--------- crappie fish on the >> call to order the Brainard City Council. It is Monday, December 1st, 2025, 7:30 p.m. in council chambers. >> Tony, please call the role. >> Jagger, >> yes. >> Erikson, >> yes. >> Beans, >> here. >> Chzach, >> yes. >> Johnson, >> here. >> Stunn day >> here. >> Bad
>> here. Please stand for the pledge of allegiance. 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. Next, we're looking for approval of the agenda. >> So, I'll move Johnson. >> Second. >> Motion by Johnson, second by Bevans. Any discussion? Seeing none, let's go to a vote. All those in favor say I. Against. Same
sign. >> That motion carries. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> All right. We got something going on here. >> That's Nelly. Sorry. >> All right. Next, we have the consent calendar. This is a notice of public that all matters listed are considered routine by the council and will be
enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless good cause is shown prior to the time the council votes on the motion to be adopted by roll call. I'm looking for that motion. >> Approve consent. >> Motion by Chzox. Second by Bevans. Any
discussion? >> Tony, please call the RO. >> Jagger, >> yes. >> Erikson, >> yes. >> Beans, >> yes. >> Chzach, >> yes. >> Johnson, >> yes. >> OD, >> yes. All right, we are underway. Next, we have number six. This is a public forum. This is time allocated for citizens to
bring matters not on the agenda to the count to the attention of the council. Time limits may be imposed. So at 7:32 we will open the public forum. If you're here to approach the council on anything
not on the agenda, please do so now. And if you're online, press star three. That'll raise your hand and let us know. And I'll ask if you're here to address the council on anything not on the agenda, please come forward now.
Looks like we do not have anybody tonight. No one online. Max. All right. Still 7:32. We will close public forum. Moving on to number seven. This is presentations. Tonight we have three different presentations. So I'm going to
ask that we save our questions for the end of the presentations just so we can get through them all a little more efficiently. 7A. The first presentation we have, this is the annual charter presentation for the center. So, whoever is here to represent the center, please come forward and state your name.
>> I'm Darcy Wakoyak, executive director with the center. >> Welcome. >> Thank you. I just wanted to address you all and say good evening, Mayor Bedau, and the city council. I'm Darcy Wakoak, the new executive director of the center, and I want to thank you for the opportunity to
present to you this evening. Thank you for your support and the opportunity to share how the center is serving our community. The center is a welcoming place where Lakes Area residents ages 45 plus come together to connect, learn, and support one another. Our mission is
simple but powerful to encourage mature adults to engage in healthy living, socialization, lifelong learning, and community connection. With Brainer's municipal funding, the center can offer programs, exercise classes, social groups, and learning opportunities
without relying solely on membership fees. This ensures that older adults remain active, connected, and less isolated, which benefits their health, mental well-being, and community involvement. On any given day, you might find line dancers in the great room, creative
crafters and painters in the craft room, or a friendly game of cards underway. Members enjoy a wide mix of activities from bone builders, wellness class, chair yoga, book clubs, band jam sessions, bingo, and lunch and learns. The signature favorites include
Thursday's doughnut days and our member made gifts in the gift shop. Beyond activities, we also serve as a practical resource providing space for meals on wheels distribution, LSS nutrition services, congregate dining, legal aid resources, and volunteers making teleare
check-in calls for those living alone. Loneliness and isolation are growing challenges, especially for older adults. At the center, we create daily opportunities for connection through meals, coffee groups, games, creative outlets, and special events. Many
members tell us the center is their lifelong lifeline to friendship and belonging. Some of our most popular programs include the second Monday dinners, card recycling, quilting, veterans coffee, the platinum players theater group, and the center singers choir.
We promote wellness through our fitness classes, our cardio and strength training rooms along with educational workshops on health, safety, and self-care. We also co host a caregiver support group, memory cafe, a navigating grief group, all designed to support
physical, emotional, and mental well-being. Our hope is by keeping older adults healthy and socially connected, this will result in fewer costly health interventions, helping them maintain their independence longer, and allowing them to continue contributing to the
community through volunteerism and civic engagement. We partner with local businesses, nonprofits, and schools to bring resources directly to our members. From the outreach programs food pantry to LSS Meals on Wheels, AAP driving classes,
and Lakes Area memory awareness advocates, collaboration is at the heart of what we do. We also foster intergenerational connection through reading with kindergarteners, our upcoming teens and tech events, and community education talks. Our toy and
doll makers distribute their items to local shelters, medical facilities, preschools, and emergency responders. This strengthens our community one relationship at a time. We are actively working with the Brainer for All Ages to support the city's goal of making
Brainer a place where people of all ages can thrive. Behind every program is a person whose life has been touched. Kathy, who lost her spouse, found relationship and comfort at the center. She calls it her home away from home. Harley feels a
renewed sense of purpose volunteering and giving back through the quilting group. Norma shares that the center has helped her build lasting friendships, given her a renewed sense of meaning and purpose. These stories remind us that what happens at the center isn't just
programming. It's lifechanging connection. As we look ahead, the center remains committed to serving as a hub of connection, wellness, and community for older adults in Brainard. We are deeply grateful for the city's ongoing support. Your investment makes it possible for
our older residents to stay healthy, engaged, and socially connected. When the city of Brainer chooses to fund the center, you are affirming that older adults are valued, contributing members of our community. This support not only
enhances their quality of life, but also strengthens Brainard as a whole by helping retain long-term residents, preserving the tax base, fostering community leadership, and sustaining the volunteer networks and civ civic organizations that rely on this vibrant
population. Your partnership allows us to continue offering accessible programs and essential services that keep older adults active, independent, and involved. It is a meaningful investment with far-reaching benefits. I invite each one of you to come and tour the
center, meet our members, and see firsthand the connection, purpose, and joy that your support creates every day. We would be honored to show you the impact your stewardship makes in the lives of the people that we serve. Thank you for your time, for your leadership,
and for your continued commitment to building a strong, connected, age friendly Brainer. Thank you. Does anybody have questions? >> I do, Mr. OD. >> Mr. Chzach, go ahead. >> Darcy, thank you very much. Um, pleasure to meet you. Uh, what's the membership
cost for a year? >> $25 per year. >> Okay. And then, um, is there a age uh requirement? >> 45 plus. >> Okay. >> So, you can start at 45 as an associate member and you become a full-fledged member at 55. >> Okay. So, um, do members get halfp price
donuts? Because Mr. Bevven's told me he's a [laughter] member. >> That's a good try. But as far as I know, they are still full price for members. >> Okay. >> But if you volunteer on the doughnut crew, you do get to take home some donuts as part of your pay. >> So I it sounds like maybe four of us
here would be able to be members cuz [laughter] there's some youngsters here at the table. Anyway, thank you very much. >> Absolutely. Any other questions? >> Anyone else? >> Thank you, Darcy. >> Thank you. >> Appreciate it. keep doing a great job.
>> All right, next we have 7B. This is the annual charter presentation for the Northland Arboritum. All right, >> just come on up and state your name. >> Uh my name is Trevor Pumnia, 623 Willow Street, Brainer, Minnesota. I'm the executive director of the Northland Arboritum. >> Welcome. >> Thanks for having me, council. All
right, today we're just going to talk about a few things. I'll talk about the the introduction of the arburedom. Most of people have heard this presentation. Some of you maybe as many as 52 times. We've been in business a long time. So, uh we'll keep it short with the recreation, education, conservation
component. I do want to talk about how we spent some of the sum uh funds this year. We did a lot of improvements to the Nordic skiing, the hiking trails, snowshoe trails. The garden renovations were probably one of the most costly. Um but we do donate 2,500 lb of fresh produce back to the community. So, it's
an important project for us. Also, renovating the wells and irrigation systems so people don't have to carry buckets and hoses has greatly improved uh volunteer morale. Um some of the things that the funds do go for is uh staffing and operational capacity. These
are a small uh portion. Most of this is driven by our member-driven fees uh and undesated receipts, which this year we received a record high undesated receipts, which allows me to then leverage those funds to get additional grant dollars. Uh so we can continue
operating uh at like low cost or no cost uh free community events like Arbor Day and lowcost experiences like Haunted Trail. Uh we did do some maintenance to the facilities because the building is frankly pretty old. uh it needs some work in the HVAC department and uh
they're about $27,000 to replace. So, we have went with the budget band-aid version of that for now um until we can get into our into our state funding, which I'll talk about uh later. Um so, our daily maintenance operations are supported by levy funding, but I'm going to talk a little bit how we leverage
those funds later. The major accomplishments this year were the getting the master plan approved. In 52 years, the Northland arburedom has never had a master plan. that makes it very difficult to procure state funding to want for the county to want to work with you frankly for a lot of organizations
when you don't have a master plan. Um it they just don't have a lot of faith in your organization. So getting that approved by Crowing County, the board of directors and then ultimately the state uh committee from the Greater Minnesota Regional Parks and Trails Commission was probably the biggest thing that's ever
happened at the Arreedom besides getting the visitor center. Um, last year we broke uh record attendance with 41,800 visitors, most of them being Brainard residents. Um, so we're able to use Placer.ai data to create boundaries to determine that the the people that are
helping to fund our organization are actually using it. So, uh, just over 60% a lot of Baxter Crowing County, but we're we're starting to see a little bit more uh, micro and macro tourism as we develop recreation amenities. We had really good haunted trail
attendance again despite the rainy Thursday. Um it's our biggest fundraiser of the year and it funds about a fifth of our operations for the year. So um we're happy to keep adding to that and keep making changes to that so it stays fresh. The bike park we got rained out like it rained every third day and the
skid steer was stuck in the mud and we really wanted to finish that thing. Um but we're looking at having to finish it next year. Um we couldn't get dump trucks in and out of there. It was just a muddy mess and plus we didn't have a skid steer. We just won a skid steer and a big grant, which is really cool. Um, we built this huge uh pollinator lighted
sledding hill. So, for little kids in Brainard, there's not a whole lot of places to come sledding if you're that two to five uh age range. So, we just put together a lighted sledding hill with some materials we had laying around. Um, new growth in membership and, uh, our donor society launched and
we're doing quite well there. Uh, significant volunteer growth as we've continued to build recreation amenities. Number four. Um, okay. So, everybody knows about the the bike park. We got about halfway through the bike park this year. Um, we just started pushing
pushing snow up and laying down ice for our forest ice skating trail that we'll be putting in in the next week. Um, we're hoping to get a bunch of ice frozen and down by this weekend and start running our freshly purchased Zamboni uh next week. Uh, disc golf course development was approved in the
master plan. just hoping to create a regional draw much like what you see up in Breezy Point with those premier kind of disc golf courses. The land acquisition um and I'll I'll be talking to the county the county about this but um our application for the 120 acre
acquis acquisition project was denied this year. We didn't have enough um municipal and county matching funds. So, I'll be asking the um Briner City Council if we can if they would approve us to leverage those funds so that we
can obtain regional designation funding for the acquisition of um to sell the land to Crowing County and then lease it back with recreational use limitations. So, um yeah, with with this regional park designation, we have access to $13 million in state funding through uh
legacy funds. So this will be a whole new page for the arburedom and we hope to become the biggest tourism regional outdoor recreation facility in the region while still offering probably the cheapest summer camp in town. Okay,
>> there we go. >> Thank you, Mr. President. >> Yeah, Mr. Chzac, go ahead. >> Yes, sir. >> Thank you. Uh Mr. [clears throat] Pomia. Um, any other municipality in Crowing County or anywhere around provide you dollars?
>> Uh, we do have we have some uh agreements with the city of Baxter where [laughter] where we do some mowing and maintenance of some of their facilities. Um, their estimated inind contributions are between 50 and $60,000 annually since we run the county's largest compost operation or second largest
compost operation. So with that and honestly they they built the sledding hill for us. We can't move 400 yards of material and they can just bring a big loader in. So the ink kind contributions are pretty significant. Also if we can if we can strike a logging uh deal with
Crowing County to thin the red pine stand that badly needs thinned um and replant that. We're looking at some serious contributions there. where we could also leverage that funding to then procure state funding for development of ski shalets or or you know ADA accessible paths or or whatever we
decide that we want to procure in the master plan. >> But as far as any direct tax dollars the city of Brainer is the only one city. Yep. >> From Baxter. [clears throat] Yeah. I know I know Baxter has quite a bit. They >> Yep. >> Okay. >> Yep. >> All right. >> They treat us really well. Yep. Thank
you, sir. >> Johnson, [clears throat] >> thank you. Uh, you're doing a great job, Trevor. I really like to see what you have going on out there. The bike trail is awesome. This skating trail, >> as everybody at the hockey rink, really excited. >> Okay. >> You said you were going to start trying
to get water, start trying to get ice this weekend. How long is the trail and when do you expect it to be open weather participating? >> Yeah. Weather contingent. Um, so what's initially approved is we and we we went with a shorter trail, uh, just under a half of a mile of trail because there's
a lot of up, downs, and turns and and so a lot of these forest ice skating trails are pretty flat. Um, but we're finding that some of the newer ones are using a drag system to kind of capture the water as it freezes behind the water tankers. We've got about just over 20,000 lbs of
water tankers that we can run pretty consistently all day. and we got pretty good pressure out of our two wells. So, we're hoping to be able to have a good 6 to8 inches ice base down within the next two weeks. Um, around [clears throat] Minnesota and Wisconsin, we're seeing them open around December 21st. And so,
that's kind of our target date. I wouldn't be bummed out if we started a little sooner. >> So, hopefully Christmas break. And it's I guess it's as wide as a Zamboni then. >> Yeah, we actually went two Zamboni widths. We went Zambon. We went with We went with 10 feet and so yeah, double Zamboni. Um, we went with 10 feet
because I a lot of the videos are I see with skates spinning and and I don't know, it just freaked me out. So, uh, I didn't like the six foot or the five foot wide path. So, >> all right. Thank you. Keep it up. >> Thank you very much. Appreciate it. Councilman >> Trevor, could you just expand just very
briefly? I don't want to hold you too long, but you mentioned asking permission to be able to leverage the funds from the city of Brainard. Is there something that you need from the city? Have you been working with our staff at all for something that allows that? >> Yeah, I I made a mistake in not asking
for a a more specific letter of support when I was doing my designation process. We obtained regional designation so quickly that I only had 31 days to submit my funding application. Um, so it wasn't able to go in front of the council with the the amendments that I would have needed. Um, and so it would
probably be a 10% funding match, which would be the land acquisition property was about 534,000. So it would be utilizing about $53,000 of the levy funds to then leverage the 90% state funds to finish that procurement. We would have we'd actually have an
investment account at that point that would acrue some decent interest and then we could begin leveraging those funds to get state accessibility fundings for ADA accessibility door door openers. Um more importantly our none of our gardens are ADA accessible. only our
nature playscape is at this time and so being able to get our primary visitors to those locations is pretty important to us. >> Okay. Thank you. Well, if you if you need more information from us, if there's something that the council can do, please get us that information whenever.
