--------- uh meeting to order. This is Brainer Safety Public Works Committee. Uh 6:45 Brainer Council Chambers. We have six items on our agenda. The first of which is 2027 capital improvement program recommendations and presenting this is
public works director Paul Sandy. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair, members of the committee. Um, so I've attached a snapshot of the proposed 2027 capital improvement plan for streets, sanitary sewer, water, and storm sewer improvements. Uh the BPU Commission
reviewed um uh this 10-year CIP at its regular regularly scheduled meeting on April 2026 and with the new charter language that goes into effect um we will be having a presentation to the city council prior to September 1st uh
2026 um of this capital improvement plan. Um, we're getting a start on 2027 project uh development and we've already started um on some uh preliminary surveying work and things on some of the projects that you see listed below here.
Um what this item tonight kind of represents is what uh staff has considered um to be you know kind of a full workload uh from from a city staffled project perspective and which projects we would like to um go out for
uh consultant help for design and construction services. So getting into kind of the full program in 2027, we have our three um kind of annual maintenance projects, which is a steel co project, a street patching, and our street striping project. Uh these have
historically been held in-house and done by our internal staff, and we are not recommending any changes to that. Um the next one here is the 2027 sanitary sewer lining project. This is the project um where I think the council maybe a year
or two ago started putting $100,000 into the capital improvement plan for lining projects. We have kept these projects in house for design and construction administration and we do not recommend any changes to that. Um the 210 Washington Street reconstruction
project, we currently are in a contract with for construction engineering and administration. So, that one is already under contract and um we will continue that contract into 2027. The first large project is uh the
Lynwood, Edgewood, and Brentwood reconstruction project. These are streets that are down in the Graden neighborhood. Uh Graden um majority of it is on Graden. Uh I forget the name of the >> Birchwood. >> Yeah, Birch Bridge. Yeah, there's a few
streets in there that have not been done here in the last few years. This would be a full reconstruction project and staff is recommending that that project go to a consultant design and construction engineering contract >> when same as a full reclamation. Is that >> it's Yeah, full reconstruction. So
pulling all the curb out. Okay. >> Um going after water mane. >> Thank you. >> The next one on the list here is the Hannes edition reconstruction project. This one is up in northeast Brainard on F Street, G Street, 6th Avenue Northeast, and 7th Avenue Northeast. It's right behind the East Brainard
Mall. This one um we've already had our engineering techs do uh most of the topographic survey on this one. We are recommending that we keep that project in house for design and construction. The East River Road sanitary sewer um interceptor lining project. Um this
one's been talked about for a few years. We're at about 90% plans with currently um in the design phase. Um we anticipate going out to bids um in late August, early September for this project for 2027 construction. We are recommending
that we retain SE as a construction um consultant uh during the construction phase of that project. Uh next one on the list here, 2A Street and Clara Street. This is south of Oak Street um down in that same kind of
neighborhood as the Beach and Oakidge project. Um, we were we are recommending that we keep that one for in-house design and construction engineering. Um, and then the last three here, uh, Northtown Street, Gilbert View, which is Island Drive, and Laurel Street
Patching, we recommend combining those three projects into one consultant resurfacing contract. Um, from a workload perspective, we um, we think that this will keep our construction program from a staffled perspective very
full. um while also um having a significant amount of consultant design and construction projects. Uh what we're seeking tonight is the council concurrence with that program so that we can start project development activities specifically um for the consultant
projects that were recommended. We would work on um getting task orders um put together and soliciting those to multiple consultants to bring back to the council at a future date. Uh so the next step in that process would be to um have staff put those together and um
start soliciting those so we can get a consultant under contract to start design work on those projects. So that is staff's recommendation tonight and um at this point I can take any questions. You'll note in the financial impact uh section I kind of gave a brief overview
of general rules of thumbs on what we can expect for in-house design and construction. There is a lot of benefit to keeping it in-house. However, we only have two engineering techs and so we have to be cautious about, you know, um our workload and how much we can take on in house. Um while consultant leled
projects are typically depending on how um complex the projects are, they can range anywhere between 15 and 25% on a consultant project for um for fees that come along with design and construction and engineering.
Paul uh Jeff one moment Paul is Lynen included in that Hannes. >> Yeah. Uh and the >> that' be Graden Lynon then Birch. >> Yeah, Lynon Lane was the one I was thinking of. >> And then what's the I suppose it's called South Six, but like the frontage road west of business 370. What is it?
South six. Is that >> the frontage road? That was done >> probably 10 12 years ago, I want to say. >> So that's not included in the Hannes >> correct >> edition. >> Yeah. In the Lynwood edition. Correct. Yep. Oh, that's okay. Thanks. Yeah, that's right. Hannes is Northeast.
>> Y >> um and then also I guess help help me understand what is it that we're actually recommending tonight because there's going to be a presentation and then we're going to be approving the CIP, but tonight is just
more approving which projects are inhouse versus not. >> Correct. >> That's what we're kind of after tonight. >> Jeeoff, I see your hand up. >> Yep. Um thank you. Uh I want to thank you, Paul. I don't think I've ever seen this type of proposal before where you've identified what's going to be
done in-house, what will be consultant driven and u and the way I understand it, you'll be at if you get approval tonight, you can then seek out the engineers based on our um >> what's that program we got? The pool. >> The pool, right? Okay. So, is that kind of why we have this in front of us
because of that pool? >> Yeah. And we're we're actively trying to get more ahead of our capital plan. You know, we feel like we're getting later and later into the bidding timeline on a lot of our projects. And I'm trying to get ahead of that by starting project development >> earlier. And I would at some point I'd
like to get about a year and a half to even two years in advance and start bringing consultants on earlier because it just it gets us out for bidding in October, November of the year prior and take advantage of very good bid pricing at that time rather than going out to
bid in April um that timeline and where we're under the gun and a lot of contractor schedules are full and you're running into higher prices. >> Right. Okay. But again, this is uh this is fairly new. Um I And when you anticipate coming back with the CIP then in this fall?
>> Yeah, I would say um once Jennifer Schuman gets onboarded in July. Um so I'm thinking August uh one of the August council meetings, we'll have a presentation put together based on what the commission looked at. >> Um looks like you got a full plate of stuff going on next year, right? >> It's a big construction program.
>> Okay. Thank you. That's all I have, Mr. Chairman. >> Thanks, Jeff. Thanks, Paul. Kevin, you had a comment? Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Sandy. I just want to kind of ask a quick question about this financial impact and the and the self-performance aspect. If I'm reading if I'm reading, if I'm reading you clearly, it sounds
like if we hire the workout average, it's about 10% higher. So, like a dumb question to me is we got roughly just we got 10 million just in 2027. Does it not make sense to just hire our
own couple. Help me with the math. How many people would we need to hire to self-perform to realize the 10% savings project overall total cost? >> I think there's multiple facets to that
and I appreciate the question. Um, consultants have a lot of services that we would have to hire a lot of staff in order to perform. A lot of specialty staff. you know, when you hire an SE or a Bolt in the Mink, they have a very deep bench of people that can work on projects, not only the standard civil
stuff, but storm water design. So, we try to separate the projects on stuff that our staff can handle um from a design perspective. That's, you know, the simpler reconstruction projects, >> um the simpler resurfacing projects, um the maintenance projects like seal coats, that kind of thing. we don't have
that technical a lot of the technical specialty areas that a civil engineering plan would necessarily um need especially on some of these bigger projects like that Lynwood project that is a full reconstruction it's going to be a little bit of a phasing um uh I
don't know call it whirlwind um given the kind of the landlocked area I think it would take quite a few staff in order to deliver some of the projects of that size like that Lynwood project we would probably we would need some different technical capabilities than just a standard civil engineering technician,
right? You need, you know, um people that are apt in like uh water modeling um to look at water man sizing and that kind of stuff. You know, there there's a lot more aspects to that. >> Understood. >> Yeah. I think where I was driving at is when how close is the math, right? And
I'm sure if with more self-performance comes more self reliability obviously as well. So just maybe something for to think about in the future is maybe we are better off because the math is showing a million dollars a year right off the bat in 2027 at 10% of 10 million. Right. So okay that's all.
