Uh, Mike, if MDOT is paying for this, why do we have to give the approval of the consulting
services? That's just dumb question, I'm sure. But we just want to make sure that the council is okay for transit moving forward. If do we want to spend all this time and energy to even do this report if transit is not on your radar to
continue? So, we just want to be extremely transparent in the services that we're providing. Very good. Um, any other questions, comments? Um, I would be in favor of having the
consultant move forward and uh I I it if ever there was a time to have some outside um consultant look at what's going on, this is it. There's uh numerous issues on the table here. He reported on some at the last meeting
during the uh uh staff reports at the end of the meeting and uh the packet has documents in there. It's rather alarming and uh we we have and I and I going to give credit to city engineer Dean because you believe it was you were
instrumental in putting in the penalty clauses for the contract if I'm not mistaken from Yes, he was. Yeah. And uh and it's important um because I think in your words, I believe it was uh it it be the prior three-year contract had very little teeth in it to be able to hold
the third party contractor accountable. So at the very least, we're not paying the third party contractor for services not rendered. And that's important because it's it it's it's helping us uh you know when they're not getting what
they expect because they're not doing the job in essence. So, I I'm I'm very glad uh Jesse brought that forward to the TAC and the council approved that contract the way it is. So, that's all I have for now. Yeah. Thank you, uh, Councilman Jagger. Uh, Mr. Abigor, one more follow-up question. So, if we if we
move forward with the approval of the consulting service, is it mandated or incumbent upon us to are we required to move forward with the findings? If if mend So, okay, yeah, never mind. That's all. All those scenarios will be for you
to make a decision on one of those multiple options or none. Correct. Okay. Thank you. That's all. All right. Thank you very much. Be looking for a motion. Uh staff's looking for direction to approve the consulting services to to be continue to continue with the consulting
services and then provide recommendations to council in June. So move to approve. Second. Right. Motion in a second. Any discussion? Hearing none. Those in favor say I. I. Those opposed, same sign. And motion
carries. Brings us to number eight. Approve placement of large planter near Holiday. Uh near sorry, near Holiday Station by the high school. That's Norwood between fifth and sixth, I believe. I Yes. Yes, it is. Go ahead.
Yes. Thank you, Mr. President. I actually stopped by the holiday station today and thankfully there was no one parked on the sidewalk at that moment that I stopped by. I did talk to the store manager. He uh recognizes the the the safety issue with that and is
totally good. He says, "Well, it's your property." And I said, "Well, I just want to be a good neighbor and let you know." Um, so he was a totally in agreeing with with the placement of this planter. It's not going to be on technically the sidewalk. It's going to be on the from the curb to the sidewalk
in that little area and it'll be one of our larger plant uh planters that we'll be placing there. Okay. Thank you very much. Questions, comments? So, one question I had uh uh Mike is where where we're getting this planter from, will we
be needing another one to replace it? So, we have between 10 to 12 of those large planters for the downtown area. We just plan on taking one of them. They're about pro. I didn't price these out. Will we be getting another one to replace that one? No, I wasn't not
planning on that. Okay, Councilman Jagger. Sorry. Uh, just two quick questions. So, in the winter time, it'll just be sitting unveilated, right? It'll just be it'll still be sitting there just like our other planters. Is that correct? Or we're going to remove this in the winter? We will. In in the
winter time, we remove them. In the fall, we take them all and we put them against the building. And so in the winter time, no, there will just be the clearing of the sidewalk in a large. So this is this is kind of a concern of mine is that, you know, for 7 months out of there, people park on that sidewalk
every single day all day long. So um I would be I don't mean to Monday quarterback this thing, but I would think a Ballard or couple Ballards correctly placed around that sidewalk would be u close to a similar cost and no maintenance and a long-term solution year round. So, uh, I'm just throwing
that out there. But again, I'm not trying to thicken the plot here. But, um, Mr. Havor, yes, we could actually install those ballards ourselves with, uh, you know, steel and concrete and and paint them. So, we could do that
ourselves in house if the and I think that would, you know, to your point, Councilman Joerger, I think that's a good recommendation. I I think this is a good um good recommendation, good motion. I think we should move forward. I mean, people have been parking there kind of ad hoc throughout the years
and, you know, it's a safety concern. So, I think this maybe this is a good temporary fix to kind of warm people up to the idea. And then I I agree. I mean, something more permanent. We need we definitely need a permanent because it is an everyday situation. Mr. Havoc, is it our parks department that's
maintaining the planters or I feel like that's is that someone else? It Well, we Excuse me. public works. Yeah, that's all right. We we actually do mean we hire a summer person and Yes, they'll actually do that underneath um public works. Yes. And they water and all that.