>> Very good. Thank you. >> Any more questions, guys? >> Looks like not. >> Thank you, council. >> Thank you, Trevor. >> Next up, we have 7C. This is the Brainer Public Utilities operating and capital budget presentation. Mr. Sandy.
>> Good evening, Mayor and Council. How is everyone tonight? >> Fantastic. >> Couldn't be better. >> What everyone has been waiting for all year on the edge of your seats. >> My favorite meeting [laughter] >> uh tonight. So, I have uh Danny with me here tonight. He'll be presenting the
operating side of our budget. Um, I'm up here tonight presenting the capital side of our 2026 to 2030 capital improvement plan. Uh, both of which were reviewed and approved by the BPU Commission on November 25th and are now in front of the council for consideration.
I'd like to begin with a highle overview of the capital improvement program across our water, electric, and wastewater systems. over the next 5 years uh include some of the most uh significant investments BPU has undertaken. These projects focus on
long-term reliability, regulatory compliance, and maintaining essential public infrastructure. I'm going to start off with the uh electrical capital program. So, as part of our annual system reinforcements, um
we focus on overhead and underground improvements, directional drilling, and transformer replacements. Uh those improvements remain the foundation to our electrical system and they average between 900,000 and $1.2 million a year in investments that we're putting into
the electrical distribution system. A major project coming down the line for us is in 2029 with uh the replacement and um upgrade of our downtown substation project. Um that's programmed at $2.5 million uh for year 2029.
Uh key uh investments into the hydro facility that are in the plan uh include a uh roof replacement on the powerhouse where the generators um are at. Uh we continue to investigate uh the generator pit 6 replacement um and that's a
two-year modernization project totaling 4.85 million in the years 2028 and 2029. We do have a system impact assessment planned for 2030 for a total capital cost of $350,000.
That's a pretty high level overview um of some of the major investments and on the electrical side of the system. Uh those investments modernize our core equipment and enhance our redundancy. Um being that the hydrodam is a locallyowned resource, it's an important
asset for the commission in meeting the state's requirement of of achieving 2040 uh 100% carbon-f free energy. Moving on to the capital water side, Danny, if you want to go there. Um the water department's capital plan is the
most significant component of our capital improvement plan. Um the centerpiece of uh the plan um is planned for um going through a construction manager at risk uh project that the BPU commission recently approved and that is
to um basically design and construct our reclamation and backwash uh tank at the water treatment plant. Um we have that in the capital plan funded at 2.825 million in 2026 and 2027. Uh that project is supported by a $5
million state uh $5 million in state funding to reduce the total local cost. Uh we have a new well number nine that's scheduled for construction in 2027 at $5 million. Uh that is to support system
redundancy and meeting the Minnesota Department of Health requirements. So, the big project on everyone's mind lately is the planning of a future water treatment plant uh with staging costs of 3.8 million in 2028 and 4 million in 2030, consistent with previous requests
for roughly a $58 million water treatment facility. Lead service line replacements are a big topic of discussion right now. Um, we've received notice here in the last month that the city of Briner has been funded for a little over 2.5 million in lead
service line replacements in 2026 um with the expectations of more external funding coming from the lead service line replacement program um through the Minnesota Department of Health in the future. BPU continues to coordinate with city reconstruction project uh due to changes
in mind uh highway 210 schedule. BPU will need to fully fund the 210 utility work in 2026 with bonding proposed early in the year to support cash flow. Um, our budget that was presented last year had those costs spread out over quite a few years,
but knowing now that the funds need to be upfront to MINDOT, um, we have planned for those costs all in 2026. Some of the just the standard system reliability and redundancy things we're working on are uh SCADA improvement, uh booster station improvements, wellhouse
upgrades, and metering improvements um throughout the 5-year period. And last but not least, I will move on to wastewater. Uh the wastewater CIP includes one of the largest uh single capital projects
in BPU's long-range plan. Uh key components include uh wastewater treatment plant expansion and bioolids improvement. We currently have $12 million in the budget in 2026 and another 12 million in 2027 to address capacity bioolid storage and permitting
needs. Uh this project is on the state's project priority list and is advancing with the joint wastewater management board. We are on the uh the project priority list um through the Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency for our main lift station replacement project. We have $494,000 programmed in 2026 for the design and bidding aspect of that project. Um and we're on the project priority list for $7 million um to be eligible for
lowinterest loans through the Minnesota Public Facilities Authority. Um there's some several carry forward items on the wastewater side um that we did not get done in 2025 that will be uh that are included in the budget for
2026. That includes some fencing improvements, HVAC controls, some grit screening equipment and door replacements. Um so those will those were moved forward into 2026. And with that, I think I will pass it over to Danny to take the reigns from
the operating budget standpoint. [clears throat] >> Thanks, Paul. It's Danny Lock, finance manager. >> There he is. >> Or the utility. >> Do you want me to run the screen? >> That's fine. I think I can handle it. >> Does he have a microphone?
>> Are you hearing me? >> I I can hear you. Do you have a microphone so the people at home can? Yeah. >> Yep. Thank you. So, as we look at the uh operating budget, what we was approved this last meeting on the 25th, as Paul said, um we had some infla in
inflationary costs, as everyone has seen, some regulatory compliance, and then staffing needs. So, our combined total operating budget uh for 2026, total revenues about 40.3 million, total expenses about 40.08 million. So, our change in net positions around that
245,000. uh that's kind of supporting the system reliability. It incorporates January 1 rate adjustments that commission has previously approved and continues building some of those reserves to support these future capital projects.
As we're seeing included in our expenses as we look into 26 are some open staffing positions and those have been included in some of the organizational charts over time and
remain unfilled. Many of these positions remain unfilled due to just the retirements and attrition we've been seeing along with the ongoing review of our organizational needs. Um the evaluation aims to ensure that we're delivering those services effectively as
we can and as we look to these capital upgrades, making sure we're completing those as efficiently as we can. Um we're looking to really ensure that the trained personnel are available to offset the attrition. We're seeing the positions then included in this budget that are currently vacant are a
technical services lead, a maintenance lead, two utility laborers, backfilling of the business office support specialist which is uh in process already. um two water service workers with back filling the one retirement and then one
new additional to provide that higher level of maintenance in the distribution system specifically and then backfilling of one wastewater operator which has already begun in process too. But uh as I stated, those are already included. And then our personnel costs in this
budget do reflect the Minnesota paid family leave, the medical leave, and then the increase in health insurance. As we look to like the electric fund specifically, um revenues are stabilizing from
year-over-year with the industrial load. We've seen uh rapid increases in revenues. Those have stabilized now over the years. uh purchase power then is stabilizing too. That's the biggest expense at that $20 million. Our wage and benefits increase reflect
the back fills as discussed earlier. There are some additional consulting needs that are included in this budget that were not in previous budgets. Um cost of service work and then IT support that's also included and then some of those rate studies.
The electric fund maintains that positive long-term forecast, [clears throat] but it also includes a 3% of revenues pilot that we've discussed at the council level before per the request of council.
The 3% in 26, 4% in 27, 5% in 28. Commission approved the 3% for 26 and that has been reflected and included in the budget for your review. At the next council meeting, you will have the
adjusted or the the policy change will be at the next council meeting for your review. Commission wants to hold off on the four and 5% until a full cost of service rate study could be performed. That false cost of service rate study is
also included in then the 26 budget. Uh as we look at the water fund, the water fund is showing a positive um net position, a change in net position for the first time in several years. Uh that's reflective of the 20%
rate increase that happened last December. the operating pressures that are within the water budget are the chemical costs and the utility costs alone are increasing but as we see the positive net position
we're showing that we can start building reserves when we look at the wastewater the wastewater fund revenues remain steady and they're supported by the residential flows and then the backer contract the O andM costs are continuing to rise with the aging infrastructure
and then just the chemical costs alone are a big portion there. Staffing adjustments are reflected in the operating back filling and then just the the wastewater fund alone has maintained having a positive net position.
This was the budget that was approved at the last commission meeting and Paul and I are here to answer any questions that council may have. >> Thank you guys and Danny. Uh, one that came up the cost of service rate study. I don't know if I c can see it on the list here, but
>> yeah. >> Is that something that was already planned or is that something put in place um recently or is it something we do every five years with BPU? >> So, we we typically do a rate study. We haven't done a full cost of service study. The latest was in 2017. So, with
the request from council to consider that pilot adjustment, the commission wanted to do the full cost of service study to ensure we were capturing all of that. Okay. And what is the cost of the study? >> We have 60,000 budgeted. >> Okay. Just curious. Mr. Chzac,
>> thank you. Um [clears throat] power purchase power is 20 million. That that number is an expense that you utility pays for power. Correct. >> Is that what that is? >> It's our purchase power from a well
producing at the the hydro plant. So that purchase power includes the offset from the hydrogeneration. >> Okay. So the cost though is 20 million. >> Yes. >> Okay. Um so okay and so um I just want to weigh
in on the water. I know I mentioned this before, but there was a 20% increase in water. And had that not been implemented, you'd be looking at about what is it 8 800,000 shortfall because you're in you're in the positive about 200, right? >> Yeah.
>> Okay. And it it would have it made a difference of it accumulated about 800,000. So is that correct? >> It about 600,000. >> 600. Okay. So without that you would see about a 600,000 deficit in water or well
actually 800 right? >> Uh >> is that not correct based on their based on being $200 in the positive? >> It'd be closer to 600,000 in the negative. Yes. >> Okay. All right. So I I just wanted to mention that because the utilities they
were you know wonder you know this this thing water has been at a deficit for a long time. So they took responsibility and increased the rates to accommodate for that shortfall they've been having and it was just a nice thing to see that they took care of it and now they have a
a surplus of funds there to help uh with their projects and all that. So um thank you. That's all I have. >> Jagger. >> Yeah. Thank you. Um Mr. Sandy, the 2040 carbon-f free initiative, is that a federal or a state initiative? >> State. >> We have any idea what that number is going to be
>> as far as for how much capital expense? >> Yep. just a macro view. No. >> Um I I don't remember the last numbers that were coming through of our solar field at the airport and what we're at uh from a hydrogeneration. How much of
our residential load is >> So presently with our residential load, we have about 17% of our coverage for the 2040 initiative. So we have a long way to go. That does not include our commercial load. >> That's a big number. >> A big big number. Do we have any idea
what the local versus the You said it was state, correct? >> What the state coverage is going to be on that gap? >> Currently, there is no state coverage. We haven't >> there. Thank you. That's all. >> Was banking on a lot of sunshine. That's all.
>> Anyone else? Mr. Johnson, >> I have a question on the 2040. I thought it was unclear when it passed if it if it uh applied to municipal utilities or just private sector utilities. Does the 2040 directive apply to municipal? >> It does.
>> Yeah, >> that's unfortunate. And then the hydro offset used to be itemized. Do you know off of hand what the offset was from the gener electricity generated by the hydrodam if you don't have any >> in the budget is 800,000. >> It's 800,000. Y >> that's that's down. It was a bad year of
flowage river down. Yeah. >> Okay. Thank you, [clears throat] Mr. President. Mr. Chzac, >> I got a question regarding the hydro. Have we ever done an analysis where we looked at our ongoing costs and then um
you know including operations and then uh what we receive in uh electrical revenues to see where we're at on that. >> I don't know if we've done a detailed analysis of something like that. You know, obviously our budget reflects I think it's a loss in net position on the
hydro side um right now. following out with a potential generator project. We just met with um Senator and Representative Heindman at the facility and they're carrying bills forward again for us this year um to try to get money to do the Pit Six um generator
replacement. So, we're working with our representation right now to try to [clears throat] fund that project to increase our hydro generation at that facility. >> Is that something staff could do at at some point in time? Do you know if one's ever done in the past regarding the It
always I guess troubled me that we've stuck a lot of money in that hydro dam since we got it. It's been a ton of money and I I I question whether the revenues we've gotten from the power have come close to offsetting the you know return on investment is
questionable. >> Yeah, I think it's something we could take from >> from memory. Jeff, we had a positive net position for the first 5 years of owning the dam and in the last 5 years we have we've been at a loss, but we can I can >> Okay, >> crunch some numbers. >> Thank you very much.
>> All right. Anyone else have questions? >> Doesn't look like it, >> Mr. Thank you, gentlemen. >> Oh, Mr. Chz, >> I was just going to make a motion. >> Okay, go ahead. >> Approve the uh public utility budget operating in capital.
Motion by Chzach, second by Bevans. >> Any discussion on the motion. >> Seeing none, let's go to a vote. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Against. Same sign. >> Motion carries. >> Thank you, gentlemen. All right, moving on. Next, we have
number eight. This is council committee reports. First up, we have safety and public's committee chairman Tad Ericson. >> All right. Thank you, Council President. We had five items on our agenda. Uh the first of which is direction uh regarding a request from Mr. Bolleg a complaint on
storm water easement adjacent to county state aid highway 48. There's no recommendation coming out of the committee uh for this uh item. We did have a motion that failed for lack of a second. The issue at hand is that uh council received testimony from Mr. Bleg
who resides on Anbec Street about his concern regarding storm water entering the county's storm water drainage easement in the back portion of his property. Uh staff's recommendation was um that it's staff's opinion that the
city connected appropriately to the storm water sewer facility installed by the county uh including a recentou agreement and that no action um needed to be taken on the city. Again, there was a motion um that was made uh to the
effect that the city to direct staff to conduct a study. Uh but again, that failed for lack of a second. So, no action or no recommendation uh from the committee on this item. >> Thank you. >> Uh the next item, >> President,
>> Mr. Chzac. >> Yeah. Um are we going to have any discussion? >> That's up to you guys. >> Okay. Yeah, I'd like to have discussion. Okay. >> No action. Um yeah, I feel Mr. Bullig is uh one of these uh people that uh this is going back how many years ago as
everybody knows like uh 2021 the Southwest Brainer [snorts] construction project was done. That's when Kurban gutter was put in. He had no issue with water at all at all. No problem with water. You we keep referring to this uh hold harmless agreement he's got with
the county. It's like um that again it's once you once you do a project of this substantial amount back in 2021 if we curb and gut it now creates a problem for Mr. bowl. Again, that's a
city issue. It's 7030, right? So, again, um we do things all the time. We had a water uh uh we had a bank over there on the river slide and we had to fix that. That was how many thousands of dollars? We had um um a gully that was filled in
that some some people here at this deis would say that was no way we should have paid any money for that. The people moved in there. It was a natural contour of the land. And so why are we spending money on this? That's their problem. Remember that? How many dollars did we
put in that? Oh, we got a grant that covered a good portion of it from the state or DNR, I believe. But at the same time, we took care of those people who lived over there because it was a very big problem. And uh I don't see a whole lot of difference between that and Mr. Bullig's problem. And he's not the only
one over there. Another thing Mr. Bullig is doing, he's paying a s a storm sewer fee. Do you know he has no storm sewer over there? And according to our finance director, the storm sewer collection is for people who get a service of storm sewer. So he's been paying since he
moved in there back in the 70s. So has everyone else on that property? Have you ever heard of that before? Getting charged for a storm sewer fee that you have no storm sewer. Um, another thing is uh we we do these things all the time
where we uh and and I'll refer to not not to uh not to say anything uh pjoratively about Mr. uh Johnson regarding a sanitary service line sewer line we had here a couple meetings back and and the u the the terminology would
say we're just calling these people peasants. We're not helping them. And in some regards I agree with them entirely. The only difference is in that specific instance, we had a sanitary sewer line for years and years, the the policy of the city was whenever that is replaced
because somebody's connecting, they pay for the service line. We didn't we would have gone against pre we had set a precedent if we would have allowed that person to get reimbured for that portion of the sanitary sewer s sewer line. So, in all these instances, we look at one
little document, uh, hold harmless. That was with the county. Now, we have water that's causing this man and his neighbors problems. And, um, he needs representation. That's our job. That's our job. Staff isn't required to do that. They're they're looking at money.