Thank you. >> Thank you. Any other comments or questions? Otherwise looking for a motion on this item. >> I would move to approve staff's recommendation. Mr. Chair, >> I'll second Mr. Chair. >> All right. Thank you. A motion in a second. Any further discussion? Hearing
none. Those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. I. Those opposed, same sign. Of course, motion carries. Brings us to our second item. This is change order number four for improvement 2314 Hawkins Drive. And um Mr. Sandy or excuse me, Hawkins
Ronald Joseph Andy alley. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um so, uh just as a point of reference, this project is currently in the substantial completion stage. We're working with the contractor right now on some punch list items. Um, specifically on the alley uh project uh
that's listed here on the agenda. Uh this change order is a Z change order. Um it's really adjusting the contract completion date and the substantial completion date by two weeks. Um really this stems from um you'll recall when uh
the the commission and council agreed to add on the galvanized water service line replacement project uh to the alley project. Um the contractor that was doing the reconstruction on the alley did experience some delays um waiting for the galvanized service line project
to get completed. Um that needed to be done before curb got put in uh and all the surfacing that got done there. Um we reviewed this uh both more engineering and myself we looked at this. We um we do believe that two weeks is warranted uh to the contractor. Um they were
completed um on like June 29th. I think they have the alley paved which is what we consider substantial completion. We're actually nearing the final completion. we've been monitoring the grass growth um and the restoration in the alley and um they've been addressing
the punch list um as they can and so um I I suspect that this project is going to be completed by the completion date of July 15th if this change order is approved here tonight. Um and really um the galvanized service line project really did uh delay them and we we
thought the 14-day extension was reasonable um to give them uh adequate time to uh finish the project. I'll take any questions. >> Thank you, Paul. So, the galvanized service line and that was for all practical purposes a requirement of the
state for us to do and so we getting that done in an opportune time with the alley opened up. So, >> unless there's any questions, I'm ready for a motion on this one. Councilman Chzek, >> um Paul, you kind of anticipated something like this in the first place
when we did these little call them the one-offs on the alley. >> I did. Yeah, it was uh >> we might be delaying the project a little bit depending on when the contractor can get in there and um J&J was very very reasonable when they were delayed. Um they came back in as soon as
they could to finish the project. So um you know it was a city-driven kind of um change uh to J&J schedule and so um we do feel it is reasonable. >> Okay. >> Anything else? >> All right. Looking for a motion? I move
to approve staff's recommendation to extend the periods indicated in the agenda request. >> Second. >> Thank you. Motion and a second. Any further discussion? >> Hearing none. Those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> I. Those opposed. Same sign. Motion carries.
All right. This is our third item. Sanitary sewer lateral locating services uh improvement 2607. Uh this is for the 2027 Hannes edition reconstruction project. And Mr. Sandy. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. So, you'll recall uh this is one of the recommended
in-house uh engineering projects. Um we're presenting this proposal from NPL Construction to locate the approximate I think 64 sanitary sewer laterals that are on the project. Um just a little bit of history, a lot of our archived
sanitary sewer plans, um they're hit and miss when it comes to sanitary sewer laterals. And what that leads to is a lot of times when we're in the field in construction, we're spending a lot of time with a contractor um digging trying to locate these sanitary sewer laterals
that come off the main and serve the actual residents. Um what this service does, and this was a service that was actually performed um for this year's uh Southeast Brainard reconstruction project. What this service does is actually locates both the elevation and
the horizontal position of all these sewer laterals and it gives staff um a good sense of clarity on which service is serving which house, which services are abandoned. This also comes in really handy as we work through our lead service line program. um in this project
specifically um those sanitary sewer services will be shown in the plan so that when they're installing a new water service line we'll know exactly where the sanitary sewer is. A lot of times we do end up running into sanitary sewer services during those projects and so knowing their exact location and
elevation is really helpful. Um we're proposing this uh to be done by MPL Construction. They do a lot of the locating work for Centerpoint Energy um who was recently down in that southeast part of Brainard. Um we actually tagged on with their contractor uh from uh from
last year when they did the southeast Brainer um gas line relocation. Um they do a lot of that uh locating service and we had to just add on a couple of more that um they did not locate as part of their project. Uh we just find this to
be uh significant value to the engineering design process. A lot of the sewer laterals that are on these older sewers are called we call them high noon laterals where they're on the 12:00 position on the sewer pipe and you can't tell which direction they go. And
because the records are from the 40s and 50s, there's not a good indication of which direction they go if they're they're capped off at the rightway line. Um which ones are active, which ones are not. And so this gives us a precise positioning of all those services that we can use in design um of the project.
So staff is recommending that we do move forward um with this proposal from MPL uh for $20,800 and that would um be funded as part of the the project engineering cost um with the allocation to get split out um in
accordance with all of our other engineering expenses. >> All right, thanks Paul. comments or questions on this item? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Real quick question, Paul. This when we get this information, is it is it already in a construction doc form or do we just get the raw information and
somebody else has to convert it into construction docs or asbuilt docs? >> We get it in we get some maps. Um but the point data is much more valuable to us because we'll actually give that to our GIS uh technician Connor. Understood. And he'll put it into GIS with all the information in there. So,
as we do more and more of these projects, get more of them located, we'll know much more than we do. Some of the sewer that's newer, like in the 70s and 80s and 90s, that has good information tied to it. It's these older areas of sewer that we really struggle with.
>> Thank you. That's all. >> Um, may I >> Yes, Councilman Chzik, >> I I understand this stuff happens. Um I I you know reading through the the memo you provided and everything it um do you know what could have been done
differently to catch this beforehand? I mean what >> is there anything that >> the records at the time I mean if if >> right >> um you know we use these we have these large sewer books that are down in our archives and they're from you know the
1930s 1940s and there's good information on them but not enough to be able to decipher where services are going. There's been a lot of changes between now and then. >> If there hasn't been a recent reconstruction project that has asbuilt plans, especially the sewer asbuilts, um
it's kind of it's you don't have the records you don't have. I'll put it that way, right? It's um we're using the old sewer books to try to locate these services and it's the best information we have, but I think any more information is is good when you get into
design. And then and then um I mean if if we were to say no, we're not going to approve this, we're just looking at a lawsuit that we couldn't win. >> Well, I mean we we've operated without this service for a very long time. It does run into uh change orders when you get out in the field. Contractor hits a
service, they didn't know it was there. Um service isn't going to the right house, wrong direction. Um so we have operated this way, Jeff, for a very long time. um without having this service. Y >> it's just um knowing where these things are at when you're in design and in
construction provides such a huge value. It just reduces the chance of change orders >> um when you get into the field. >> Yeah. And I don't Jeff, it sounds like that probably answers your question, but the way I'm looking at this is this is how we get out ahead of it. I mean, that's what we're doing with this
project. And um this just reminds me of you know we when we've run into this before I think we've all three of us have sat and heard that where the asbuilts weren't accurate. So um you know like up off of Beaver Dam with the senior housing development
there that was so >> country manor >> country manor. Thank you. >> All right. Any >> Mr. Chairman I would move to approve the change order. >> A second Jagger. >> Thank you. motion and the second. Any further discussion?
>> Um again, um just Well, let me I I just have a question. So, in this instance, were we able to actually find something that we were able to utilize to in the future help
prevent this type of thing in any other areas based on what we found here in this location? You know, you feel what I'm saying? Knowing that the the asbuilts aren't correct there where we worked, >> I wouldn't say they're not correct. They
just don't have a typical asbuilt plan that we would produce today would have specific horizontal information on our sewer services. What we're dealing with in these old archives is literally maps that were produced in the 30s and 40s
that have some of the taps shown. There's been a lot of changes too between 1940 and today, right? There's been tabs that have been added. There's been there's been a lot of stuff that's been added over time to where um we don't have asbuilts of every single addition that happens um over the course
of 60 to 70 years. Right. >> So, so if we look beyond this area like next door or whatever just street over, can we assume that there may be similar issues? >> Yeah, I would say a lot of northeast is going to have the same problem. A lot of southeast, a lot of north Brainard. when you get into the southern part of town,
the newer sewers, we have a lot better records of that stuff. >> Thank you. >> I think Jeff's question is similar to the one I asked you about, you know, is this is there an opportunity for us to blanket the community to do this, you know, at a reduced rate to do the kind of do it in bulk, but you were kind of explaining probably best to do it as we
go because there's other areas where we do have >> we want to take a look at the asbuilts that are available before we recommend a service like this, >> right? If we don't feel confident in what the the data is that we have in archives, then we're not going to recommend this service. But if we're not confident in it or we're in a very old
part of town, um this service becomes very valuable. >> Do this. It removes some of the variables, removes some of the questions that are left from the older plans. So um motion and a second. Any further discussion? Hearing none. Those in favor signify by saying I. >> I.
>> I. Those opposed, same sign. And of course, motion carries. Our fourth item, this is final contractor payment for improvement 2602 uh the large patching project and um Director Sandy. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh through the
city's uh capital improvement plan, uh the city council has budgeted for 55,000 for this patching work. Uh Knife River was hired uh for this patching work at an estimated um I think $12.35 per square yard inch. Um the estimated
quantity of the project was 4, 414 square yard inches. Um when we got into the project and got all the holes saw cut and all the pavement removed, um the assumed depths of the pavement were not correct. Um and we ran into an
overrun in the quantity. You can see that we verified um that we ran into about 5,779 square yard inches. That led to a contract overrun cost of $16,857.75 for a total project cost of $71,370.65.
Uh Knife River did perform this work pursuant to the quote documents that were sent out. Um they replace all the pavement at the full depth that was existing and so staff is recommending that we pay the full invoice amount of $71,370.65.