Pull the weeds and all that. Yes. Well, I I like the idea if I can um moving forward in this, but I think we just pay attention to Mr. Jagger's point. If if we move this thing out of there in the fall or winter and it just we just got to do something different next year. If this doesn't work for the winter, I it
won't be there. So, I think we're just uh going to fix it for the summer months when that's there the way it sounds. So, yeah, planter will definitely look better than Ballards. Anyone want to take a stab at a motion? I I'll go forward with staff's recommendation on putting this planter
in there if that was your recommendation. I think it was. It was. Sorry. Yep. All right. Motion and a second. Um any discussion? Hearing none. Those in favor say I. I. Those opposed, same sign. Of course. Motion carries.
All right, our last item number nine, discussion and review of street performers. Uh, public works director Habigor. At our last city council meeting, staff was directed to develop a street performer buskers as it's known of ordinance in review of other busker
ordinances and the police uh chief and other departments, the city attorney staff has developed a draft ordinance for the council to review. And in your packet um is the draft ordinance. This morning I emailed the committee
regarding some discussion points and I can take any questions at that this time. Right. Thank you. Any questions or comments? I I got the email from you. It says sidewalk performers and now we got it on the agenda. Street performers. It is sidewalk exclusively, right? But that
technically it's buskers. So they can be in the street. No. Okay. they can only perform and that's one of the actual discussion points. Yeah. Should we be having a map of a very specific location where they can perform because we have other restaurants there
that would like a little uh outside eating area in in those sidewalk area and we don't want those to conflict with one another. Uh could we just make it so um if you have a business there and you want to have your performer come in to be associated
with your business get permission from the next door business or something to that effect. Is that a possibility like we do with chickens? Yes, it's all a possibility. It just rem It's just a matter of writing down direction. Okay. Sure. You're seeking feedback from
council and then the next the recommendations to bring this back at least on those four items that I indicated. Yeah. Um I um yeah a couple of good points you made there. Um let's see
highlight permit the big one if I may. So on page two it's just regarding the actual permit. Shall the permit just be issued by a staff person here at city hall? are should this permit should we uh allow the chief of police investigate
this individual making sure that they're um will endorse the application and just in the public good and we want to protect the public good and we want to make sure that they're you know good moral character and the the uh chief of police would actually perform that
investigation. So that's one matter right there. Well um you also talk about an individual. What if this individual has two two partners or they have a Kingston trio sitting out there and they want to I mean I'm just I you know I mean there's so many variables that can
happen here to performance. Um are we going to limit it to a single individual? Can there be more than one? Is there a limit of how many we should have? I I don't know. I I I guess I don't want to, you know, put a restrictions.
you're going to have allow 10 people out there performing in front of a restaurant or a business. I I don't So the permit's got to be specific, I would think. Correct. That's why we're having this conversation, right? Yes. Yeah. And um Mike, the you know the kind of the
idea of the background check kind of performing that we we have something like that for peddlers kind of doortodoor. Correct. Um this is a little bit kind of quas in between that. It's not necessarily door to door, but it al is also just making sure that those performers
are in good wholesome nature individuals to be in our general public performing in our public area. Okay. Um, if we, if I can, if we were to issue a permit and uh, it didn't and and they
pass muster with whoever approves that, whether it's staff or council or whomever, um, and it turns out they're not living up to what we expect from them based on the permit requirements or, um, I see stuff in here like tattoos, uh, uh, different things like
that. You, we're not, that's a suggestion in the ordinance or permit. Correct. And but if they if they say violated that what what do you do then? Um does uh law enforcement go down there and pull their permit they contact how would that work? That is also the
question on in this ordinance that I have is just very specific direction. It does. One or one option is for a staff person to bring that to the council and the council remove that that permit. And with our city attorney, he indicated
that that would be the best route is versus just having a general staff person pull their permit. We actually have that the city council requires action to remove their actual permit.
Any other questions or comments? Otherwise, I think we can we could we could look for a motion to take staff's recommendation. They'll have further comments council. Um given that the the recommendation is to modify the draft ordinance with council comments and submit at the next council meeting. We
have a motion. I'll go ahead and make the motion to do what exactly to come back with to modify the draft ordinance with council comments and submit at the next council meeting. And that is staff's recommendation. That's I'll second motion and a second. Any discussion?
Hearing none. Those in favor say I. I. I. Both. Same sign. And motion carries and we are adjourned.