Okay. It's expense. Big expense. Um, are there alternatives? We don't know. We don't even know what kind of engineering um services would come back if we did ask staff to go out to get an engineer to do um some sort of study. A study is
going to tell us what he's got water going through there. We want to find out what caused it. Um Country Manor staff said to this man in meetings, they aren't going to point the finger at anyone. No way. Not going to do it. And I understand that. But Country Manor,
everyone knows that the asbuilts were not asbuilts because they were not precise. And that's what asbuilts are. And staff was quick to point out that the asbuilts weren't what they were supposed to be for country manner, sewer, and water. But we took care of that. $50,000. Didn't bat an eye. So, I
just want to speak on behalf of Mr. Bullig and his neighbors because that's what we're here for. That's our job to represent the people in the city. And if it costs money to do so, that's our job. We have to make a decision. My colleagues here apparently didn't want to weigh in on that. So we look at a
hold harmless agreement 35 35 40 years old and that's what we're resting our laurels on. I I I I think we have to start weighing everything um equally country manner. I I I I argued against that. I thought if those AS bills would
have been correct, if we gave them the specs before they would have gone out for bids, they would have incorporated that into their total costs without any problem whatsoever. But we felt it's necessary to give them money because they see an added expense that technically wouldn't have been an added
expense had they had the right locations to begin with. So that's my pitch. I'm in favor of seeing that this man get some relief and I made a motion to that effect, but of course there was no second. But I would encourage the council to consider that based on my argument on his behalf because that's
what again what we're here for. >> Thank you, Mr. Chzac. >> Anyone else want to chime in on this discussion? Mr. Johnson? >> Yeah, I will just say the project on Ninth Street replaced nearly 10 ft of of sanitary main. So, I don't necessarily
agree with how it was characterized there. And I I agree with Councilman Shazak that we we should at least look into this. I know $100,000 is six figures. It's not 90,000. It's a hundred. It's a lot of money, but that's just a staff estimate. I do think we should at least go so far to see what a
study would cost and have staff get an actual quote bid, proposal, whatever the correct term and process is for a for a project like this. >> Thank you, Mr. Johnson. Anyone else?
>> Okay. I'll I'll have a motion to that effect if if you take it. >> Um, yeah, I'll just make a comment. It's It's hard for me to go through all of this documentation and just ignore the whole harmless agreement from 1977 was it?
>> There's two of them actually. >> Okay. No matter how old they are, there was a garage built with permission given the condition that there's no there's no there's no cost to the county
at that time. Now, we're we're in an agreement with the county holding on to that same exact uh drainage ditch or pond or whatever you want to call it. You can twist this and and turn it and say everything has changed and maybe it
has. Maybe we maybe we need to do that study. May maybe that would be the best way to figure it out. But when I look at a cost such as that at hundred and some thousands, I would really prefer that the solution came to us from whoever is being held at
harm rather than having us figure it out because we [clears throat] weren't the ones that built the garage. We had nothing to do with it other than permitting it. So, it's hard for me to go in favor of of
going ahead and doing an engineering study on something like this until we [clears throat] have more of an idea of what we're getting ourselves into. M Mr. President, the garage is not an issue. He he has a there never has been a problem with any kind of uh storm water
drainage for the garage. He brought in hundreds of yards of fill. He raised that up. It's got a perfect slope. It drops down significantly at the back compared to the rest of the contour of the land to go down into lower area. So, that's never been an issue. The garage is fine. It's never been an issue. It's
it's in it's it was it's there for um if if in case the water is a problem for the garage. But, he did the right thing. He brought in um I think he raised it up six feet, he said. So, that is not the issue. He's got all this stuff that collects. trees are going down and it
only happened after the 2001 Southwest construction street construction project. As a matter of fact, on February 17th of 2004, uh, President [snorts] Jim Deian, council president, uh, they they voted and I believe Mr. Beaven was
there as well to have staff, engineer, county engineer, and city engineer get together with Mr. Bullock and come back with a resolution for this problem. that never happened. So again, there's staff direction being given that never got
taken care of. I find that very interesting. So that was in February 17th of 2004. So this man's been dealing with this for over two decades. All right. That's just troubling to me. >> Thanks, Mr. Chair. I'd like to second
chair Chairman Johnson, PF Chair Johnson's motion to at least find out what a project would would cost. >> Okay. Is that Can you clarify the motion? >> Yeah. So, the motion would be to direct staff to get a bid quote proposal,
whatever the correct lingo is, to get a storm water engineering study performed. And I so move >> and I seconded that. And I have a comment when you're ready. >> Motion by Johnson, second by Bevans. Uh Johnson, do you have something to say about >> I just want to speak to the motion that this isn't spending any money. It is
spending a little bit of staff time to get the actual cost of what this would cost instead of just pulling a random big number out of the air and making it look scary. >> Okay, Mr. Beavens, >> just that I I wouldn't be surprised with
our two engineers on staff now that we might be able to figure this out our in-house. I mean, I what do I know? >> That's I feel like draining water is a very simple thing, but it becomes so complicated. [laughter] I wish it was less complicated.
[clears throat] >> Anyone else discussion on that motion? >> Mr. President, >> Mr. Chz, >> I'd like to thank Mr. Beavens and Mr. Johnson for the sec motion and the second to hopefully move forward on this. >> Okay,
roll call, please. >> Tony, please call the RO. >> Jagger, >> no. >> Erikson, >> yes. >> Bevans, >> yes. >> Chzach, >> yes. >> Johnson, >> yes. >> ODC, >> yes. That motion carries. >> Chairman Ericson. >> All right. Thank you very much. Our
second item is approve design construction engineering proposal improvement 255 Southeast Brainard reconstruction project. The motion coming out of committee is to award uh the proposal from Bolton and Me for design and construction engineering
services for the Southeast Brainard reconstruction project in the amount of $430,186. And I so move. >> Second. Motion by Ericson, second by Chzac. Erikson. >> Yeah. So it um attached we have a proposal from Bolton and Meg to perform
design and construction engineering services for the said 2026 Southeast Brainer reconstruction project. Um BPU was recently awarded PFA funding. Um both uh directors Sandy and Lock uh
referenced these in their presentation for the lead service line uh replacement. Um several of these locations are located within the city's project um uh scope or area and so staff
put together a request that we um approve the proposal for Bolton and Mink as they are also the con the consultant that's doing the uh lead service line and in so doing it would create uh efficiencies and uh cost savings. >> All right. Thank you. Any more
discussion >> Mr. President, >> Mr. Chazak, >> um, just so everyone knows, this is not just the city's portion of the lead service line. This will also encompass residential properties from the curb stop to the home where they have the uh,
the uh, lead or the galvanized lines. So, that's important for people to know that. >> Thank you, Mayor Blow. >> Yeah, I just want clarification. Galvanized is included in that as well. >> Let galvanized service lines, correct?
>> Correct. A majority, a large majority, probably almost 100% are galvanized in the city of Brainard. >> More discussion on that motion? None. Let's go to a vote. All those in favor say I. >> I. Against. Same sign. >> Motion carries. Chairman Ericson.
>> All right. Our third item to approve amendment request SRF Consulting Trunk Highway 210 Washington Reconstruction. Motion coming out of committee is to approve the requested contract amendment from SRF consulting in the amount of 65,210 and I so move
>> second motion by Ericson second by Chzach Ericson. >> So staff received this uh amendment request from SRF consulting. Uh they're performing the design and engineering uh for the water main sanitary sewer and lighting u for the upcoming trunk
highway 210 reconstruction [snorts] project. um they had additional hours uh that they found were necessary to complete the additional analysis uh that was outside the original intended scope of work and um this dollar amount represents the cost for those additional
dollar amounts. There was a I'm going to call it a well $15,000 allowance that was built into the original. Um so they did use that up first and then the additional amount um for those hours is the 65,210. >> All right. Thank you. More discussion.
>> Yeah, I might add to that um the lighting portion is state aid eligible. >> Okay. Have discussion on that motion. Seeing none, let's go to a vote. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Against. Same sign.
>> Motion carries. Chairman Ericson. >> Uh our fourth item was simply an update on uh construction projects. Uh no action was required. Um there was no additions uh since the agenda went out. So u this was just information only. Uh
information is in your packet. So no action required. >> Mr. President, >> action required. There's this is an item up for discussion though. If anyone has questions, comments, discussion, >> Mr. President. >> Yeah. I I held off because I figured this is should have been on the council
agenda based on the motion coming from Mr. Evans and uh to move forward with this. But um so um as you know, I've expressed a few concerns about this uh project and um we we um I I I guess my
I I I think I understand how this happened and it it it it it is what it is. Okay. So, I understand that um we have um decisions being made um and and Mr. Dean's memo says the meetings were
not designed to get council direction. So, I I appreciate that. I I don't think that was the intention. However, there's numerous documents that show that um the tenth street portion of the um right street project has been suspended until
next spring, which our attorney did indicate that it needs council action. So, I'm I'm just going to ask this. Is that going to come before us yet before the spring? Is that is that going to be an item we will see in front of us yet
sometime here perhaps in the near future? I'd ask that of staff. Maybe Nick or >> Jesse, do you have an answer for that? >> I I can advise. Uh it depends on what the council is looking for. We don't need to make a contract change
unless the council directs us to make a change. As of right now, the only change uh that has been made is to the contract deadline uh which the original end date was October 3rd and change order 2 reflected an additional 15 working days. So, as of right now, the contract
language dictates that after that point, liquidated damages do apply on the contract. So, depending on when they finish the contract and the uh work on the project, um those liquidated damages apply accordingly. So, I guess I'm looking for direction from the council.
If you were looking for a change to that contract language, we would also have to run that by the contractor. >> I think it would be smart to bring that back to the council at some point. I I don't think it would be smart to open up that project right now after last week's storm. I think we can leave 10th Street
untouched and I don't think that's what you're suggesting. I'm just joking. >> Wasn't very funny. >> But uh >> Mr. >> with that I think I think we should there were things discussed at that meeting that really weren't much of an
option. Uh it was more communication with council being present. So I think bringing that forward with whatever the council needs to approve would [clears throat] be smart to do as soon as possible. M >> Mr. President. >> Yeah, Mr. President.
>> I'm just going to repeat myself. I sorry I have a on October 6th. City attorney Langel indicated that when you change the time of a contract, which we did, it's 10th Street was not originally scheduled to be completed in the spring
of 2026. So we changed the time. Um, not by this council though. He said the council needs to vote on that if you change that. Am I correct there, Mr. Lang? >> It hasn't been changed though. >> Oh, every every document I read says I got a report here from our
administrator. It says that project been suspended until 2026. That was on the 17th of November. Um, I see October 6. It says that we're holding off on 10th Street until spring of 2026.
Um, has there been direction given to the contractor to hold off on 10th Street until 2026? >> I I can advise on that. Uh, yes. Uh, the project was phased specifically right and 10th Street. Um, based on their process and their schedule, they
essentially finished Wright Street at the end of the construction season, the constructible season. Um, for them to begin 10th Street, it would have been at the end of October. uh we knew it was infeasible for them to not only open it up but also finish it uh within a
reasonable time frame um during the constructible season. >> So >> so staff's direction to the contractor was not to open up 10th Street earlier uh than Right Street was completed which in effect moved 10th Street to the 2026 season.
>> Right. Okay. So yes, there has been a decision made to Mr. Johnson's point, I guess, too. Um, one other question I have is on the Ronald Joseph Street. Did the council ever take action to extend that till 2026? >> Anyone? Mr. Dean,
>> the original contract had uh an allowance of that project to extend to June 2026 because we knew uh Joseph and Ronald had potential impacts with the detour route for the roundabout. So, it was specifically crafted to have some flexibility with the deadline of that
project. But the allowance to be able to get Hawkins done within 20 2025, which it did. >> Okay. I wasn't aware of that, but thank you. That that helps me. So, at this point, Mr. ODay, um I would just uh I I
my whole problem here I have with this is the process, and I've expressed it a number of times. I don't won't go through it again, but I I would like to know um what what do we see moving forward? you know, um, if if if this if if we um maybe I could ask a legal
question to Mr. Langle. If if if we're going to talk about liquidating damages, cancelling a contract, is that potential litigation? >> Well, anytime that you talk about damages in a contract, there's a potential litigation depending upon whether the contractor's agreeing with
it. I mean, that's that's always the case. So we we would be have the right to go into close session for potential litigation to discuss this if we chose to. >> If there is some indication that that that could occur. Yes. If you I mean we could make an argument that that's a
potential uh coming out of a contract um dispute violation what have you. >> I think you just said anytime we have um talking about this liquidating damages and cancelling contracts as potential litigate. Okay. So, could we receive an
email um that would be confidential from our city attorney in regards to what's going on here? Is that something we could do? >> I could discuss the underlying facts with staff and we could uh come up with a confidential communication to council.
Yeah, that's certainly allowed. >> Okay. Um I I m Mr. Um, President, if I could, um, I would like to move that we receive an update from our city attorney and staff to inform us of the, um,
issues surrounding the potential of us exploring liquidating damages or cancelling a contract and all or all the above regarding this issue and to see exactly what the recommendation is from staff on going forward with the uh, suspension of the
10 speed portion of Right project until the spring. I so move. >> We have a motion by Chzach >> for a second. >> I'll second that. >> We have a second by Bevans. Discussion on the motion. Mr. Ericen, you have something? >> Yeah, Mr. Chz, could you just clarify in
in the motion? You said all of the above. Can you just further define that? >> Yeah. Any of the u items that are faced before us here outlining Mr. Dean's memo um a most recent memo regarding liquidating damages, cancelling a
contract, the items he had listed there, that's what I was referencing. >> All right. Thank you. >> Yep. More discussion on that motion. Seeing none, let's go to a vote. All those in favor say I. I. >> Against. Same sign.