65 cents. >> Thank you, Paul. Questions, comments on this item? >> Um, I hate to apologize. What exactly item are we on? >> Uh, for final contract payment, uh, >> page 206 207. >> I'm not on that way.
>> Oh, sorry. >> For what's it called? >> Oh, uh, final contract payment improvement 2602. Uh, large patching project. >> Okay. I apologize. Thank you. >> No problem. Um so Jesse I mean this is as or I'm
sorry Jesse Paul um as as you note in here this is significantly exceeds what was budgeted um and I think you know I think you're generous in saying we because you know this was kind of put together before you
came on but and the question that I asked is how do we avoid this in the future and I guess your response I'll paraphrase but you were saying you and our new engineer will take make strides to ensure that this is not >> right. >> You know, essentially the >> the payment was thicker than what we
>> had assumed. Correct. >> All right. Any other questions or comments? >> If not, be looking for a motion to um um recommend approving this this item. >> Um so move uh staff's recommendation on
this, Mr. Chair. >> Second. >> All right. Thank you. Motion and a second. Any further discussion hearing? None. Those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> I. Oppose. Same sign. And motion carries. And this brings us to our fifth item. This is proposal for geotechnical
services 2027 street projects. And director Sandy. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, so these are the two reconstruction projects. Um, the Lynwood Edgewood Brentwood reconstruction and the Hannes edition reconstruction project. Um we have solicited to our pool uh for
geotechnical investigation services which include soil borings um in these areas to characterize the subsurface uh soil conditions. um give us recommendations on pavement sections, trench back fills for utility replacements,
um water uh uh groundwater elevations and uh providing a uh geotechnical report that it gets included in the contract documents that are solicited to contractors. Uh the first um as kind of a starting point, so this is kind of the
new view of how uh services will be um uh solicited in the future. So, this is what we're calling our task order agreement forms. And so, you can see here um the the if you look at the the task order agreement for the Lynwood, Edgewood, and Bretwood services, uh it
kind of gives a project overview, um instructions to the proposer, um schedule requirements, and then we are dictating what the exclusions are uh from their bids or what the exclusions should be from their from their bids. And then we also get into the second
attachment which is the actual uh spreadsheets that the consultant fills in with the scope of work that uh staff has put together. Um and so we provide basically this whole document to them and all they do um in this process is
fill out the hours and the fee that are associated with these services. So the nine phases for each of these projects um was created by staff based on previous geotechnical reports. Um, Bronn Intertech supplied this data, um, these,
uh, fees back to us based on our scope of work. Um, and so, uh, on future projects when we solicit multiple different proposers on this type of work, um, they would all be receiving the same scope of work, the same assumptions, and so we're really just
basing it completely on fee at that point. Um so uh getting back to these two proposals specifically for the um Lynwood uh Edgewood and Brentwood reconstruction project um Bronn Intertext total fee for that
geotechnical uh services is $20,432. And for the Hannes Edition reconstruction project, the total proposed fee is $18,750. Um you'll notice that these task order agreements are not signed. Um what I'm
asking for the council to um uh do tonight is to approve the scope of work and the fees. I'm still working with attorney Langel who just walked in here on um the master services agreement with Bronn Intertech. Um what we're trying to do here is take advantage of some uh
other work that Braraw is doing in town in later July here for our 2029 Oak Street project. um so that they could perform all these geotechnical services when they are in town doing similar work on other city projects. So staff's recommending that we um approve the
scope and fee for both of these geotechnical investigations. >> All right, thanks Paul. Comments, questions on this item hearing none. Be looking for a motion on this item. >> I would move staff's recommendation on
this as well, Mr. Chairman. >> I'll second. All right. Thank you for the motion and the second. Any further discussion? Hearing none. Those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. I. >> And oppose. Same sign. Motion carries. >> Uh, which then brings us to our sixth
and final item. This is tax forfeit non-conservation parcels and public works director Sandy. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh so we got a notice from Crowing County that um they have a tax forfeited parcel that they would like us to review for uh
concurrence with its non-conservation status. That is a parcel, a triangular parcel um that is uh kind of at the intersection of Park Street and Pennsylvania Avenue. Um the county is proposing to include this in the land sale unless the city elects to designate
it for conservation and have the parcel transferred to city ownership. We did a review of this parcel. Uh James Cranvic uh noted um that you know without multiple variances um this parcel would likely be
unbuildable, but it may have a strong case for practical difficulties if somebody did want to purchase it and build a uh structure on it. Um I will note that in conversations I had with um Mr. Ericson there, um this is a pretty
large there's a big depression here. Um, so it's kind of a hole. Um, how I see this probably working is they put it up for land sale and then the adjacent property owner picks it up to include it as part of their lawn most likely. Um, but yeah, staff is recommending we don't have any utility needs for it. The
street already has adequate right of way. We did talk a little bit about storm water. Um, I think this uh neighborhood is scheduled for reconstruction sometime around 2030. Um, I don't like picking up parcels just under the anticipation that we may use
it for future storm water retention because we haven't done any design work yet. We don't know where the storm water needs to go in this neighborhood. We don't know if we'll need storm water retention in this neighborhood. So, it's one of those things I don't like to make, you know, or recommend we make decisions based on what could
potentially be in the future and to just hold land um by the city that we have to mow and maintain um and do all that. So, we are recommending that we uh concur with the county's non-conservation designation uh for P 41360584
and that allows county staff to put that on the Croman County land sale. >> All right. Thanks, Paul. Um yeah, just piggybacking on what you referenced and the only reason I brought it up is I happen to have looked at this or been familiar with this and it, as you
mentioned, huge depression. It goes way down there. It's very deep. Um, and I uh mentioned to Paul, I had had a conversation with uh I wrongly referenced Jesse earlier, but I had a conversation with Jesse, our previous engineer, about this. And he had said he
wanted to pick this up or he would he had hoped to have picked it up for that storm water retention because it's so deep. And I I would think it's completely unbuildable. Um, so I guess I don't know. I to me could if we did keep it could we
we could put it up if we could sell it at any time. Um we could or that would have to involve the EDA then or >> I don't think it would have to involve the EDA. Um it would just be um we can offer land for sale at any time. I would think um if we wanted to pick it up I
mean we can to just we have to go and mow it and maintain it to our own ordinances at that point. And so it would just be something we'd have to add to our maintenance schedule. >> And like you mentioned too, I guess um you'd have to do some design work to see if that could be used as a pond. So it
it just be >> it'd be kind of anticipatory if it could be used for a future project. >> I just wanted to mention it. It's a conversation that I had had with Jesse about this and then lo and behold it comes up as an opportunity. So I thought I'd mention it. But I I'll I'll somewhere support the recommendation.
But Councilman Chzik, >> how many square feet is this? This parcel. >> Oh boy. I don't know. >> We could do some math there. >> 112. So it's a triangle. >> I can do the math real quick. It's
>> about 4,300 square feet. Almost an acre. >> No, it's an acre. >> 43, right? Just >> It's very small. >> Okay. Little guy. >> All right. That's Yeah. 40. 4,300. Um, okay. Um, >> I I'm going to support the the
recommendation if there if there's a motion to that effect. So, entertain a motion on it. >> I would move forward with staff's recommendation on turn this into a nonconervation. Yeah. >> Yep. Second. >> All right. Thank you. Motion and a second. Any further discussion? Hearing
none, those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> I. And those opposed, same sign, of course. Motion carries. And that brings us to the end of our meeting. We're adjourned. >> Oh, good Part: 2
It is Monday, July 6th, 2026, 7:30 p.m. in council chambers. Tony, please call the role. >> Johnson >> here. >> Stunn here. >> Jagger, >> yes. >> Ericson >> here. >> Beans >> here. >> Chzach >> here. >> OD >> here. >> Bedell >> here. Stand for the pledge of allegiance.
>> I pledge allegiance 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. Next up, we're looking for approval of
the agenda. So, move second. All right. We have a motion by Stunic, second by Bevans. >> I I would like to pull something from consent. I don't know if you want me to do that now or during the consent calendar. >> You can do it now or after. We do have a motion. So, if you want a friendly amendment to that, I
>> I'd like to add to the agenda that we pull from consent the job descriptions for the BPU. >> I don't have a problem, babe. No problem. See? So, pulling job descriptions, that would be L. Just L.
>> Yeah, just L and put it to five D. >> Put it right behind consent. >> Yeah. >> All right. Any discussion on that motion? None. Let's go to a vote. All those in favor say I. I. Again, same sign. >> We have an agenda.
All right. Uh, next up, we have the consent calendar. >> Mr. Mr. President, could you remind me what item got pulled from consent? >> Yes, it is uh letter L. >> Okay. >> 5 L. >> Thank you. >> All right. Uh this is a notice 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. Looking for a motion. So move consent. >> Second. Motion by Chzach. Second by
Bevans. Any discussion? >> Tony. >> Johnson. >> Yes. >> Stunic, >> yes. >> Jagger, >> yes. >> Ericson, >> yes. >> Beans, >> yes. >> Chzach, >> yes. >> O day, >> yes. Next up, number six, we have public forum. This is time allocated for
citizens to bring matters not on the agenda to the attention of the council. Time limits may be imposed. >> I think we do uh consent. >> Oh, yeah, that's right. Sorry about that, Gabe. Let's do those job descriptions. So, >> okay. Yeah, I'm asking to pull this. I'd like to put it off for two weeks and
have it at our next meeting. A as I read through them, there were some things that I just think should be clarified. You know, I have a couple examples here like the uh the administrative assistant dispatcher overseas work orders for all divisions of the electric department.
The electric department has two divisions, but it's all still electric based. It's not water or wastewater or and I was under the understanding that a lot of these positions would still be handling the water, the wastewater, all of the enterprise funds that are no longer in the utility. And then go to
the finance manager. It'll be the second one I share with you. I'm not going to go through all of them, but it says the finance manager is responsible for guiding the financial and administrative functions for the utility, which is only the electric department now per our charter. It says it directs preparation of all annual operating budgets and
projections, but that would tie to only the electric department and not the wastewater, water, storm water, all of the other enterprise funds. So, I I like the work that was done here and I and I think they're good, but I think I would like I think it would be better if we could get some more clarification and if
we put it off for two weeks. I talked to Britney beforehand and she doesn't have a problem with it. >> Mr. President, >> if anybody else has any concerns, I I would encourage them to reach out to Nick and Britney and and I I'll do the same just to get our concerns for any any changes that are taking place. Thank you.
>> Thank you, Mr. Johnson. Mr. Chzach, >> uh move to uh hold over till the next meeting. >> Second motion by Chzach, second by Bevans. Any more discussion on that? I think it's always good to get more clarification, especially on paper. That's where all the ambiguity comes
from. So, see no more discussion. Let's go to a vote. All those in favor say I. I. Against. Same sign. That motion carries. Now we will move to number six. Public forum. Time allocated for citizens bring matters not on the agenda to the attention of the council. Time
limits may be imposed. So we will open public forum. It is 7:34. There's anybody here that would like to address the council, please come forward. If there's anybody online, press star three. All right. It doesn't look like we have anybody. So, we will close the public
forum just as fast as we started it the second time. Moving on. Number seven, presentations. 7A. We do have a presentation from the airport. Come on up. Welcome. >> Good evening, Mr. President, council,
staff. Uh, thanks for letting me come and talk about the airport tonight. Anytime I get a chance to do that, it's uh a fantastic opportunity. Uh really what I want to talk about tonight is um an overview of the current airport operations and impacts and where we're
and where we're at. So as many of you know, our airport's the primary commercial service airport for central Minnesota. Uh we do daily commercial service to Minneapolis. If you're not uh aware, we have 12 flights a week. So we
depart uh every day, 7 days a week in the morning, 6:45. The flight comes back from Minneapolis around 10, departs again at 11. So that 10 am and 11 am flight is five days a week. They do not do that one currently at on Tuesdays or Wednesdays with um really three
exceptions we found. So Delta Sky West added three opportunities. So after our Memorial Day weekend, this week after our Fourth of July weekend and in Labor Day, after Labor Day weekend, they're adding back the Tuesday and Wednesday flight, which is fantastic. And I
actually found out we are at 100% capacity for those flights this week. So, uh, folks are taking advantage of the flights out of here, which is great. And then the flight returns back from Minneapolis at 6, uh, 6:55, 7:00 in the evening. Um, and that's also 7 days a
week. So, we're certainly busy with our commercial air services here in the Brainer Lakes area. Uh besides that, we've got our general aviation population, our business aviation and flight training that happens at the airport and multiple onfield tenants and aviation businesses. And I'll cover some
of those throughout the the brief. What you see on the bottom, North Point Aviation, that's our fixedbased operator providing our ramp service, our fuel service, uh maintenance and aircraft sales. And Brainer helicopter service also providing uh maintenance and helicopter services and some flight
training uh here in the Brainer Lakes area. If you'll move down to the next, our passenger service and performance, as I mentioned, is strong. Uh we're up April, May, June, up about 35% compared to last year, which is fantastic. And
while that's a great number to be up, it's only about 50% capacity of what we are able to serve. So, we're still continuing to advertise and uh work with Sky West Delta on how we can continue to up those numbers. What that really does
for the airport is brings in our uh PFC, our our passenger facility charge credits. So that's a credit back to the airport and we can use that to pay back local shares. So when we do uh work under an FAA grant or a mindot grant, we
can request those funds, the passenger facility charge come back to the airport. Uh so that's where we benefit on a monetary value from having the commercial service here. Um besides that, Delta Sky West, uh Unifi is our ground service provider for those
flights. Uh they employ 10 to 12 folks that come in and work the flights. Everybody you see at the front counter loading the bags, uh and managing the, you know, the uh de ice in the wintertime, uh that's those folks is is Unifi. And of course, we've got our transportation security administration
folks that are there to uh manage the secure the security uh uh process for our onboarding our passengers. And lastly, uh tourism. We do get our Sunountry flights come uh September through April. So, that's an opportunity
for folks to go direct to Laughlin, Nevada, spend a 4-day weekend non-stop out and back. And those we we fill up, too. That's about 185 passengers that we're able to serve in and out uh once a month is what we've got uh that
currently scheduled for. Next, moving on a little more about our general and business aviation. So, um what you see here, uh I'll start in the bottom right corner. So, if you're not aware, uh Bamiji aviation, they are bringing in UPS packages. So,
overnight type uh packages once a day in the evening. They fly out of Biji and bring our UPS packages. We've got a very uh active EAA chapter uh 1610 on the airport. That's our general aviation folks. Uh their group that meets and um
uh does a variety of u uh flying. It's a recreational flying community, I guess, is the best way to uh to put it. Um and then we also have our flight training. So, those folks are are working through the FBO who manages that for uh people in the community that are interested in
learning to fly. And lastly, the high demand for hanger space. We're really doing well there, too. We've got uh just over 80 80 um hanger spaces available for rent, and we're only sitting with two vacancies. And our big box hangers, uh we do have a bit of a wait list. So,
if an opportunity presents itself for us to be able to grow in that regard, uh we could look at potentially building, you know, more of our larger, that's our 60x 60 or 60x 65 uh foot, uh box hangers, and I think those would um those would
probably rent out uh pretty quickly. Next slide. Capital projects and improvement. So, we've been uh working closely with the FAA and managing our capital improvements. So they occasionally change their uh requirements on the
airfield which forces us into potentially some uh changes of taxiways for safety or or runway connections and so forth. Um and they also help us manage our pavement conditions and and and work with us on on kind of
foreseeing when we'll need to go into large project improvements to replace taxiways or or the runways themselves. But recently, um, uh, this fall, we're going to go ahead and do a a pavement and airfield maintenance. So, we've got a taxi lane and helipad reconstruction
project, uh, that will be kicking off September, October time frame. That'll be about a 30-day uh, a 30-day project. We've done, uh, LED lighting upgrades and nav navigational upgrades. also recently did a a large security compliance enhancement with our fencing,
replacing the fencing around a majority of the air airfield. That was a a four-phase four-phase project with two of the phases being completed before I came on board in February. that included uh a a higher fence, so a 10-ft fence,
and also a three-foot underground to keep um wildlife and so forth from hopefully digging underneath the fence and and um destroying things there. And then lastly, we've got future hanger development and long-term planning. So, we have the last of our IIGJA grant
available and that's about $3.8 million that we're we're able to utilize to build actually build hangers. So that is a carryover yet from COVID when the FAA allowed uh airports of our nature to be able to use FAA funding into projects
like that. So hanger funding comes around very very rarely I'm told. So, uh, we're we're figuring out exactly what we are, uh, are going to do there and should see this October is our deadline to get our kind of decision and
paperwork, initial phase, uh, or initial grant paperwork into the FAA. Um, moving on. So, some of our non-eronautical services at the airport, really an opportunity to add value to our customer service out there. Recently
we've uh started working with Executive Express. So that's a new tenant at the airport. They're renting leasing some space for us and also providing a small commission back to the airport. They are a black car service that uh PE patrons can go and um sign up ahead of time for
a car service. They've got sedan. They've got small bus and large bus options. And so anything that originates or comes back to the Brainer airport, they pay us us back a small commission fee besides their monthly rent for space to to keep their vehicles. Um, and then
we've got, of course, our our award-winning Wings Cafe or our highly recommended Wings Cafe out there. Uh, who is it continues to see uh trends upward on business this year. They've they've really have got um they've got a good a good year established so far. And
then of course our Alamo Enterprise and National Car Service uh rental service there at the airport. Uh next slide. Looking at our economic input. So, it's been quite some time, but back in 2019, uh Minnesota Department of Aeronautics did a large uh
or did a formal survey, I should say, uh and they estimated back then our airport was bringing in $31 million into the Brainer Lakes uh regional area, whether it was job support, um um tourism, hospitality,
um and those sorts of opportunities into uh the Brainer Lakes area. And I know it's only grown since then, although there's not a formal study out there. One example is one of our tenants is Lifelink uh uh medical helicopters. So
they've started doing their uh large um aircraft maintenance at the hangar here in Brainer. So their heavy maintenance about every 500 hours on a helicopter, you've got to tear it down, you've got to do all the inspections and build it back up. So they're actually flying their helicopters here. They've onboarded a couple more mechanics.