>> That motion carries. Chairman Ericson. >> All right. Thank Oh, >> can we continue discussion? >> Yeah. Sorry. We can keep the discussion going. >> Well, I just have one question. I need clarification here because I'm under the understanding that the contract was not amended >> and that liquidated damages are on the
table. Just because staff said don't dig up this street, you're not going to get it done. Doesn't that doesn't constitute a change in the contract where liquidated damages don't apply, does it? >> It does not. >> Right. So, liquidated damages on 10th
Street still apply because we have not amended the contract. Correct. Correct. >> That's what I thought. Thank you. >> Okay. Anything else? Moving on. Chairman Ericson. >> All right. This is our our last item and it's uh to consider enacting an
ordinance regulating massage therapy businesses. Motion coming out of committee is to direct staff to draft a proposed ordinance to regulate licensing and business practices for massage therapy. And I so move. >> Second. >> Motion by Ericson, second by Chzot.
Ericson. So, in our committee, uh, Chief Davis presented this item, and I'm just going to read the summary here. To address rising criminal activity and concerning conduct at local massage therapy businesses, staff seeks council direction on implementing a local
regulatory ordinance. Unlike most states, Minnesota does not license massage therapy at the state level, prompting many cities to adopt their own lensure requirements to ensure public safety. And that's the the onus for uh this request.
>> Okay. Any else have discussion? See none. Let's go to a vote. >> All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Against. Same sign. Motion carries. Chairman Ericson. >> Uh thank you. End of end of report.
>> Thank you, Chairman Ericson. Moving on. This is 8B. Personnel and finance committee chairman Gabe Johnson. >> Thank you, Mr. President. We've got four items. The first of which is approval of an updated animal control contract. And the motion out of committee was to approve the three-year animal control
agreement with Lakes Area Animal Control and ISO move. >> Second. >> Motion by Johnson, second by Bevans. Chairman Johnson. >> Uh the police department and and our committee as well are have been satisfied with the services provide by Lakes Animal Control. The part that
really affects the budget or the finances, his compensation is only is going up less than $100 per month in each year of the contract and less than $100 a month from this year next year too. So it it's a reasonable financial change for the for the quality service
they provide. >> All right. Thank you. More discussion, Mr. Chzock. >> Thank you, Mr. President. Um I don't know who can answer this but if the animal control individual is not um responsive and somebody
uh has issue who do they contact? >> Anyone from staff want to answer that chief? Yeah, generally most of those calls are fielded through our Crowing County Dispatch Center and if for whatever reason animal control is not available,
that gets passed directly on to the police department to take responsibility for it and that usually is uh either an officer or at times a community service officer addressing what the request is, what the need is. >> So, so if u say somebody is unhappy with
the service, they could contact that. That's that's how they would contact through the uh >> I'm I'm sorry, maybe I misunderstood. If they're unhappy with the animal control service or they're requesting animal control service >> there the the animal control is less than responsive or they're not
performing as maybe the individual might think they should. >> Sure. >> Who who then oversees that person? >> Um it' be my belief it'd be city administrator Broyals. >> Okay. >> On behalf of the city. Yeah. >> Okay. Thank you very much. >> Johnson, do you have something? I would
just like to add to that answer. We have a public forum every two weeks. I think they should come and let the council know so we can take action if if the job isn't being performed properly. >> Okay. Thank you. More discussion. Seeing none, let's go to a vote. All those in
favor say I. I. Against. Same sign. >> Motion carries. Chairman Johnson. >> Thank you. Next up is the misdemeanor prosecution services agreement. And the motion is to approve the agreement with Severson Porter Law for misdemeanor prosecution services for calendar years
26 and 27 contingent on approval of a joint powers agreement with the cities of Baxer and Niswah for their like services and to direct staff to explore case management software options with Severson Porter to aid in these functions and ISO move. >> Second motion by Johnson, second by
Bevans, Chairman Johnson. So they are proposing a 3% annual increase cap and a 1% floor. So it's a reasonable annual increase for services that the police department and I think the city as a whole are
satisfied with. We don't have agreements with Baxter and Niswah yet, but we don't have any reason to believe we won't. So this is contingent upon that agreement being put in place and that should be before us soon. >> Thank you, Mr. Beaven. >> Uh thanks, Mr. Chair. And the committee
did ask of staff to report back on revenues from the state on this prosecution. >> Okay. Is that part of the motion or just >> No, it's just an FYI. >> Part of the minutes. >> Thank you. Anyone else? >> President OD. >> Mr. Chz.
>> Yeah. I emailed Nick a question about case management software. Nick, would you be willing to just explain that again? So I I'm I'm just real not very clear on how that explore explore that case management software I think is what's in the
>> Go ahead. >> Yeah, I'll be happy to to start this and Chief Davis can help fill me in if I uh miss something, but Chief Davis and I had a meeting with Kurt Porter and Mark Severson. We were talking about the contract and just due to the nature of of uh particularly criminal criminal
litigation, the volume is increasing considerably year-over-year. Um there's a lot of interaction between the our our misdemeanor prosecution office and officers uh etc. during discovery things like
that. So the one thing that Severson Porter did ask that we have in the contract is that they want us to have a discussion going forward about some case management software to better manage this. They're still managing their files essentially in banker boxes in their
basement. Um and I think it's worth having that conversation. Councilman Chzach asked me a question. I believe it was earlier today about the cost for that case management software and it would and I talked to Chief Davis and it would be our intention that as we continue to maybe in engage in those
conversations about a case management software that those costs that are associated with that would be shared with Baxter and NISA. Obviously they would have to agree to that. Um but this is just taking the next step technologically where we can find a software suite where we can store all
this data and we just help in all the interaction between the federal the various law enforcement agencies and attorney teams. >> Thank you very much. >> All right, more discussion. Seeing none, let's go to a vote. All those in favor say I.
>> I. Again, same sign. >> That motion carries. Chairman Johnson. >> Thank you, Mr. President. The third item on our agenda is discussion of the 2026 non-working funds budgets. Uh they are all attached. We don't have final budgets from the EDA which should be set
this Thursday or the library which would be set I think in January. But it is what it is. So just a discussion item. We'll adopt all of these budgets when we adopt the total budget package as a whole at the in 2025.
Okay. So, no motion. >> No motion. Just if anybody has any questions or discussion, >> any questions or discussion on that item? >> I see none. >> Okay. Then we'll go to the next item and that's discussion of the 2026 operating
budget and levy. There's a lot of information here in the packet that you read. The motion that came out of committee was to reinstate the $784,000 for the public works garage in the
capital plan in year 2028 and present a 2026 levy of $7,435,323 a 4.75% increase at the public hearing next week. And I saw move. >> Second. >> See a 4.74.
>> I think we could do that. Yeah. >> Okay. All right. We have a motion by Johnson, second by Bevans. >> Any discussion, Mr. Johnson? >> Yeah. So, Mike, as you know, and you could you could expound upon it, but when we met with uh with the city
administrator and finance director, they the finance director had already gotten some more information in of lower insurance costs and some good news for us that got the proposed levy down to a potential 4.75% this year. But we also
took a look at the capital budget and we saw for 2026 they had $784,000 in the public works garage and and the council president and myself agreed to remove that because we're going through this
possible reorganization and we're not sure what public works is going to look like in one year, two year, five years. So, we pulled it out of 26, but this motion is putting it back in in 28 because if and when there is a reorganization, there will probably be a
construction need out at that garage. We decided not to do next year's project right now, just to bundle it with whatever changes need to be made in the future when we identify what those are. Right now, we don't know. So, let's put that off for now and set the levy at a
4.75 increase. Go ahead. expanding on on that, that was a project that was coming forward from a study that was based on the way that the city is organized right now. So, looking into the what the charter is doing, uh what the charter commission is possibly doing and what we
might do is reorganize the city. That study might not pertain to what we have in in another year or two years. So, Johnson, >> that's all I have. >> Okay. Any more discussion? >> Mr. President, >> Mr. Chz.
>> So if if that had stayed in the budget for 2026, the public works garage 700,000 and change, >> what would that do to our levy? That's looking >> wouldn't change. >> Huh? >> It wouldn't change. >> Explain that. I That's the part I'm not
getting, >> Mr. Johnson. >> So it wouldn't change the 2026 levy because it's a capital expenditure. We have our capital levy each year of $1.1 million. Some years we spend 3 million, some years we spend 500,000. So over the
course of the long term, that 7 not spending that $784,000 would eventually benefit the levy, but it's not immediate every year just to kind of keep our levy as stable as we possibly can. >> Another reason why I like Mr. Johnson as
our finance committee chairman. Thank you very much. >> Does a great job. >> All right, any other discussion, questions? Seeing none, let's go to a vote. All those in favor say I. >> I. Against. Same sign. That motion
carries. Chairman Johnson. >> End of report. >> Thank you, Chairman Johnson. Moving on to number nine. This is unfinished business. First up, 9A. We have a call for applicants. And we have your honorable Mayor Bedau. >> The honorable indeed. I have a note on
here that says this includes the vacancies expiring on 1231. I appreciate that. because it's good to get a head start on this. So, uh, the following boards and commissions have positions available. Charter Commission, two terms expiring 2025, two terms expiring 2026. Economic
Development Authority, one term expiring 2028. Housing Redevelopment Authority, two terms expiring 2030. Library Board, holy Hannah, get ready for this. Five terms expiring, all [clears throat] at the same time, 2031. and the park board, one term expiring
2028 and one term expiring 2029, as well as public utilities commission, one term expiring 2028 and one term expiring 2030. And hold on to your seats, folks. Transportation Advisory Committee, one term expiring 2026, and two terms expiring 2027.
>> All right. And as council president, I have two terms for the planning commission expiring 2028, and then two terms for the water tower committee still open. Moving on to 9B. This is the final reading of proposed ordinance 1598 for snow removal. Presenter listed here
is Mike Habigor, public works director. >> Thank you, Mr. President. The existing downtown snow removal ordinance is specific for a contractor to complete the snow removal. The attached downtown snow removal ordinance has been reviewed by staff and approved by the city attorney. The proposed ordinance is
flexible to allow the city council to award downtown snow removal to a private contractor and are to be completed by city staff. The city council conducted the first reading on the proposed ordinance 1598 on November 17th. Staff
is recommending to conduct the full reading of the proposed ordinance 1598 and suspend the actual reading. And number two, approve the ordinance 1598. >> Thank you. Anybody have questions for staff?
There are no questions for staff. We're looking for a motion. >> So move to approve. >> Second. >> Approve and dispense with the actual reading. Uh looks like we have a motion from Chzach. Second by Bevans. Any discussion?
Seeing none, let's go to a vote. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Again, same sign. >> Motion carries. Next, we're looking for a motion to approve ordinance 1598. >> So move. >> Second. >> Motion by Chzach. Second by Bevans.
>> Any discussion? >> This is a roll call vote. Tony, please call the role. >> Jagger, >> yes. >> Ericson, >> yes. >> Beans, >> yes. >> Chzach, >> yes. >> Johnson, >> nope. >> OD, >> yes. That ordinance is adopted. Moving on to 9C,
we have approval of a adopted solar development agreement at Rotary Park. Again, we have public works director Mike Habagor. >> Thank you, Mr. President. The solar development agreement for Rotary Park has been previously approved by BPU Commission, Park Board, and City
Council. However, however, the Rotary Club is requesting article 11.2 2 and 11.3 to be removed, which really addresses that after the warranty has expired, the Rotary Club would be responsible for the ongoing maintenance and decommissioning of the solar panels.
This verbiage has been removed now and will be the responsibility of BPU as with all solar items in the city. Other charges, other changes are minor and uh include the BPU will will provide a down payment by December 31st and which will
rem uh maintain that federal tax credit and also the completion date was adjusted to June 30th, 2026. And lastly, Michelle Francis was added as the signature for the Rotary Club. Attached to this agenda item are the red line and
the clean versions of this agreement. The BPU commission has approved the updated agreement and also the park board has also approved this uh this new um amendment. Staff is recommending approval of the updated solar uh development agreement at Rotary Park.
And with that, we can take any questions. >> Thank you, Mr. Habagar. Does anybody have questions for staff? Doesn't look like it, Mr. President? >> Yeah, Mr. Chzac. Um, I have concerns and I'd like to discuss those if I could. >> Yep. Go for it.
>> Um, I um they the utility commission got this wrong and um the reason why we all able to see the email I got from uh public uh utilities director Sandy today? >> I did.
>> Okay. Not sure if everybody did. >> It's it's it's in your inbox. Um just to go through it really briefly. Um there's already been about 11,000 of costs with u wages or employ employee hours and uh um materials to extend
power to this facility. So they have power. That was their that was their their thing. They would like to have power. And what happens here with this solar panel is um now with this change, of course on November 3rd, I voted for this because at that time um the
Rotarians were going to be responsible for future decommission, any kind of maintenance and uh repairs. And this isn't a location where uh the threat of vandalism is extremely high. And this is going to be all burden on the rateayers,
the rateayers that we represent. Um, additionally, if I could, um, $34,000 total comp um contribution by the public utilities and and that's paid
by the people that we represent, the rateayers. Um, it it's it's irresponsible when we're we're we're looking at what this is. It's literally an ideological driven facility. It It's
great. It won't It won't even click the meter on what on what we can uh see regarding energy in the big picture. It It's like it it really doesn't add anything to our port portfolio of carbon-f free because it's so small. The
amount of return on this is it takes >> 32 years. >> 32. Thank you. to get I mean by then it's it's it's kaput and and I just think if we're going to do our job
correctly and uh represent the people who are going to wind up paying for this we shouldn't pass it. That's that's where I'm at. So initially public utility staff did not recommend this. So, uh, I would
say this that I did talk to one commission member who told me he made a mistake when he voted for this last Tuesday. So, I I I would move that we do not approve this agreement.
Is that a motion? That is a motion. Motion by Chzach. >> Second. >> Second by Jagger. Any discussion on that motion, Mr. Johnson. >> Yeah, I'll support the motion. I I agree
with everything uh Councilman Chzach stated. I, you know, I would just add I was going to go along with it because so many people and organizations are involved and they all support it and it's not that big of a deal. So, I was going to go along with it, but I'll support this motion because I don't
really like the idea of what's happening at Rotary Park. It was it was the city accepted all of this natural habitat to be the city's one natural park. And now we're getting gazeos, parking lots. I don't know if we have bathrooms
yet, but they'll they'll be there all on the backs of the taxpayers or now rateayers for uh this solar project. I think that the councelor correctly pointed out is nothing more than a vanity project. And when you're doing smallcale installations on your house,
you're not really saving the environment. You're just letting your neighbors know that you're a good person. So, it is kind of pointless to do this. But since the motion was made, I will support the motion. >> Thank you, Mr. Johnson. Mr. Beans. >> Thanks, Mr. Chair. As usual, this drives
me crazy making motions to not do stuff because I don't think we need to. We just don't do it. But I'll I'll support the motion as well. As crazy as it is, >> we already do have an agreement in place. It's just we we as a city and the
public utility don't have as much liability with the current agreement that's in place. For whatever reason it may be, this this agreement went through what three different commissions, including council, and then Rotary decided that they didn't
like it. I don't think I can think of a time that I've been around here that we've just gone back on agreement that's already gone through all the commissions. So just as a principle, I don't believe in changing this after we've already agreed on it and already
gone through the motions of everything. So I support the motion as well. Mr. Mayor, >> clarification here. So, this is is the motion to resend the the agreement that they're no longer looking to sign because you've we've approved an agreement, but they're not interested in
in that agreement now. >> Take that away. >> Oh, I think we can. >> So, is the motion to but the motion that is this this agreement in front of us? I'm rejecting it by the motion. >> Okay. >> Yep. Thank you. >> Okay.