they're bringing parts uh to and to the airport. Uh so business business is growing out there. That's just one uh easy example there. And next slide. Taking a look at our community and regional benefits. Um our little airport
makes travel easier for residents and visitors alike. Uh we just had a a very busy Fourth of July holiday with jets coming in and out. Prior to that, there was the large Lakes Jam um uh concert that brought uh more fixed wing aircraft
in and out. And we anticipate later in August, another busy weekend is uh will be a BIR uh race as well. Uh it supports hospitality uh for our resorts and outdoor recreation here in the area. And we also are are seeing a lot more
interest in school groups, both young young folks coming out for a tour as well as an opportunity for high schoolers to come and and see what careers in whether it's aviation, whether it's medical um uh or you know whether it's it's working on the air airport around aircraft, doing mechanic
work, or maybe it's part of the the services that are offered as well. It's an opportunity to see the variety of jobs that uh one could go in um post high school. Looking at our public safety and emergency support, uh we're very lucky
to have two uh medical helicopter, both our Lifelink and North Memorial um helicopter. Uh they primarily work with a within their own consortium of hospital services, but they also work very well together. So if one one aircraft is out and there's another call
that comes in, they certainly share uh share that work. They don't let anybody go um unsupported if need be. We have our wildlife uh wildfire suppression aircraft uh as we saw with our large fire here in May. What kind of support
it is to have uh how great it is to have that support here local. Uh and if you're if you're not following, they are looking at a $16 million phased building project on the on the airfield where they're going to redo ramp. They want a
new operations center and then eventually aircraft hanger for what they have um for their services as well. And that we actually will see they were awarded $2 million of bonded $2 million by the state of Minnesota to be able to
be begin their project uh this fall. Um we look at uh getting going with that. Then we have two law enforcement aviation. So, we've got both the Minnesota State Patrol and Minnesota DNR Enforcement working out of uh the the airfield, our Civil Air Patrol, which
which is auxiliary air force that has a very large enrollment of both young aviators as well as uh adult population that that serves uh in that capacity. They have uh both hangar space and a classroom that they utilize. And they have uh one aircraft that they keep in
the hanger out there. And then lastly, we do see quite a few Minnesota National Guard training flights um come in and out with both the uh UH60 and the CH47 aircraft that will uh come through the the airport. And of course, none of this would happen
without your concerted effort and support back to the airport. Um uh the city of Brainard, Crowing County, uh the FAA and Minnesota Department of Aeronautics. I would say those four agencies working together uh with the
airport really is what keeps us strong and growing and um offering the best that we can uh out here at uh Brainer Lakes Regional Airport. Are there any questions for me? >> Thank you, Jennifer Roach. Does anybody
have questions? >> Mr. Chz, >> thank you. Thank you, Jennifer. Um the passenger facility charges, are they still at $4.50? They are at $4.50 and the airport only actually sees $4.39 of that because of
course uh somebody else takes a small cut of that. That's what they're at. Yes, sir. >> Are you still tracking the gross receipts for the cafe? >> Yes. >> Okay. Are we on the 2% yet? Do you know >> because it was five years for one and then following five was two.
>> I don't know that off the top, Mr. Chzer. And then if you had your choice for an air show at the airport, Blue Angels or Thunderbirds, >> what would you choose? >> That's neither is a helicopter. >> Wait, I hear about this.
>> Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Chzach. Anybody else have questions? >> Look like it. Thank you, Jennifer. Appreciate it. >> And thank you for all your good work out there. Looks like things are going great. >> They are. Thank you. >> All right. Right. Next up, we have number eight, council committee reports.
First up, we have safety and public works committee chairman Tad Ericson. >> All right. Thank you, Mr. President. We got six items on our agenda. Uh the first of which is the 2027 capital improvement program recommendations. The motion coming out of committee is to
signify council's concurrence with the work plan outlined above and I so move. >> Second. >> Motion by Ericson, second by Chzach. Ericson. Uh so what this is not is this is not approving the CIP as noted in the uh the packet. That'll happen that'll occur later. We're going to get a
presentation on the uh capital improvement plan. Um however uh due to the charter changes um we're going to be getting that presentation and um we'll be approving that u likely in September. Uh but what this is is in order for staff to move continue move forward with
the projects that are identified in the draft CIP. Uh they're identifying as you can see here which ones are in-house design and construction, which projects we'll be handling in-house and then those that will be hiring a consultant and will be consultant.
And so staff's putting this together so that they can continue to move forward um and be ready uh when the such time as the CIP is improved. >> Thank you, Chairman Ericton. Any more discussion? >> Chaz. >> Yeah, I in committee I think Mr. Sandy,
this is something we haven't seen before um laying it out like this and then of course it's helping staff get the um the the pool of uh consultants lined up um uh more get things done sooner. So we're not kind of behind the eightball when we
get our bids out or requests for that late or later in the year instead of early in the next year. That helps with uh prices. So I really really encourage to see this. >> Very good. Thank you, Mr. Chzai. Beans. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Can I ask a question of either the committee chair or Mr. Sandy?
>> Yes. >> The Lynwood, Edgewood, Brentwood. I Google map that. I can't find those in the city of Brinard. I can find them in the city of Baxter. Are we building roads in Baxter? No, thank you, Mr. Beavenans. Um, we had a request from our finance department to
start changing the names of our projects more to the additions, so the plats in town rather than specific street names or areas of town. You know, you'll see a lot of southeast Brainer Reconstruction or Northeast Brainard Reconstruction. These are actual names of the plats that
contain those roads rather than specific road names or areas of town so that we don't run into problems with multiple projects called the same thing. So Lynwood addition to the city of Brainard is an actual plat in Brainard. Brentwood edition is an actual plat. Edgewood
edition is a plat in Brainer. >> Can I ask where they are? >> So that should look should I look up the plat map? >> That that project specifically is down in the Graden area. Um, Graden Avenue, um, Lynen Lane. Yep. >> Okay. Thank you.
>> Thanks for asking that. I appreciate that, >> Mr. And I had the exact same question for um for Paul earlier, too. So, >> right. It'd be like the Pine River airport pine trees. >> It just helps for project tracking in
the future. >> I think it it'll make sense more as we go, I believe. >> Mr. But it just so happens to be that those are two streets in Baxter, too. So, >> yeah, >> to add to the confusion, >> all three of them are actually. >> All right, further discussion. Seeing
none, let's go to a vote. All those in favor say I. I. Against. Same sign. >> Motion carries. Chairman Ericson. >> All right. Thank you. This is our second item. This is change order number four. Uh, improvement 2314 Hawkins Drive, Ronald Street, Joseph Street, and Alley Reconstruction Project. The motion
coming out of committee is to approve the change order number four. Um, and I so move. >> Second. >> Motion by Ericson, second by Chzach. Chairman Ericson. >> All right. So, this is uh a non-monetary uh change order. All that all this does is change the um substantial completion
date to June 29th uh 2026 and the final completion date to July 15, 2026. Uh the reason for this is um that we had had to do the galvanized water service line and since
we had the alleyway opened up there was 14 properties that were receiving new service lines and so this was a city request that the contractors hold off so we get that work done uh which they were uh happy to comply with and so um it's just changing these dates so that they
can complete on time due to our request. Very good. Now it's all open. It looks like we're just waiting for grass. Correct, Mr. >> Yes, that's correct. >> Very good. >> Grass is closed. >> Very good. Any more discussion? Seeing 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. Now, this is proposal for sanitary sewer lateral locating services. This is in regards to improvement 2607. Um, this is again referenced in the CIP
as the 2027 Hannes Edition reconstruction project that's in Northeast if anyone would like to know. Uh, the motion coming out of committee is to approve the proposal from NPL Construction Company uh for sanitary sewer services locating services in the
total amount of 20,000 800 and I so move. >> Second. >> Motion by Ericen, second by Chzach. Chairman Ericson. Uh so we've run into this time and time again where um the maps and the plans that our uh crews are are look working off of are from the
30s, 40s, 50s and beyond. And uh in those maps and those plans there are sometimes questions on where things are located. We've seen it where our asbuilts are simply not um what they should be. And so this is getting out ahead of that and um uh
trying to hire the service to locate where these sewer lines are both laterally and um u horizontally or vertically in some cases so that they can reduce the questions and know exactly where these are at um so we don't run into this at the tail end um
trying to make up and find where these as are located. >> Thank you, Chairman Ericson. Any further discussion? I'll just add a question that I had asked Paul and it came up in committee is you know is there an opportunity would there be a cost savings if we just did did this on a blanket throughout
community commu throughout the community um and Paul explained that you know it's probably best to go um project by project uh where this is really going to be a benefit is in these older neighborhoods as I mentioned where the the plans are really old and there leave
some questions uh newer newer roads uh where where there's some new um uh undergrounds. Uh we're going to have those more or less the knowledge in place. So, it's best to go project by project. >> Thank you, Chairman. Mr. Sandy, I know
with your experience with the city, have we done this before on certain projects? >> Thank you, Mr. President and members of the council. We did do this for the Southeast Brainard reconstruction project that is slated to start here. Um we have a pre-construction meeting starting this week. So, that is a service that we did for that project. Is
it a similar price point? >> Yeah, similar price point. Um, this contractor does a lot of the uh sewer locating work for Centerpoint Energy who has all the gas man in town. So, they um we know who they are. They do good work and they give us a good product at the end of the day. >> So, in the end, it's some it looks like
a lot of money. It is a lot of money, but it might end up saving us more money than what this costs. >> I I see I was kind of explaining this to the committee. Um there's a lot of benefit to this when it comes to our galvanized water service line projects too because those the sewer service and the water service are usually pretty
close together um on most of our residences. And so if we know an exact location, vertical elevation and horizontal uh location of those services when we go into a galvanized project, it's going to provide a lot of value because the contractor has a lot less risk when it comes to directional boring
um potentially hitting a a service line when they're doing that work. um this will we'll know exactly where they're at um when we do this service. >> Very good. Thank you. Any further discussion? Seeing none, let's go to a vote. All those in favor say I.
>> I. Against. Same sign. >> Motion carries. Chairman Ericson. >> All right. This is our fourth item. Uh final contractor payment improvement 2602. This is the 2026 large patching project. The motion coming out of committee is to approve. Um uh staff
recommendation approve the attached invoice reflecting an increased project amount of 16,8575 cents for a total project cost of 71,370 and65 and I so move >> second motion by Ericson second by
Chzach. Chairman Ericson. >> Yeah. So, uh, we had, um, you know, budgeted 55,000 annually for this, um, and staff had, uh, talked about and shared in the both in the memo and in committee that this is significantly
over budget. Um what had happened was um I think this was a staff kind of a swing and a miss essentially where um uh the estimate um simply didn't match what was out there and the contractor you know uh when they got in there and did the the
cuts they determined that the pavement was sub substantially uh thicker than what uh we had estimated and uh resulted in the overrun. So they built it to what what was there as um as was agreed upon. Uh it just happened to be more than what
we had estimated. So >> Okay. >> Um chairman >> I had asked thank you I had asked uh Paul uh both when they briefed me on this item beforehand and also in committee about you know how can we prevent this and um Paul mentioned that both he and the the newly hired engineer
would you know ensure that this is something that they're looking at for each and every project going forward and shouldn't be a should not be an issue. Is this a case of just not getting samples ahead of time and that's something that we won't do going forward?
>> Thank you, Mr. President. Um, I don't know exactly how the scope of work was put together. There was an assumed depth um in the quote package that was solicited. Um, I don't know if asbuilts were reviewed prior to that. We could go and do cores um in these areas. That's
going to be cost obviously um you know probably 5,000 bucks to have somebody go and do a core. I think the asbuilts that we have um on most of our pavement projects are going to be new enough to where we have a good understanding of how much patuminous depth there is there. Um like I said I don't know how
that quote package got put together. Um but we replaced what was there. We did confirm it multiple ways that the tonnage matched what they had put down with the depth and it just you know once they cut the patch out um and they remove it that's when you know what the
depth is um and that's you have to patch it back at that point. So >> okay thank you Johnson. >> I support the motion just because obviously we need to put the patches back at street level otherwise we're just making the street worse. But one
way to pre prevent people from going 30% over budget is not allowing them to go 30% over budget. We just allow it every single time a contractor says so or a mark. Everything is going to be 30% over budget. But I support this one. >> Thank you, Mr. Johnson. Any further
discussion? Seeing none, let's go to a vote. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Against. Same sign. >> Motion carries. Chairman Ericson. >> Thank you. Our fifth item, this is proposal for geotechnical services 2027 street projects. The motion coming out
of committee is to approve the scope of work and associated costs for both projects as outlined above uh to direct staff and the city attorney to finalize the uh TOA documents and associated master service agreements with all consultants prior to obtaining final signatures on the document. And I so
move >> second >> motion by Ericen, second by Chazak Ericson. >> All right. So the TOA is task order agreement. Um, we received proposal from Bronn Intertech for geotechnical services associated with two upcoming 2027 reconstruction projects. These are
the ones we mentioned earlier, the Lynwood, Edgewood, Brentwood um and then the uh believe it was the Hannes edition. And again, this is uh I commend uh staff for um doing this this uh taking those uh geotechnical services,
getting the samples uh for each each project uh in advance so we know essentially what we're dealing with and we can hopefully avoid these uh cost overruns that we have been experiencing and I believe this is going to be the um the practice for staff guess of course
if approved going forward to do this for each project. Okay, further discussion. Seeing none, let's go to a vote. All those in favor say I. I. Again, same sign. >> Motion carries. Chairman Ericson.
>> Thank you. This is our sixth and final item. This is tax forfeit non-conservation parcels. A motion coming out of committee is um to recommend concurrence with Crowing County's non-conservation designation for P 41360584
allowing the county to offer the parcel for sale during the Crowing County land sale and I so moved. >> Second motion by Ericson, second by Chzach. Chairman Ericson. >> Yeah, just a couple notes about this uh piece of property. I don't know if we got the image of it there. Um it's along
uh it park in Pennsylvania Avenue. It's that triangular piece. Um it's approximately about a tenth of an acre and um just a couple of notes. It's the topography there. It's a pit. It's very deep. Um I think staff had mentioned it would require um several variances for
anyone to build anything. I don't even think it would be possible to build on it. Um and then I mentioned in committee um previous um engineer Dean had actually told me one time that he had thought maybe it would make a good uh retention pond. So I did think about what maybe you know um utilizing it. I
think Paul and the staff had talked about in the previous presentation that we had seen from HR Green. There's a lot of requirements with the MPCA that we would have to meet that probably wouldn't fit this. So um motion coming out of committee was to go ahead and let it go.
>> Okay. Thank you, Chairman Ericson. Further discussion. First, uh Mr. Mayor Bedau. Well, we all know that we need about a billion retention ponds as to the state's requirements. So, thank you, state, for making us need to even have the conversation about potentially making this small piece of land into a
retention bond. It's something that's always got our minds because you continue to tell us that we need retention ponds everywhere and that all things should be retention bonds. Might as well make this city hall a retention bond while we're at it. >> I don't know if that would work, Johnson. >> Yeah. I I just appreciate the
description from the chairman. And I was when when I heard it was a pit, I was like, "Well, why aren't we turning it into a retention pond?" But I'm glad you asked the question. I'm glad Paul answers. I know Paul loves his retention ponds as much as Jesse did. Engineers love retention. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Chairman Johnson.
>> Further discussion. Seeing none, let's go to the vote. All those in favor say I. I. Against. Same sign. >> Motion carries. Chairman Ericen. >> Uh, thank you. End of report. >> Thank you, Chairman Ericson. Moving on to 8B, personnel and finance committee chairman Gabe Johnson.
>> Thank you, Mr. Chair. We have two items on the agenda today. The first of which is a letter of support for the Northland Arboritum use of levy dollars as a grant match. And the motion is to authorize the letter letter of support for the Northland Arboritum to utilize levy dollars as a grant match. And I so move.
>> Second. Motion by Johnson, second by Bevans. Chairman Johnson. >> Yeah, Kelly could the leazison over there. could probably describe it better, but since they got the regional park designation, it opens up an avenue for grant funding from lottery funds and
whatever. They're not asking for additional levy dollars. They're asking for on the specific project if they can pledge the levy dollars they're already receiving from us as a grant match to open up some state funds to have the county buy some of their parcels to
lease it back to them. and be it'd be a financial win-win and keep the properties in conservation for 200 more years. >> All right, further discussion, Chzac and then Jagger. >> Um, so
are any of the levy dollars we currently give to the arboritum restricted in any way? >> Not that I'm aware of. >> Okay. So, I I have a problem with this and it's about the wording. Um, is this a resolution? I forget. Or is it just a letter? >> It's just a letter of support.