We have the motion by Chzach. Second was by >> Jagger. >> Jagger. Sorry. >> Okay. >> Everybody clear on the motion? Any more discussion? Seeing none, let's go to a vote. All those in favor say I. >> I. I. >> Same sign.
That motion carries. All right, that is it for unfinished business. Moving on to number 10. This is new business. 10A is an consideration of an interim use permit uh renewal for the short-term rental at
105 South 6th Street. And this is community development director James Cranic. >> Yes, thank you, Mr. President. Uh so Rick Bedau has applied for the renewal of an interimm use permit to operate two short-term rentals at 105 South 6th Street. The forplex is currently permitted to operate two short-term
rentals along with two long-term rentals. Uh, an approval of the request would allow the applicant to change which units are short-term rentals without council approval. However, no more than two units can be short-term rentals at any one time. Uh, staff have not received any complaints against the
property while operating as a short-term rental. Uh, and with that, the planning commission recommended approval of the IEP renewal as presented with the following conditions. The interimm use permit for two short-term rentals at 10005 South 6 Street shall terminate on 1231 2027 upon sale or transfer of the
property. The IUP for the short-term rental at 105 South 6 Street are no longer valid. Submittal of the City of Brainer lodging tax form by the 10th of each and every month regardless of rental activity and units cannot exceed occupancy limits of the property maintenance code and no more than two
units may be rented at any one time. And I can answer any questions. Thank you, Mr. Cranic. Anybody have questions for Mr. Kramvik or staff? Look like none. If not, we're looking for a motion. >> So move. >> Second.
>> Motion by Bevon, second by Johnson to follow the recommendations. Any discussion on that? Seeing none, let's go to a vote. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Against. Same sign. Motion carries. Moving on to 10B.
uh consideration of interim use permit for a short-term rental at 712 North 6th Street. Again, uh community development director James Kravik. >> Thank you, Mr. President. Uh Rick Bidau has submitted a request for an interim use permit to operate a short-term rental at 712 uh North 6th Street. This
property is currently operating as a short-term rental and his mother resides at the property. Short-term rentals operating prior to June 18th of 2024 shall be compliant with section 515-337 short-term rentals by December 31st of 2025. Uh staff have not received a
complaint against this property while operating as a short-term rental. As with that, planning commission recommended approval of the interimm use permit for a short-term rental with the following conditions. Interimm use permit for a short-term rental at 712 6th Street North shall terminate on 1231
of 2027. Upon sale or transfer of the property, the interimm use permit for the short-term rental is no longer valid. Submitt of the city of Brainer lodging tax form by the 10th of each and every month regardless of rental activity and the maximum occupancy must be reduced to three. Staff recommends a
slight change to this one. Um changing the condition to units cannot exceed occupancy limits of the property maintenance code. And with that, I can answer any questions. >> Thank you, Mr. Kravick. Does anybody have questions? Seeing none, can you restate that on
number four for your recommendation, Mr. >> So the recommendation would be the MAC maximum occupancy cannot exceed occupancy limits of the property maintenance code. >> Okay. All right, everybody clear on that? If we don't
have any questions, we're looking for a motion. >> So move >> second >> motion by Bevans, second by Johnson to go with those recommendations. Are you going with uh the recommendations on the memo or those uh from Mr. Krampic
just the one that number four cannot exceed the code for maximum occupancy instead of just three? >> I thought he was going with the recommended action. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Okay. That is the motion.
Any discussion on that motion, Mr. Ericen? >> Yeah. Could could I ask a question of James as to the difference between what's on um the maximum occupancy must be reduced to three and then how you stated it what >> it would still be three you know kind of irregardless um it's a little bit
cleaner to just reference the property maintenance code in the event that changes or um it's just a I think a better way to do it. >> Okay. Either way if if it passes this way it doesn't seem like I don't think it'll be too big of a change in two years when this comes up again change
it. So, all right. Any other discussion? Seeing none, let's go to a vote. All those in favor say I. >> I. Against. Same sign. >> That motion carries. Next, we have 10 C. This is a consideration of interimm use permit for
a short-term rental at 9995 Island Drive. Again, James Cranic. >> Thank you, Mr. President. Uh, Curt Waters has submitted a request for an interimm use permit to operate a short-term rental at 9995 Island Drive. Uh, this property is currently operating as a short-term rental. Short-term rentals operating prior to June 18th of
2024 shall be compliant with section 515-337. Short-term rentals by December 31st of 2025. Staff have not received any complaints against this property while operating as a short-term rental. Uh, planning commission recommended approval of the IUP for a short-term rental with the following conditions.
The IUP for short-term rental at 9995 shall terminate on 1231 of 2027. Upon sale or transfer of the property, the IUP for the short-term rental is no longer valid and then submittal of the city of Brainer lodging tax form by the 10th of each and every month regardless
of rental activity. And I can answer any questions. >> Thank you, James. Mr. Johnson. >> Yeah, I just have a question. I notic we have three of these short terms on tonight and I I believe we have a number more that expire at the end of this month. Do you know how many are outstanding? did not.
>> So, these are the only ones that um expired at the end of the month here essentially. So, whenever they have applied or been approved for that short-term rental, it's a one year. It's not an end of the year type thing. >> Okay. So, it's one year from the date. So, these are the only three expiring on December 31st. Okay. Thank you.
>> Anyone else have questions? >> Seeing none. Looking for a motion. Move to approve. >> Second. >> Motion by Bevon, second by Johnson. Any discussion? Seeing none, let's go to a vote. All those in favor say I. I. Against. Same
sign. Motion carries. Moving on to 10D. This is a first reading of proposed ordinance 1599 having to do with the fee schedule. Again, this is community development director James Cranic. >> Thank you, Mr. President. Uh, city council should review the fee schedule
annually and determine if any fees should be adjusted or added. Staff have pro provided a recommendation of additional fees and adjustments for city council to consider. City council should review the fee schedule and make any adjustments prior to conducting the first reading if necessary. Additional
fees include shorland alterations permit which will be beneficial for the new um shorland ordinance that uh the planning commission will be proposing uh PUD amendment EAW as well as an EIS review and annexation petition.
Adjusted fees include zoning text amendment, club on sale and Sunday liquor on sale liquor Sunday impound fees and assessment search. In addition, staff also added a provision for collecting escros. Uh so with that, staff recommends to conduct the first reading of proposed ordinance 1599 and
dispense with the actual reading. Note a vote to dispense with the actual reading must be unanimous. >> Thank you, Mr. Kravik. Does anyone have questions? >> Mr. President, Mr. Jez, [clears throat] >> we uh didn't we uh go over fees last year and um increase a number of them
last year as well, Mr. Cranic. >> The last two years there was a number more fee increases compared to this year. >> More than Okay, thank you. I It's hard to remember everything. Thank you. >> That's all. >> That's all I got.
>> Anyone else to conduct the first reading of 1599? Second >> and dispense with the actual reading. >> Yeah, I think so. >> Okay, good. Motion by Beavenon, second by Johnson. Any discussion on that?
Seeing none, let's go to a vote. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Against. Same sign. >> Motion carries. All right, moving on to 10E. This is a consideration of a CUP for future use land map uh amendment and
proposed ordinance 1600 uh reszoning from CN2 to GC to allow for an animal clinic on parcel 41290683 northeast corner of Oak Street and 28th Street East. Uh I believe again this is
community [clears throat] community development director Kanvic. Go ahead. >> Yes, thank you Mr. President. Uh so the applicant has applied for these requests um to construct and operate a new Brainer Animal Hospitals facility again at the corner of 28th Street and Oak
Street. Uh the planning commission considered this request and recommended denial as they believe this property would be better zoned as traditional neighborhood 2 district. There are other TN2 in this area. Um they believe that this would be a spot zone. Uh the
adjacent properties are zoned CN2. uh opening up additional commercial commercial uses could be detrimental to the surrounding properties. Uh the TN2 district has a minimum has a 20 foot maximum building setback which would be an issue for the applicant. Um and the current design layout that was stated by
the applicant at the meeting. Uh staff noted that commercial and residential development in this area have large setbacks. So the TN2 district setback requirement would be inconsistent with the surrounding uses. Uh staff did include a larger summary of comments um included in the packet. uh staff have
included uh the recommended motions for denial based on uh the planning commission recommendation. Uh if that is the the council's direction, uh reasons should be given by city council for a denial. If city council chooses to approve the request, a first reading
must be conducted for proposed ordinance 1600. Uh staff has included the recommended process for approval under the um denial process. Uh and just to note, uh twothirds council approval would be needed to reszone from residential to commercial. And uh staff
is also recommending that all actions must be approved or denied separately. With that, I can answer any questions. The applicant is also here. >> Thank you, Mr. Cranic. Does anybody have questions? Mr. Chzac. >> Uh yeah, on the 2/3, is that of the six members here or is that of seven?
>> That'd be of the six members here. >> Okay. And uh regarding the denial and uh we have to state a reason you indicate here. Is that for each one of these items you have to state our denial or just uh any one or or all of them? How do we do that?
>> Reason should be given for um each denial. So for instance, if uh the planning commission's um main reason was for the reasonzoning um certainly a lot of um reasons were provided um in in that agenda request that the staff
presented there. The reasons for denial for the cup um was simply that they um recommended denial of the resoning request. Um but any other reasons could be given by council as well. >> Does that answer your question? >> Yes. >> Thank you very much. Appreciate it.
Anybody else have questions? Doesn't look like there are more questions. Um, I guess we'll just have a discussion. I will say I've been looking at this. I I understand where the planning commission is coming from. If
if Max, could you pull up the zoning map and get into that area if you could? H >> uh it's on the city website. You you can take a minute and find that map. But
when you look at what this is, it's it's a a corner lot or two corner lots that have been essentially vacant my whole life. Um it's on a busy corridor. It is zoned residential.
There are a couple residential areas or plats right next to it, but I'm asking them to pull up the the zoning map specifically because if you look at one property over past the next door neighbor, all the rest of
those properties along Oak Street on the north side are owned by a the owner is called the Liberty Group, which owns the entire general commercial area. just to the east of this which is a pretty significant chunk of land. It's
all general commercial. It's a junction of highways 25 and 18. A lot of traffic and our corridor entering from there to downtown is Oak Street. And I think we should be promoting business. I think what our zoning map is
doing right now is hindering development. I understand why they decided to put this as CN2 because there are a couple properties that fit that and they would have been non-conforming if you had gone some other route.
But if if you think of what makes sense, you put businesses you put businesses on the busiest streets. Oak Street could be one of those streets. I think it already is. If you look across the street where the Animal Hospital already is, they do have parking on the front of the
building. Same with Clark Lake homes right next door. It's not non-conforming to the area to see this type of development. It's just it's just a zoning issue of what's allowed. So, I I lean the other way
from what is recommended here and looking at going further at Oak Street and maybe looking at did we get this wrong, you know, four years ago or three years ago, whatever this was, because this is the exact type of thing that I
don't want to get in the way of. So, I'm leaning away from the recommendation from planning commission and allowing this. If anyone else wants to chime in, Mr. Johnson. >> Yeah, I I I'm fully in favor of allowing this and moving forward with the the
zoning change. I mean, moving it to TN2 would also be a spot zoning if you want to get into zoning language, which I don't. If you look across the street from this property, there's a little bit of woods, but right next to it is the Oak Street Christian School, which is a huge setback in a parking lot. Council
President already pointed out Clark Lake homes and Brainard Animal Hospital. probably a lob wedge away. Both have parking lots out front. I mean, it fits the character of what's already developed there, and they're willing to stay in that neighborhood, invest in that neighborhood, and build a brand new
facility for all of our all of our cats and dogs. I I think it I think it's a win-winwin. So, I I fully support moving forward with the reszoning to general commercial. >> Thank you, Mr. Johnson. Mr. Ericson. Yeah, I absolutely agree with moving
forward with uh allowing this uh on Oak Street, especially given that corridor. I mean, it's to especially towards that eastern end. It's it's really acts as a commercial corridor. Um I do have a Mr. President, if you'll allow me, I have a question of Director Cranic. >> Yeah.
>> Um directly west of this proposed site is Carefree Living. is while that could be arguing is a residential use is that what is that currently zone I don't mean to put you on the spot but I mean that's
>> so the senior living facility would be more of a commercial use but is allowed in the CN2 district. >> Sure. >> Could you repeat that please? >> Yeah. So like the senior living facil facilities would be more of a commercial use um allowed in a residential district. >> Thank you. And then
if I may um just wanted to clarify um with the city attorney here. >> Yeah, just for clarification it's under the statute is 2/3 majority of all members of the governing body not twothirds of of the quorum. So it's five votes are needed.
>> We need approval from five council members to pass this change to zoning. >> Correct. >> Thank you. >> Thank you for that clarification. Anyone else? Mr. Jagger, >> thank you for the opportunity to speak, Mr. Chair. Um, I will uh be going a
little bit against the grain with uh some of the members that have spoke on this. I believe that one of the reasons why we are struggling with this is because we have a history of spot zoning on this very road. And this is how spot zoning pays you back over time. Uh we now if we uh and we all did it probably
drove down Oak Street and looked down the two sides and we saw four or five houses and then we saw an auto shop and then we saw a school and then we and so uh my concern is is that this is just another example of spotzoning. I've spoken against spot zoning in the past.
Um and I believe this is just another example of why we shouldn't do it. Now, in this particular case, I 100% agree that there is a lot of ambiguity and there's a lot of nuance on this particular road. I'm pro business. Also, that's easy to say when you don't have a
house directly next to a property that is going to be turned into for now an animal hospital, but for general commercial, probably forever. So, that use may be there forever. It may not. That really to me is the real risk and the peril in the shiny object um chasing
shiny objects, chasing the project that happens to be in front of us now that we like. Over time, it begins to just continually erode and eat away at our most valuable uh places in Briner, which I believe are neighborhoods. So, uh I believe that the uh planning commission
got this one right. Um so, I will be not in support of the resoning. And I'd just also like to mention that we have many, many locations in this city right now where the applicant could walk into James' office, slide those plans across the desk, and walk out with a permit. No
CUP, no IUP, no variances. We have commercial properties for this exact type use. This use could actually also fit on this property with just some slight changes to the plans. So, I believe that it's just a big swing to take this all the way to a general
commercial directly adjacent to um uh uh neighborhood zoning. So, I'll be uh in uh not in uh favor of uh changing the zoning here. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Jagger. Anyone else have discussion points they
want to bring up? [clears throat] >> Mr. M Mr. Mayor. >> Yeah. So, typically Kevin and I see eye to eye on this stuff. On this one, I I I think we got it wrong. Um, in looking at this, I'm surprised that this this building would not fit into
what this is zoned as. Not saying that the zoning is or that that it should be able to fit into that, just saying that it surprises me that given the other structures that are around here that we zoned it in a way that would not allow for that. Um, you know, I I'm going up
and down this street right now and just looking at it and there are a a couple of homes, but everything is set back. Everything along this road is is very far removed from the road itself. So, the idea that moving essentially Kitty
Corner to where they're currently located now is is a use that isn't allowed to me means we got it wrong. I mean, I'm looking at their current building. They're looking to build something very similar.
I mean, we're not talking a mile away. We're talking across the street, Kitty Corner essentially. And everything around it is built up to be built in this certain way. I do agree as we get further into this street and get further down, you do see a a change to where it
is mostly homes, a little bit of intermittent businesses, but that type of zoning I I'm okay with. I I don't think it should be general commercial down further up this street, but from Beach Street on towards Highway 18,
Highway 25, I I mean, this is a corridor coming into the city that should be lively and is ready for development. And I know there are a few homes within there, but all the homes that are in there are are way off the street. And I would they even fit into
the zoning the way that they are? I believe the CN2 district does not have a maximum setback like the TN2 district or TN1 district have. >> Sure. Sure. Yeah. It just it seems very odd to me. I I I think we should have done a little bit better job. And that's the problem that we run into when we
have these large resoning um you know ideas that we had. We basically reszoned the entire city. Went through bit by bit. And I from my own perspective on this one I think we got it wrong. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Anyone else?
Mr. >> I already said my piece, but I'm I'm glad the mayor referenced the the two highways there. I mean, this is I don't have a measurement, but this is in close proximity. There's no other local roads between it and the junction of two state highways. So I I don't I think we'd be
remiss to not consider allowing a commercial use at the junction of two state high or near the junction of two state highways and at the corner of two of our um say collector or gateway road local roads.
Thank you Mr. Ericson. So most of us have kind of made our comments on this one. We have two different directions um to go. >> Mr. President. >> Yeah, Mr. Chzach. >> Um I think I'm going to take a crack at this.
>> Okay. >> I'm going to recommend we uh reszone the parcel 412 968. I believe it is 90683.
Thank you to GC general commercial. I >> second. >> We have that motion in place. But the the proper uh >> the proper route would be to first
conduct the first reading of proposed ordinance 1600 and >> okay >> with the actual reading. >> I'll follow your motion. for sure. >> Okay, that is your motion. >> I'll second that. >> Ch. Second by Johnson. >> All right. Any discussion on that
motion? >> Um that that require five of us sitting six. >> This all of us, Mr. Kramvic. >> So again, this is just the first reading. The next meeting, the city council would have to consider the resoning. So a couple options. You could
just conduct the first reading at this meeting and decide everything at the next meeting or the second and third option would have to be contingent upon the reasonzoning. >> Okay. Okay. So, the motion should be then conduct the first reading. >> Conduct the first reading, dispense with
the actual reading and a vote must be unanimous to dispense with the actual reading. >> Okay. >> So, that that would be my motion then. >> All right. It wasn't clear. So, >> yep. We got it. >> Okay. Thank you. All right. Let's just move on that one. >> Question on the motion. Does there have to be a public was there a public
hearing at planning and zoning? So we have to have one. >> That's correct. There was a public hearing at the planning commission. >> All right. Any other discussion on the motion? Seeing none, let's go to a vote. Tony,
roll call. >> Jagger. >> Yeah. >> Erikson, >> yes. >> Beans, >> yes. >> Chzach, >> yes. >> Johnson, >> yes. >> OD, >> yes. That first reading carries and next we have the the next
two options we could move forward with uh contingent on that reasonzoning next meeting. I have no problem doing that if that's what we want to do. So this the next motion we would be looking for is approval of the attached resolution amending the future
land use map from medium high density residential to commercial contingent upon approval of proposed ordinance 1600. >> So moved >> second >> additionally the uh resoning >> uh so number three as well
>> no conditioned upon the passing of Gotcha. >> Or is that what the reszoning is? Oh, never mind. Yeah, it's >> already stated in there. Yeah, >> you already read it. >> Uh, motion by Johnson, second by Chzach, >> sir. >> Any discussion? >> Tony, >> Jagger,
>> Erikson, >> yes. >> Beans, >> yes. >> Chzach, yes. >> Johnson, >> yes. >> OD, >> yes. That resolution carries. And next, we're looking for approval of the conditional use permit to allow for the operation of an animal clinic as presented for parcel 41290683
contingent upon approval of proposed ordinance 1600. So move Johnson. >> Second. >> Motion by Johnson, second by Bevans. Discussion on that. >> Seeing none, let's go to a vote. All
those in favor say I. >> I. Against. Same sign. Motion carries. All right. Moving on from 10E. We move to 10F. This is a review of Voyager Heights EAW
and holding the public meeting required. Again, this is community development director James Cranic. >> Thank you, Mr. President. Uh, prior to a final decision by city council, the council is required to complete an environmental assessment worksheet, the EAW, for the development as there are
over 150 proposed units for the project. Uh, tonight is the required public meeting. staff emailed a redesign of the site uh earlier today. Uh the two buildings to the south were combined to one larger unit to accommodate the storm water redesign. As of now, the proposed
190 units is being reduced to 176 total units uh with potential to expand in the future. Uh Keepers is planning to reapply for the December and January planning commission meetings. Uh it was determined that a portion of the property is located in our drinking water supply management area in a high
vulnerability area for surface water contamination. Uh the infiltration ponds are being moved outside of the DWISMA to allow for infiltration according to the city code. Uh staff did include comments from other government agencies. Uh Westwood Engineering is not present at this meeting uh but will be at the next.
A representative from Keepers is available for any questions of city council. Again, this agenda item is meant for city council to thoroughly review the EAW document and direct staff to gather any additional information needed. Uh we certainly work with Westwood um to gather information for
the next meeting uh in order for city council to make a final determination at uh the next meeting. And with that, I can answer any questions. >> Thank you, Mr. Kick. Does anybody have questions? I trust everybody got through the entire document. So, if you don't have questions or if
you do have questions uh related to additional information that you would want from this EAW, please ask. >> I'm just glad they took care of the uh long-nosed bats again. >> Oh, the long-nosed bats. >> Yeah, softeared bats. What are they? >> Maybe the long ear.
>> Fuzzies. >> It's funny that a bat would have long ears. >> Actually, no, it's it's vision. Never mind. >> They require. >> Yep. >> Yeah. It's getting late. Yeah, it's 9:21. [snorts] >> You should just >> need to go [clears throat] to bed. >> Yeah, you should leave the bat comments
to other people. >> Well, Batman had long ears. >> Makes sense. Anyone else? >> It doesn't look like we're looking for any more information on this. So, uh, there we held the public meeting. Moving on to 10G. This is approval to
seek a grant to extend the height of fence the fence line at Memorial Softball Fields. And this is public works director Mike Abigor. Thank you, Mr. President. Staff is requesting approval [clears throat] to pursue a grant opportunity to fund improvements at Memorial Park softball fields. The proposed project would include extending
the height of the fence on the sideline and back stop to provide additional protection for the spectators and to install a new fence for home run balls near the pickle ball courts in that area. The park board has approved this grant request and staff is recommending
approval for the proposed improvements at Memorial Park softball fields. Anyway, I can take any questions. >> Thank you, Mr. Abigor. Mr. Chzac, >> do you have an amount a total amount of the grant you're seeking? >> No, that is one of our uh when we submit
this, it will be um a proposal from a contractor to install this home run fence and the additional fencing. >> Thank you. Yeah, Mr. Johnson. >> Well, given that I I I don't even see how this fits into our grant policy if we don't even have an amount or a local
share or anything. It's kind of really tough to make a financial decision without giving numbers. >> It is tough. That was that was my next question is what's the local match on it? >> We would be indicating that there's no local match that we don't have funds to
provide for this. Okay. >> Um so that would be a given. Okay. You never know what other uh traps they're going to throw in there. It might not be a local match, but they might have some other kind of trap in there, too. Uh Mr. >> Sorry, I might be misunderstanding. So, you're asking for permission to apply
for the grant or correct approval of the grant? >> No. To apply for it >> simply to pursue it and then >> and it is going to be well >> awarded we could approve or deny. >> Correct. >> Yeah. >> Would we come back, Connie? would we we would be coming back after we were
awarded it for acceptance of that money. >> So it'll come back before us and we will understand the dollar amount the match and all that at that time. >> Is that correct? >> Correct. >> Mr. Mayor >> and I just want to double clarify we are not pursuing a grant in which we have
any type of match. So this would be a grant we are applying for with no local match. >> Okay. I just want to make sure we have that on the record. >> Correct. >> Okay. >> All right. Looking for a a motion to give permission for this grant to get those fences.
>> So move up higher. Motion by Bevans. >> Second. >> Second by Ericson. >> Any discussion on the motion? >> Mr. Johnson, >> I I can't good conscious support this. I don't know who we're applying to the grant from. I don't know what the amount is or how much local share is. I don't know what the lifespan of this grant is.
And in is it going to be in seven years? We're on the hook for $200,000. 1 million. We don't know. I can't approve something that I know nothing about. So I I just can't in good conscious support it. So it'll be a no. >> I get it. But I think we just learned it. We will get those details to approve
or deny if we are awarded. So I'm comfortable with it. I don't know anyone else has comments. >> Yeah. Mr. President, >> Mr. Chzac, >> um I know many times when we ask uh we ask there's a request to go out for a grant opportunity, we generally know
what that is. In this case, we're just saying go see what you can get and we'll get the details when it comes back if there is anything coming back and then we can either vote it up or down at that time. So, I understand Mr. Johnson's concern. But, uh, I think that, uh, we should just give it an opportunity. If
someone wants to spend a time and seek a grant and they can get it, more power to them. You could add to a motion that this is brought back to council just to make sure before we approve any acceptance of a grant. But sounds like that's already going to happen. But you could add it into the motion just to be
sure >> if anybody's going to make a motion. I >> already made the motion. >> Oh, you did make the motion. >> I did. >> It's been seconded. >> Are you going to change it at all or change? >> Not at all. I'm confident with half having told the truth. >> All right. All right. Should we vote on
the motion? >> No. >> All those in favor say I. >> I. >> I. Against. Same sign. >> I. >> We have two nos. >> Like it. >> All right. That motion carries. That is it for new business. Moving on
to staff reports. Start with Tony Gage. >> Chief Holmes. >> Chief Davis. >> Max Hen CLC. >> Connie. Mr. Havagor. Just Friday, uh, December 5th, we have a Christmas tree
lighting at 5:00 pm in the parking lot. >> Can't wait, Mr. Cranic. >> Thank you, Mr. President. So, we have a busy EDA agenda upcoming this Thursday. Uh, the EDA will be reviewing a residential development proposal from CMHP to develop a portion of the right
street extension. Uh, we'll also be reviewing the consultant contracts for 2026 as well as a brokerage agreement extension. uh receive an update on the Washington Street mitigation plan um that was proposed from um the chamber. Uh also be reviewing a facade and sign
grant proposal and then approving the 2026 budget. >> Thank you, Mr. Cran. Mr. Langel, >> nothing for me. Thank you, >> Mr. Dean. >> Mr. Sandy, >> I kind of preface this during the budget presentation. We had the opportunity to
host uh Representative and Senator Heitzman at the Hydro Dam facility. um and they will be um hopefully carrying a couple of uh bills for us this year to potentially fund our generator project at the hydro dam. So um just want to
express my gratitude for them stopping out and taking a tour of that facility um and uh hopefully carrying that legislation for us uh through the through the bonding uh process at the legislature. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Sandy. Uh, Eric Sharper,
you're I know you're out in outer space somewhere. >> No updates this evening. Thank you, Mr. President. >> Thank you, Eric from the moon. All right, Mr. Broyals. Thank you, Mr. President. Just an update on U staff's work with the revised charter language.
Um, I think we're getting closer to um some proposed language that we'll get before the charter commission and the city council. We're anticipating the next the charter commission meeting will be on December 17th. It has not been noticed yet, but we will get that notice soon. We're on we're on schedule to meet
that deadline and uh we'll see where it goes once we get it before the charter commission and someday before the city council. That's all I have. >> Thank you, Administrator Broyals. Next, we have the honorable Mayor Bedau. >> It's twice tonight. You've called me honorable and I appreciate it. Uh so, I don't have a lot to talk about because I was going to talk about the tree
lighting. I appreciate it. Thank you, Mike. Uh I but I just want to make one point. Kevin Jagger, tonight you had said and you asked a question, you know, is there any is there any funding coming from the state on some of this stuff that they push down on us and I want to just thank you for making that comment
because this happens a lot in Minnesota. A lot of people like to feel good about themselves, so they like to make some laws that say we got to do a lot of things, but then the state doesn't follow it up with funding to get it done. So they they love to tell us what we got to do. They love to tell us what
we're going to get done, but then they don't like to follow it up with funding to let us get it done. And so I just want to make sure that everyone heard that tonight when these projects come through from the state that it sounds great. It's wonderful. We love our environment. We love to get it done. But if you're going to do that, then help
the citizens out because all you're doing is putting it on the taxpayers's backs locally and making it look like we're the bad guy when really that stuff's coming from the state capital. So end of rent. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Nice and short. Uh, Mr. Chzac.
>> Yes, Mr. President. I enjoyed a $4 double molasses cookie today. It was the best cookie ever. And you can find those cookies at a nutrition center out in Baxter, Minnesota. They are homemade. They are made with natural ingredients and it is fantastic.
>> That's all I got. >> That's all. All right. >> $4 cookie. >> $4 cookie. >> Nothing to add to the cookie. >> How do you beat that? >> Can't. Half price. Don't >> probably a Brainard cookie. >> Maybe a Brainer cookie for $3.95.