>> If you could read that portion, is it up there? >> Yep. >> It it talks about we're the city council authorizes the arboritum to use those dollars. We can't authorize them to use it or not use it. They get it regardless. And I don't like that wording because
it's disingenuous. We don't have any authority how they use that money. So why are we saying we're authorizing them to use it? I I would be fine if we said we fully support their use of the grant money they get from the city of Briner, but to say we're authorizing them and in
the agenda request it says they're asking for our permission. They don't need our permission. So it to me it's like I think I I I again I'm not trying to say no to this. I'm fully in favor of it. It's just the wording. It's not truthful. and
we talk about transparency and I think that wording there specifically is trying to imply that we have authority over that money and we don't the word authorize them to use it should not be in there and I would I would be in favor of just
amending that wording before moving forward. I I I don't see any reason why we're saying that in that letter because it's not truthful. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chzek. That makes sense to me. Uh Mr. Johnson, you want to read that? >> Yeah, I wouldn't I wouldn't be opposed to changing some of the wording. I do believe the uh director of North
Arboritum drafted this. I think it was more of just a communication update of where they're doing and what they're doing with our money and keeping the city aware of what they're doing, not so much as as believing that we direct how they spend it. But I'm not opposed to changing a few words here or there to
make you more comfortable. >> Again, if you don't mind, Mr. President, >> go ahead, Mr. Chz. >> Again, I I can't stress this enough. Um, this is at a level where I if it would if we just said we're in full support of them using the money that we levy from
our taxpayers, that would be fine. But to say we're authorizing them, that's that's not true. We're not we're not authorizing them to use We can't authorize them. They can use that money however they want as far as I know, unless somebody knows otherwise. >> Right. again. So, it I guess I would be
so I can we just draft uh change the language here before we approve this? >> I think we could make a friendly amendment to uh change that language. I >> I would absolutely make a friendly amendment to change. Uh Jeff, will you tell me what words you want it out and what you want in >> or where it says the city council
authorizes the use of levy dollars or something to that effect. >> Change it to support. >> So, we change authorized to supports. I'd make that friendly amendment. >> Second. >> Thank you very much. Very good. Uh, Mr. Joerger. >> Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, just u wanted to let you know I will be uh
voting against this not because I'm not a supporter of the arburetum, which I absolutely am. amazing work uh amazing destination that we have out there and I think it's wonderful for our citizens but uh I just will choose to vote against it to not reverse myself on some other uh arburedom items that have come
before and my opinion kind of still stands the same in that it's my fundamental belief that levy dollars taxpayer dollars should not be funneled to any nonprofit. uh we have many many hundreds dozens hundreds of of nonprofits in the city which are
deserving of of dollars and and yet they don't get the opportunity to share. So uh I just fundamentally believe that's wrong. Um but I want to see the arburitum exist, thrive, grow, all good things. So all good feelings there. I just have a have an issue with the uh
taxpayer dollars. Uh the other one little thing that I did want to mention is in the summary here or in the agenda item the I I saw the language in here that says that but that by increasing the regional park and expanding the protected land it manages the arboritum becomes more competitive and thus
reducing their reliance on annual operating support over time. that would not align with really any project that I've ever been involved with that the expansion ultimately leads to um somehow some less reliance on the dollars to operate it. In my experience, f state
and federal grants um usually apply to expansions uh or development not m. So my concern is is that we continue to expand uh without, you know, a mindset of how
to maintain and operate it. That's my concern there. So um for those reasons, I'll be voting no, but certainly um appreciate it being brought forward. Thank you. >> Understood. Thank you, Mr. Jagger. >> Any further discussion? Seeing none, let's go to a vote. All
those in in favor say I. >> I. >> I. Against. Same sign. >> I. That motion carries 61. Uh, Chairman Johnson. >> Thank you. Our second and final item is a hiring of a public service director, Zack Sworth out. And the motion is to
approve hiring Zack Sworth out as our public services director effective July 27th, 2026 at step one of the public services wage director grid and ISO move. >> Second. >> Motion by Johnson, second by Stunnick. Chairman Johnson. We're excited to get this position filled and we're kind of
getting closer for our reorganization kind of all coming together and that and that's exciting and and I think Zach's work out will be a good fit for the city. >> Thank you, Chairman Johnson. Mr. >> Chz, could would you mind uh just letting the public know what uh this
position is going to be uh uh heading up? Parks transit I believe >> parks transit Nick would know better. Yeah, >> it would be uh parks programming, parks maintenance, surface maintenance on the streets, transit facilities. I think
that's probably an exhaustive list right there. >> Thank you very much. >> Very good. Any further discussion, Mr. >> I would just welcome Zach to an event that will be happening just previous to his employment, which will be the uh police versus firefighter softball
showdown. That'll be happening on July 23rd. It might be a good way to get acclimated to uh all the things that are happening in the parks in a very festive manner. >> Very good. Further discussion? Seeing none, let's go to a vote. All those in favor say I. I. Again, same sign.
>> That motion carries. Welcome aboard, Zack Sworth. Chairman Johnson. >> End of report. >> Thank you, Chairman Johnson. Moving on to number nine, unfinished business. 9A is a call for applicants. First up, we have the honorable Mayor Bedau. Yeah, before we do call for applicants, I just
want to get um some clarification on our positions for our commissions. When someone is not re-upted for their continual year and have not been replaced, we have traditionally allowed people to continue on those commissions. But I'm under the understanding that
that may only be for specific commissions and not for all commissions. So, we don't need to clarify today, but I just want to get some clarification as to what if there are commissions that's allowed and are not allowed. I just want to make sure that we're on the same page. So, if I could just ask staff to
have some clarification on that uh moving forward. But having said that, the following positions are available. Charter Commission, two terms expiring 2029, two terms expiring 2026. Economic Development Authority, one term expiring 2028, one term expiring 2031. Library
Board, one term expiring 2027. Public Utilities Commission, one term expiring 2026. Transportation Advisory Committee, two terms expiring 2027. >> Getting pretty good at that. >> I've done it a lot. >> And as council president, we have one term expiring 2028 on the airport
commission, one terms expiring 2028 on the planning commission, and two open terms on the water tower committee. Next up, 9B. We have a discussion on transit affairs uh with the city of Baxter, and this is Nick Broyals. >> Thank you, Mr. President. Uh this is
just a discussion item. Staff will be listening to any comments from council and if you guys want to make any further direction, uh we will uh we will certainly comply. On June 1st, the city council directed staff to compile and present additional transit, financial and operational information. So the
attached report summarizes several things. Fair revenues, allocated transit cost, reconciliation results, fair structures, ridership. We touched a little bit on travel patterns, uh, fair related rider decisions, basically some, um, comments from some of the riders
that we've been doc that we have documented and additional operational information for years 23 through 25. So, I'll just hit a couple of the highlights. I don't want to go through this ad nauseium, but we'll start with number one. Um, number one just kind of talks about um, what revenues were
collected by the three entities, the city of Briner, City of Baxter, and Crowing County. Item number two talks about the outlays, whether the costs for the three respective bodies. Uh number three is the reconciliation. So it's essentially revenues minus outlays and it shows the net position over the three
years for the three entities. Um item number four talks about the fairs, whether they're advanced reservations or same day fairs in Brainer, Baxter, and Crowing County over the three years. Um, number five just is a just a number of
how many trips there were in the three years um by entity again by the three different entities. Number six, how did the riders travel between Brainard and Baxter? Um, this talks about one-way trips from each of the three, excuse me, from Brainard and Baxter and roundtrip
fairs that originated in Brainer and Baxter. Additional information talked a little bit about there was a drop off when PA productive alternatives late 25 that delta was made up with other uh travelers which is was of was of note.
Um again this is just like additional information. Um they got some data on groceries. They wanted to get trips to Walmart, Super One Brainard and Super 1 Baxter. Um so that's been captured. The last little bit is um MDOT. Uh so Mandot
we are the grant recipient for this for this program. City of Briner that is as the grant recipient um MIDOT's position is as a grant recipient we have the authority to set fairs in the service area. Um the council did sign a a joint
agreement with the city of Baxter in the summer of 20 that essentially gave that authority to Baxter to set fairs for Baxter. um that the current agreement that we have with the city of Baxter expires on June 30th
of 27 next year. So just a little less than a year from now. And there also is a in the severability clause, we have to give either entity has to give 180 days notice if they want to um remove themselves from that contract. Joe, if I said anything wrong, please correct me.