>> Yeah, half price. >> I know. We could do it, Mr. Joerger. >> Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just a quick uh airport ticker update. Uh we had our first snow event as I'm sure you well know. And I'd like to just thank our staff who everybody was out there all hands on deck. This was not really an
easy one. It was heavy wet snow. Gave some problems with some gates. gives us all kinds of problems with this uh unexpected heavy wet snow early in the season, but uh we made it through. And again, I'd just like to extend my appreciation to not only the guys that were on the ramp and on the field and everywhere, but the whole team that got
us through that uh with a high degree of urgency. Appreciate that. And uh also, it is my intent to uh be at our next meeting uh to be here present with Mr. Planer and hopefully our new airport director at that time. So, uh, we will
be, um, conducting, uh, last little interviews, uh, this coming Thursday with the airport commission and then potentially a follow-up meeting of the December 10th that we've scheduled a special meeting if we need, uh, in in such case to to make a final decision and to make a final offer. So, two weeks
from now, we should hopefully have a new director as well as our interim director and myself here uh, to uh, make an introduction. So, thank you. That's all. >> Mr. President, have the finalists for the airport commission uh airport director position been not noticed? Have they been announced?
>> Not that I know of. >> Okay. But you're interviewing. >> Are you asking this to me? >> Well, I'm I'm asking you because you're the you're the president and I would guide direct my question to you so Mr. Joerger can hear it. >> Oh, >> yes. >> Oh, let me redirect your question.
>> Okay. >> Mr. Joerger, did you hear uh Mr. Chzok's question? Um I I believe so. Yes. Uh the the question is have have the two finalists been notified? >> No. Have they been not have they been publicly noticed that they you have
selected two finalists >> publicly posted? >> I don't believe we have. No. >> Okay. >> All right. Thank you. >> I think you should probably do that. >> Uh Chairman Ericson. >> Nothing further. Thank you. >> Chairman Johnson. My afternoon snack
today was a dirty soda from the sweet shop downtown and I recommend everybody go check it out. It's a nice little candy ice cream parlor >> supporting Brainer Business. >> Yeah, >> you go. All right. Is that all? >> That's all I got. >> I think we have one more comment from the mayor here. >> Yeah, I apologize. I just wanted to just
quick give an update on Councilman Stunnick. He uh was unable to attend tonight's meeting, but he's getting better and he said he should hopefully be back at our next one. So, keep him in your prayers. He's healing and and uh getting stronger, but he felt like he needed to have one more away. And I just
wanted to let everyone know that uh he's doing well and he's in good spirits. >> Mr. President, in honor of Council Member Stunnic, >> may I or somebody else got something to say? >> You've already started. Go ahead. >> Okay. I would motion to adjourn this meeting.
>> Well, I was going to give my report first. >> Okay. >> First, my first my report was going to be exactly what the mayor said. >> Have the mayor jump in before >> Can I just have a point of order? [laughter] Just once. Jeez. Are you done? [laughter] >> No, I'm done now. Okay, let's adjourn.
>> Looking for a motion. >> I'm sorry. >> Motion and a second. All those in favor? I >> We're adjourned. >> I'm sorry. I just say one week. Part: 2
City Council Chambers 6:45 p.m. Safety and Public Works Committee meeting. We have five items on our agenda. Um we're going to make our we've made one change. We're going to make our fifth item our first and that is to consider enacting an ordinance regulating massage therapy
businesses. And presenting this one is Chief Davis. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. To address rising criminal activity and concerning conduct at local massage therapy businesses, staff seeks council direction on implementing a local regulatory
ordinance. Unlike most states, Minnesota does not license massage therapy at the state level, prompting many cities to adopt their own lensure requirements to ensure public safety. staff is requesting direction from the council regarding the drafting of a proposed
ordinance to regulate licensing and business practices for massage therapy. Um you'll see in my additional comments there just over the course of the last year we've um encountered some concerning activities at um several
businesses. Um, one of them, um, as illustrated in the Brainer paper, you might be aware of, was, um, a massage, um, therapist that, um, alleged to have conducted two, possibly three, um, acts of
criminal sexual misconduct. And also along with that um we've had two other establishments uh when we've looked at complaints regarding them have identified their therapists having previous uh criminal histories for
prostitution um associated with massage therapy businesses. And what we're would like to do is take a look at a regulatory ordinance that through the lensure would allow us to perform some background
checks and some checks and balances on this um industry that's really not regulated in in Minnesota. So I guess the recommended motion before you is to direct staff to draft a proposed ordinance to regulate licensing
and business practices for massage therapy. All right. Thank you very much. Uh any questions or comments committee may have? Mr. Chzik. >> Um anybody knowing um potential cost for this uh service or licensing whatever
certification >> as as far as a licensing fee imposed upon the proprietors? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. And can't speak to that. I'll be honest with you, Jeff. We've um discussed this item at a very um high level. Haven't really focused in on you
know some of the specifics. Um first step was to to come to council and see if they had you know the the appetite for us to move forward and really start looking at this. >> Do you know how many in in Brainer we have how many massage? >> You know I really don't because once again they're they're not licensed.
They're not regulated. I I think there's some that work out of their home, some that travel. Um, not all of them are brickandmortar businesses, so it's it's really hard to, you know, give you a number with that. >> All right. Thank you very much. >> All right. Thank you. Any uh questions
or comments? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Just uh real quickly, Miss Davis, what we're really trying to get to is we're trying to get to a mechanism that allows you to do background checks on the people that run these. Is that right? >> I would say that would be the the primary thing. Yes. Um you know, taking a cursory look at some other ordinances.
There are some other business practices I could see coming back and recommending. I I'll just give you one for example. Maybe hours of operation really no different than maybe some of our liquor licensing and ordinances. And you know, with the concept that I if you're open for business at 3:00 a.m.,
um there there might be some questions as far as what type of business practice that is and so on and so forth, but primarily it would be the background checks we'd be looking to do. >> Understood. Thank you. >> Very good. Well, um yeah, I think it's it's worth looking into and I think
that's the request that you have is just simply for a draft ordinance. Um something that would come back to um the committee and or council uh for approval. >> Mr. Chair, I'd move staff's recommendation if >> Yeah. Well, I'm going to just finish if you don't mind. >> That's okay. Just a couple other
comments, but I was just going to say to staff, if this does move forward, I think I recall the county took a look at this and so they may have um some language or um you know, some resources, I guess, to potentially look
at. So, James, you had a comment? >> Yeah, we would look into other municipalities on uh provisions they may have in there. Um as well as what other municipalities and and counties may be charging for a fee. So we'd be um consistent with with the others. >> Yeah. I I remember that conversation
being had at Crow Wing and I don't know year year and a half ago or something like that. So uh entertain the motion then. >> Yeah, Mr. Chair. Apologies for interrupting you, but I I would move that we approve staff's recommendation and come back with a draft. >> Second. >> All right. Thanks. Motion and a second.
Any further discussion? >> Uh hearing none. Those in favor say I. I. >> I. Those opposed same sign. Of course. Motion carries. All right, thank you very much. Um, we moved our fifth item to the top. Um, you didn't miss anything. >> Thank you.
>> As you're coming in, uh, so back to the original top. The first item or the second item now is a direction requested for Bolig complaint on storm water easement adjacent to count uh, county state aid highway 48 and uh, engineer Dean.
>> Thank you, Mr. Chair. So, a lot of the item is very similar to what the council had seen at a at the previous meeting. Uh we did uh excuse me, we did add to this u the discussion uh meetings that uh council requested that staff have with Mr. Pollig. Uh we had two different
meetings with him to hear his concerns and receive feedback for what he was requesting. Um essentially a storm water engineering study be performed on how the piping could be essentially bypassed around the
um storm water easement that is in the back of his property. Um the other part that staff included with this revision of the item was that um just some of the considerations for the alternative uh based on that request. Uh
we're roughly looking at a $100,000 uh study to be performed on that. Um it's very variable on what the scope and scale uh that we would ask for. Um, but based on the conversations that staff has had with both Crowing County staff as well as the city attorney staff's
recommendation is that the uh that the city does not explore a storm water engineering study at this time. >> All right. Thank you. Uh, Mr. Dean, any questions or comments of the committee? >> If I could. >> Yes, Mr. Jezik. >> Um, yeah. U Jesse, is this an actual
storm water retention pond that is behind uh Mr. Bullig's house or or is it something else? >> It wasn't designed that way. It was designed as well. It wasn't really designed. I would say it's just it's a low point in the area. Uh so it's kind of where all the everything flows to. It
wasn't necessarily designed as a retention pond, but that's how it functions. >> Does staff argue Mr. Bullig's point that uh there was never a water uh concern that he has had for 20 years up until the south west uh Brainer reconstruction
of all the streets was completed. Is that something you have contention with or or I know that's been addressed in the meetings we're in. Is that something you agree with or disagree with? >> Can you can you clarify that one more time? Well, he never had anywhere near or anything with water problem at all
until the southwest Brainer street reconstruction or construction projects were uh administered and completed when they put in storm water system and all that. Is that something staff has contention with regarding what Mr. Bullig is stating?
>> I couldn't advise you that way. I it wasn't something that I personally experienced or observed 20 years ago. So that would be u between him and the council for discussion. Uh I can tell you that what's included in the packet was a study and the calculations that
were performed with the staff at the time um that the storm water would be held within the drainage easement area. As far as I understand um that's where that water is stayed. It hasn't encroached beyond the easement area. >> It hasn't encroached beyond the
easement. Okay. So even though his property is within that easement and he's losing trees and he al all sorts of refu and stuff when the water get a half inch to an inch of rain on any particular rainfall he experiences all those difficulties lost numerous trees
and uh that that's something that we would anticipate based on um that's something to be expected is what you're saying over the course of all these years is that what we're hearing >> what I would advise the council is a drainage easement is specifically
withheld for storm water drainage uh or natural drainage I suppose as well um but that was the intent of the drainage easement at the time what the expectations are it's I I couldn't advise >> okay but did Mr. Mr. Bullock have any
say in that easement as far as where the water was going to go regarding uh he he has a property there. He built his house yada yada. So does he have any say as far as whether that could go there or not? We know that >> I can't advise on that. All I can tell
you is that the area was platted with the easement on it. >> Um so I don't know what the expectation would have been at that time. So his claim though is that up until this southwest street reconstruction or construction project or were all dirt
streets. I'm sure you all remember that. And he had um uh no water problem whatsoever. I I think water whatever did come through there was insignificant to cause any issues for him. And uh when the street when the street project was
completed uh he started having all these problems going back 20 almost 25 years now. And uh I mean that's troubling to me. And not only that, he um he uh uh he has a um it's not just Mr.
Bullig, he has a couple two or three neighbors as well that are experiencing the same similar issues. And um it's it's I guess it's easy easy for us to sit here and say, "Well, you know, it's too bad. That's where he chose to live. There's a storm storm water easement
going through there and now he has to deal with it." And you know, there have been numerous things we've done for people who have had issues over the years. Uh um I guess Tad and Kevin um we we filled in a gully for nearly over a million dollars in South over by your
place, Tad. I think you know about that. you. I'm sure you do, Kevin. >> As a natural natural gully, we have a >> we have a outfall over on N Street. Uh that was something erosion took, you know, that cost us a lot of money. We fixed a fence for the property owner and
did some other things over there. It just seems like um because this is something we don't feel we have a responsibility for. And there's one thing I I would mention that there are council minutes from 2004 February 17th where council made a motion unanimously
approved that the staff get together engineer and Mr. Bullig and the county engineer and come back with a resolution and u as many times as we talked about giving staff direction and making sure it gets followed up on that was never done. No report was ever come back with. So this man has been dealing with this
for over two decades. And I I just I don't know where we say, "Okay, let's help them, let's not." Um, is it all about the money? I sometimes look at what is the right thing to do. As as a property owner, any any of us would say, if this was happening in my backyard, I
want the city to do something more than just saying, "Well, it costs too much money." And uh I've heard uh Mr. Broyals talk about u employees with a servant's heart. Well, I I think we should have the same type of heart, a servant's heart. and that's where we serve the
public. Mr. Bullock is our constituent and he deserves to be represented. So that's all I have to say right now. >> All right. Thank you, Jeff. Any other comments or questions of staff at this point? >> All right. Um so yeah, Mr. Bolague,
you're is of course here. Do you want to I know we've heard you speak a couple times, but go ahead and come on up to the mic if you'd like to um share some other thoughts and name and address of course. >> Uh my name is Danny Bullig, 101 Annabbec Street and like you said, I've been here
and we've met I've met with Paul in the past. I met uh anyway, we're getting this resolution or whatever they just brought forward is getting way way out there and unfortunately it it it went this
direction. I'm just going to give you a quick background. Uh I I called Jesse in April or May because he's a new city engineer basically to come and look at uh do an on-site
inspection. I had a couple of concerns at that time and during that on-site inspection, I brought them up a date of some of the history. During these last two meetings that we've had, we're focused on long range plans. And my
question to Jesse at the time, and he's the one that told me I needed to come in front of the city council. The question I had before him is what can we do to alleviate alleviate the the mess in my backyard, number one. And number two, uh we were
looking at long range long range issues. I have Jesse's voicemail in my pocket. I'm not going to read it. Uh but he basically said that I needed to come to city for the city council because it's uh some money was going to be involved. The two things
that I asked for is a fence up my property line with a silt fence in it. So when the water does come, all the stuff that is in my neighbor's backyard, basically their backyards are unimproved. Mine's improved all the way to my property line. uh that stuff
wouldn't go into my yard. And number two, bowl out the the existing pond farther to the south, make it a little deeper, lessen the amount of water that's coming into my backyard. This recommendation that they just put forth
today is a long-term re recommendation. That is not why I went to Jesse to begin with. I went to Jesse for two concerns. And during the discussion, we were directed to have these meetings and we got into the history and all the
backlog, which there's a lot of it. And what a lot of people don't understand is it's right on my plat. That's a temporary easement. And the city has no, it's between the land owners and the uh
count Crowing County. There's nothing, no piece of paper that the city can provide me that they have authorization to put storm water in my backyard. But the two main issues that I wanted wanted addressed was the sil fence, the fence,
and possibly bowling uh bowling out uh the drainage a little bit to lessen the effect on my yard. As far as it not going uh outside the easement, that's totally wrong. They have never come and done an on-site. I think Kevin was here
and I showed them where it was to the south the back property line on my property. There's about 15 ft that goes to a hill to my neighbor's property that is flooded right up to that hill. The
easement is my property line. So it does go outside the uh ease the uh easement area as defined currently. So I think that kind of goes to the point that possibly
maybe that couple of trees have to come out. I could do it in a day with a b with a with a I don't think you need any engineering studies to take a little dirt out, put it up on the bank, uh take a few trees down. most your other
drainage ponds around town. I referenced the one on south six. It's completely fenced. I'm just asking for a fence up the affected area up my pot property line with a silk fence. That was the two issues and Jesse can verify that that uh
at that con you know during these meetings unfortunately or not unfortunately it all needed to come up all the history the back history and this what he's recommended today is a long-term fixed. I didn't ask for a
long-term fix. I I I wanted him to be aware of it in in the future. Yeah. Let's look at, you know, this right now. My feelings are the city is illegally dumping storm water in my backyard with
no property owner notification of when it happened in 2001. Nothing. They just arbitrarily tapped into the county's line and started dumping water in my backyard. >> All right. Thank you, Mr. Bool.
Um, bring it back to the committee here. Um I guess just question of staff uh just hearing what uh Mr. Bolague is proposing about, you know, call a simple fix, so to speak, a silt fence bowling out and creating some depth. Is that um
can you can you >> with a We had a long conversation about this on a site. I advised against the idea of the silt fence. It's not designed to take on um essentially any kind of flowing water. Essentially, the first decentiz rainfall is probably going to blow that silt fence out and
you're going to have some more debris um of the silt fence sitting down. So that it's going to be a challenge to have that maintained. It's not designed that way. It's not designed to carry water. It's designed to keep erosion um within uh like a construction site for instance. So that's not what the silt
fence is designed for. As for the bowling uh out more of the easement area, we discussed that at length as well. Um, the concern I have is expending time, effort, and potentially a chunk of money, and it may not have the desired effect, which is why the
storm water design study uh be completed so we know what we're getting into. How far out does it have to go? How deep do you have to go? Um, again, we're working within easement. Uh, so it have to be not only just the county's got to be involved, um, but the area that you're
excavating and where you're going to place the material. Um there's a there's just a lot of things that go into that and we want to make sure that if we're going to expend time, effort, and money into it, uh we want to make sure that it's effective. Uh thus the study,
this kind of reminds me of a situation at the corner of Spruce and South 6, that pond there right by National Bank. I know there was a property adjacent to that intersection or that pond that had experienced a lot of damage to their
home and I know that took a long time. It wasn't a there was no quick fix to that. I think we explored some insurance options, the city's insurance, I don't think was able to help the homeowner. Um, and I don't know, Jesse, if you're familiar with that um situation. Paul, I
didn't want to put you on the spot. I was in a past life, but um would you feel comfortable speaking to that? >> Yeah, so that that project >> it wasn't an easement situation, but >> Right. Yeah, that was a city-owned parcel. That project really came to light when Mandot started talking about the reconstruction of South Sixth Street
and needing somewhere to um divert storm water from the trunk highway onto a parcel that could be used for storm water retention. Um, and so yes, there was multiple problems um, previous to that South Sixth Street project taking place. And it really ended up being a
joint project between Mandot and the city knowing that that pond was a problem to begin with because of the some of the higher intensity rain events that we've seen over the last 10 years. Um, and MDOT needing somewhere to divert storm water from the trunk highway. Um
so again you know one of there's storm water across the city that's shared between jurisdictions. You know MDOT shares storm water with the city, the city shares storm water with MDOT, the county shares storm water with the city. There there are no written agreements
that take place during that process. Um when you're looking at storm water, you have to look at the system holistically. It doesn't matter where water is coming from, whether it be a county road, the city streets. When we do drainage studies, we look at the whole drainage
area and size pipes accordingly to be able to take the drainage. Whether it's from a trunk highway right away, from a county right away, from a city street right away, we size the pipes appropriately and there's no agreements that take place during that process. Everyone just works collectively
together to make sure that the project functions as it's constructed. And so wherever you go in the city, there are no agreements in place of of sharing storm water in any fashion. >> Okay. >> At least not that I know of. >> Well, thank you. Well, I guess what
about theou that we have then with the county that's referenced here? I mean, is that >> that was something that we tried to put into place when I was in Jesse's seat um to try to help keep the site at least clean of debris. Um clean up the site. Um and that the the split is based on
the storm water calculations that were done back in I don't know what year it was 90s. Um you know based on what how much storm water the county is diverting to that easement and how much the city is diverting to that easement. That split was calculated at that time to figure out what the cost share would be
on any maintenance that's performed in that area. Okay. >> Because it is a county owned easement. >> Mr. Sher. >> Yeah. Yes. Mr. Chz. >> When the water goes in behind Mr. Bulg's house. Where does it is it just filter out into the the landscape? Is that what
happens to it eventually? >> Yes, sir. That's the low point of that whole area. >> Okay. And then um um it's pretty hard to argue though that Mr. Bullig did not have any problems with that low point prior to
the street construction that the city initiated and completed back in uh 01. And that's that's the part here that bothers me that we just said, "Oh, too bad. You live there. You gota you're have to suck it up." Um, so I I I'm not
in favor of spending $100,000 just on a study. If we could put $100,000 to doing something to actually affect a change, that that would be more in my line of uh thinking. But um and I I know go uh to go a little further on on a study.
Could you just give me an idea uh Mr. Dean or or maybe even Paul, what you would anticipate from that study? What would you hope to see if there was something to be uh found that would help alleviate the issue at hand?
>> Right now, that's something to be decided once the council gives staff some direction on how they want to go. Um if there was a study to be done, staff would first recommend having maybe a record collection and a tabletop analysis of the uh sewer shed of that
whole area. Um and then come up with some alternatives. We can go even further and have them do some field survey work um to do some more verification, but it really depends on the direction received uh from the council at this point of what scope and scale uh of that proposal that we would
ask for. Um, so just for a sake of discussion, Jeff, hearing your point about Mr. Bullock not having um these issues prior to the city taking the action, whatever year it was. Um, this second bullet
under the summary of issues that the staff has put together states in 1987, Bolague was provided permission to install a garage with the drainage easement under the condition that the county, we're not the county, but that's what it says here, would not be held liable for damages from use of the
drainage easement. That statement there would lead me to believe that regardless of when the damages began that would to me that would almost support staff's rationale that we shouldn't be taking any action. We wouldn't be liable. any I just got to I
guess maybe I don't know if it's a question for staff or discussion with with us, but um I mean he reading that second bullet to me is a bit of a counter Jeff to to your argument there about the you know him not seeing any damages
until after a certain point. Well, that's that's reflecting his garage and he brought in hundreds of yards of uh fill to raise that up and he actually uh has a a high high mark. Um the behind his garage it tapers down
significantly in according uh in relationship to the rest of the property going down into that low. So he he planned accordingly. The the water has not affected his garage or the base of where he put in the fill. And so I mean
that that was that that's calculated. That's understood. You need Phil to get that up off that that lower area. But when when you um then have this water that was never there. And uh um and according to Mr. Bullig, I don't know if
it's true, he said that the city tried to hook up to the uh South Sixth Street uh sewer, which was the counties apparently, and it was uh not sized right. To Mr. uh Sandy's point, you have to have the proper sizing. So, lo and behold, whatever they did, uh and this
is where staff wants to be very careful about saying, "Well, things weren't done right back then because that's weighs on the engineers, the staff back then." Um, and I I get that, you know, nobody wants to go around pointing fingers. That
that's not their job. First of all, I understood that. They made it very clear in the meeting with Mr. Bowling. Um, so when we look at the situation and and and uh when when they can't connect to that sewer line because it wouldn't
handle the amount of water that it was going to be putting in there because it was not sized right to begin with. That was their intention. Of course, then they can't do it. The water runs winds up behind Mr. Bullig's house. So, it's kind of like uh geez somewhere along the lines I think somebody made a mistake.
And it certainly wasn't Mr. Bullig by trying to live his life on a property that he bought that had a um storm water easement going through it. It It's like um yeah, there's going to be water, but city does some things, doesn't plan accordingly, didn't plan accordingly,
and now he's stuck with this issue. So, that's kind of where I'm coming from. And those are all temporary easements, by the way, or uh what do you call the uh the item you just mentioned there? Okay. >> Whatever that's >> Well, thank you. Yeah, that's what that was actually really quickly and of course we got to bring this to a head
here to a vote but >> um staff or Jesse this second bullet that references that 1987 and then holding liable for damages what is that come where is that coming from is that directly from the easement agreement or
>> there is a document included in here um which attachment it is >> page the number six, lot three garage request. Um, that was an agreement between uh Mr.
Baldle and the county uh prior to installation of the garage. >> Okay. Uh Danny, you want to come back up and give you the last word here? Give you just one one or two minutes and then we got a >> just a quick thing. >> We'll wrap up here. That easement is between the whole harmless agreement is
just if you look at the agreement that the county and the city just signed in 2024 to share cost of the maintenance. It's got the same language in it. It's it's a something that's customary. They do it all the time. In 1987, if I would
have had the amount of water in my backyard as I did after 2001, Dwayne Blank would have never signed off on it. I'll guarantee you that. prior to the signing off of that's the second hold harmless. I have two home hold harmless agreements uh that uh that the county
issued. One is for my drain field and the other one is for my garage. They were both issued. The one for my drain field was issued in 1978. The garage is 1987. And at that time I hadn't there wasn't a water issue. If
there would have been, I would have never got approval to do what I did. And the whole harmless agreement is just a formality that they used. You know, hey, see, anything happens, we have a 100red-year flood, you can't hold us up. Uh, and that's all it is. But they
predate >> the action that the city took in 2001 by putting 70% of the water that is currently going in my backyard comes from the city. 30% comes from the county. That's the agreement they they
signed. >> Thank you, Denny. Um, all right. Bring it back to uh the committee if there's any other final thoughts. Otherwise, you'd be looking for a I guess I don't know. I the hold harmless. It the language was put in there intentionally
to protect the county, I'm assuming. And um in that case, I think you know, you're looking to have the city do something in that case. So, um, any other thoughts or comments before we,
you know, as of now, I don't think there's really any action we are, it's incumbent upon us to take unless someone has a motion one way or the other. I would move that we bring the U
staff's um it's not a recommendation but we bring back a proposal to the council to consider a um having um the city look at um a consultant engineering firm to um investigate this issue. That's my
motion. >> Thank you. Just to um Well, there's a motion. Is there a second? Is there there's a motion. Is there a second? All right. Hearing none. Um motion fails for lack of a second.
And um as I said, there's there's really nothing incumbent currently that the city needs to respond to. So the motion motion fails. And we're on to our next item. Next item is uh plat ser excuse me I'm
on to the wrong one here. Uh item number was our number two. This our now our number three is design construction for engineering proposal improvement 255 southeast Brainard reconstruction project and engineer Dean. >> Thank you Mr. Chair. In the interest of time, I'll try and quick summarize. Um,
with BPU getting uh some funding for lead service line replacement, uh staff is recommending uh executing a contract with Bolton and Mink uh to do construction administration and design uh for next year's reconstruction project. Uh the recommendation uh
includes award of that uh contract to Bulmake in the amount of $430,186 and can answer any additional questions. >> All right. Thank you very much. bring it back to committee if there's any questions or comments. >> Um >> to approve
>> um one there's a hand up Jeff if I could hold off just a moment. Um Director Sandy, >> I will just uh comment that the BPU commission um entered into an agreement with Bolton and Mink to provide to provide design and construction administration services for the lead
service line portion of this project. Um and so uh having some internal discussions with staff, we um thought it prudent to at least bring a proposal in front of the council to keep um the same firm involved in the project across both the city's reconstruction and BPU's lead
service line project. That's what you're seeing tonight. All right. >> But BPU did approve that lead service line proposal at their last meeting. >> Excellent. Thank you very much. And then um yeah, now entertaining that motion. Please >> move to approve. Second >> motion and a second. Um any further discussion hearing? None. Those in favor
say I. >> I. >> I. Those opposed, same sign. Motion carries. >> All right. Brings us to our fourth item. Approve amendment request from SRF consulting trunk highway 210 Washington Reconstruction. And engineer Dean again.
>> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh so before you is an amendment request from SRF for some of the design work for next year's reconstruction project on Washington Street, Highway 210. Um, a majority of the amendment request is for uh some additional uh design work that they had
to do for the lighting system uh that was beyond what was originally expected u with the original proposal. Um there was a $15,000 allowance um for some other subconultant work that they didn't need. Um the the original number is roughly about maybe 80,000, but we were
able to reallocate the 15,000 to take a little bit of a bite out of that. uh the 65,000 is kind of the I'd say the remainder uh of that uh cost incurred for their design work. Um so staff is recommending the uh approval of the
contract amendment in that amount. >> All right. Thank you very much. Uh so if I'm understanding that correctly, about $80,000 is the amount the 15% kind of contingency so to speak and then the 65. Could we think of it that way? >> Give or take. Yes.
>> All right. But the request is just the 65. Any other comments or questions on this item? So, uh, Councilman Jagger. >> Yep. I'm just going to go real quick here. Uh, I'm assuming we don't have anybody from SRF here or online? >> No, not that I'm aware of. >> So, I just have a a question and maybe
you can shed a little light on. So, when I look at their scope of services and I do the breakdown on the hours compared to the actual cost, I come up with $24.37, $149.62, 62 cents 163 63 a 1937 75 those seem like very odd amounts broken down
by hours. Can you and if you can't I totally understand but it just seems odd to me that an hourly breakdown to an even amount with a zero behind it came out to uneven numbers in all four categories at all different amounts. >> Are you talking about the original contract the original
>> the scope of services? Yes. >> Uh so it's based on what they're expecting to do. Um so for instance like the uh lighting analysis they have what our standard lighting is going to be and they have the mindot uh expectation for uh lighting on the corridor. Um so they
have a certain expectation of how much time that that's going to go into it's still an estimate. Um cuz we really don't know what we're going to get into until we get into it. Um but they have a pretty good idea when they do these proposals of how much time and effort goes into the ef into that design. Um, a
lot of this was some above and beyond work uh between us, SRF and MDOT uh to get a lighting design that met uh the requirements of MIDOT uh while allowing for our custom lighting as well. >> Thank you. Nothing else. >> All right. Thank you very much. Is there
uh what are the wishes of the committee? Questions, comments, discussion otherwise entertaining a motion. I'll make a motion to approve the requested contract amendment from SRF Consulting in the amount of 65210 >> and I so move >> second.
>> All right. Motion and a second. Any further discussion? Hearing none. Those in favor say I. >> I. >> I. >> Those opposed, same sign. And uh motion carries. All right. Our last item, update on 2025 construction projects and
engineer Dean. How quickly can you give the update? >> I'm going to just leave it up to the council. I think I I try to summarize every uh question that was brought up uh at the last meeting um in that memo. Uh but I will entertain uh answering any questions that the council has beyond
beyond what's in the memo or any other additional details. >> No action requested on this one. It doesn't look like just an update. >> That was my my expectation was provide pro provide the update to the council. >> Very good. Any >> is there any new any update since the packet went out that is perfect?
>> No, sir. No, this the memo is >> um may I? >> Yes, please. >> Um I appreciate the memo, Jesse. I I just u I wish being that this was a action um outside of this committee if you remember. Um I I wish it would have been on full agenda and it will be u in
our report. So I I'll just if I I might have a question during that report time. So that I'll just hold off for now because it's this is something that motion by Mr. Beavens. It I think it should have been on the full council agenda. So >> very good.
>> All I got. >> All right. Thank you very much. Um we had moved our fifth item to the first item. So we are this concludes our committee meeting.