A lot of data here. Um and uh staff just wants to hear from this was this data was requested by council. So we just want to hear from council if there's anything else you want us to do with this data. If there's any other actions you want us to take we will certainly comply. >> Thank you Mr. Broyals. Anybody have
questions for staff at this point. Mr. Chaz, >> I don't necessarily have questions. I did want to inform a couple of things the council. Um uh the bus used to just pick up Briner and Baxter before I think 2001 when Crowing County got their buses
and it was all one service but we set operated them essentially separately. Um there was never any agreement then uh until we had a county um bus and then because of that we had the shared services agreement. So everybody was we
looked at numbers we said okay what's your wrership all those things were looked at we said okay we got to have money from Baxter we have money from Crowing County for the local share when you buy a bus it costs so many dollars there's a local match of I think 15 or
20% and that was split now we have it I believe 18% for Baxter to cover their local share um the the issue is uh they they get their fair box revenue and they're fully able to use that money to
cover their local share. They've kept their dollars or writership fairs uh their fairs significantly higher and and if these fairs were brought down to what Brainer is, it would help a lot of different things on efficiency uh
difficulty understanding why is it so much more. It used to be Brainard would pick up, you pick up in Brainard, if you're going to Baxter, you'd pay double. Uh that that is no longer. We did make adjustments over the years as
we know, but as it's gotten to the point we are now, it would just make sense to have the fairs the same for same day pickup or advanced call-in like Brandon has three days advanced call-in. That's anytime a day before or longer, and then the same day it's $5. There's our seven
and 11. And u people are rejecting service because of that. Excuse me. And what I would like to see us do is just say, "Okay, let's remove the shared services agreement." And then they don't have to worry about collecting fairs, uh
what what their dollar amount would be as a local share. Because we did this for years. It was never any problem. We never levied taxpayers to cover the cost of the local share. We would still keep county because with a shared services agreement because it's a different
animal. It's far more expensive to operate the bus outside of the city limits of Baxter and Brainer than it is inside. So if we were to move forward and Baxter has not accepted our offer to go and speak to them, I believe this has
never been before their city council. Uh I'm confident of that and uh that's that's a little bit of a I I don't know why that is. We've asked back in October our staff to go out there and they have not put us on their agenda. Um if we could I would like to see if we wouldn't
be able to just ask uh Nick to make a phone call, see if this proposal that I'm suggesting if that would be something they would just say, "Okay, we don't have a shared services agreement. The bus is going to come here and pick our people up and bring them wherever they want." just like it used to be back
in the good old days. And uh I I've talked to transit coordinator uh Gothier and she seems to think that's would be something that would fit in the scheme of things very well to where we don't have difficulties for people wondering why it's so much all those things I
mentioned earlier. Um it's a reasonable ask. They there's no penalty. There's no cost to Baxter now. There wouldn't be if we changed this any levy. If we saw if we ever saw that our revenues were suffering, we can always raise the fairs
to cover what we might anticipate being a cost to the taxpayers. So that's why the tracking system we have now is awesome with the computerized um dispatching we have. That's why they were able to do so much of this stuff.
And it is a fantastic report. And what Nick mentioned about PA, if you could take a look at that page, um, that tab. In November of last year, the wrership of productive alterners dropped off by almost 90%.
At least 80. And uh the next month it picked up again, but their their their passengers stayed the overall ridership stayed the same the following month or kept kept went right back on track. So what that tells you is the wrership that
was riding in the AM hours and the early afternoon was collectively gathered up from other people that weren't riding on the subscription ridership. So there were riders out there wanting to use the bus, not didn't have the availability because it was so
filled up with the group home residents at that time. So that that's that's a phenomenal stat. That really is because when they said they're going to cut almost 75% of their riders and they're 20% of our ridership total, we didn't
take a hit. A month later we're right back in business. So if you think about what that means, that's a really big big deal. Anyway, um I wanted to focus on that specifically for that to show that people are wanting to ride and uh we can
do better. Lowering the fairs would be a better for ridership. That's what this is all about. The more riders that ride the bus, the more revenue you get and uh the more efficient you are and keeping the fairs where they're at in Baxter, it
just doesn't uh equate to having more writership. So, I would entertain any questions on my proposal. I I I' I'd be hesitant to make a motion without everybody understanding it. And I would certainly ask Joe to look at the shared
services agreement we currently have. Like Nick mentioned, it's 180 days to uh for both party for one party to get out of it. And that's just too long. We've sat on this since at least October. >> Okay. >> All right. Thank you, Mr. Chzac. Mr. Beans.
>> Thank you, Mr. Chair. I I certainly intrigues me what Mr. Chzik suggests. Sounds interesting. My question is we have a transportation advisory committee. Has this gone through them yet? Do they have a recommendation? I mean, that's kind of what they're for, >> right, Mr. Trezach? Has that gone
through? >> This has not specifically gone through, but we have discussed, you know, so this item we actually have that came back that was never gone through transit. And and the point Mr. Mr. Be may it is an advisory committee. So we haven't been
meeting very much at all. I don't think we met since last fall >> and there's been an issue with that um proposal to have an in-house operation and that's been pushed back as I think most of us understand. It was supposed to come back in March or April and it hasn't and and I'm not pushing that
either here. That's has nothing to do with what we're talking about. So >> okay Mr. Beavens >> I it just seems like it should. >> Right. Okay. >> Mhm. Is there a problem getting a quorum with the transportation advisory committee? >> I couldn't I don't think so. >> Okay.
>> So, we could >> that would that would be my recommendation since we have the time the 180 days. >> We have we have that or we or we could reach out and see if we could get out of the agreement. We could do either one >> or wait until next June. But either way, it'd be nice to hear what the what the
people who have been charged with making that advice have to say. That would be my recommendation. Agreed. Any more discussion, Mr. Bedau? >> Yeah. So, two things. One, I really want to thank staff for this report. This is a great report. There's a lot of data in there that I think is really important
that tells us a little bit more about our usage and who's who's going where, where we're picking up, where they're going. I think that's all good stuff that we need to have. Uh, two, you see that the 30 hours of staff time. I really want to thank everyone involved with that cuz I'm
going through this thing. I was like, "Yeah, that that seems like 30 hours worth of work. There's a lot of data there." But I will say that in my conversations that I've had with a couple uh members of the Baxter Council, um their concern with it was just making sure that the Baxter taxpayers are not
being hit at some point to pay for something. That's the big concern with this. So, I think from Brainer's standpoint of going after this and to take a look at it to see what the data says and come up with the information so we can then bring it forward to them, I think is a very sound method to go forward with. But I do agree with Kelly
that if we have committees, we should send it to the committee and at least get them to take a look at it as well so we can get their voice on it because those people are uh hyper fixated on the those specific issues. So >> very good. Any more discussion?
>> Um may I? >> Yep. Nobody else is raising their hand. >> Okay. Sorry. I I I guess transit I I've been on there since 1996 and I I can't speak for the transit committee. Um we have talked about
Baxter fairs. Uh there was no objection to us moving forward back in October to um have our staff go meet with Baxter and uh I I guess I I'm not opposed to that. I would I I'm a little hesitant to
maybe not initiating the 180day um shared services agreements. Uh what do you call the uh what's the clause called? We separation I believe it's called. Um we're just we're just
waiting and waiting when we've waited since October and we haven't I don't believe had a meeting since October transit. So again, I I think we could round a meeting up. I that would be um I guess our we wait till the 27th when our
community services director comes on board and then we're another month down the road. Um this has been waiting too long. >> I have a motion when you're ready. >> Okay. Yep. Looking for a motion to tag. Okay. Mr. Beaven has a motion to send this to transportation advisory
committee. Second by Johnson. >> Any discussion on that motion? See none. Let's go to a vote. All those in favor say I. I. Against. Same sign. That motion carries. All right. Moving on to 9C. It's a funding request. The
YMCA. I believe this is uh Mr. Chzox's item. >> Yeah. Um I just want a clarification for something I heard and uh the agenda request is not quite what I asked for. I don't know how the confusion came in
because um a little history on this. I heard the staff was working with the YMCA and a business plan at the June 15th meeting. And I called Nick on the 23rd of June. And he said he sent an email on the 16th, the very next day
after our meeting, and asked him if they have any thoughts on what was discussed, if they had listened to the council meeting. And as of the 23rd, he had not heard back. And then on 29th when I made this agenda request, he had still not heard back. And what was troubling for
me is uh we made a statement here, a declarative statement that staff was working with the YMCA on a business plan. And uh I knew nothing about it. I said it the night of that meeting. Nick hadn't heard nothing. So is staff working with the YMCA on a business
plan? That's my question. I just want clarification. >> Don't answer that, Mr. Broyals? >> No, we are not. Have Have you ever? >> No. >> Okay. So, I don't know where that came from. I It's very, I guess, disappointing to say the least that we're saying things that have no validity. And uh I I don't have a
problem if staff's working with the uh YMCA. That's one of the things we decided as a council to move forward on. Uh now we see this letter that came in. It's kind of like we're reacting to what the YMCA wants uh instead of doing what
we want to do. That's happened on the 8th. They sent a letter for our 15th meeting after our June 1st action. Now, after our June 15th meeting, they finally sent a letter at the last 11th hour on the day of our packet coming out last Thursday. So, I I'm just
disappointed that it just seems like the we don't know what they're doing. They they they seem to be following what we're doing, but it comes in at the last second. And and I again, if we're if we're going to follow what they want to do here, they're saying they want to pause the request. So,
um, if I got clarification and asked for that, I got it. There is no business plan being worked on by the staff of city of Brainard with the YMCA. That's why I had this on the agenda. >> Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chzach. Any more discussion on this item? Not looking for
a motion on this. So, if not, we will move on. Next up, we have 9D. This is another discussion item on Anbec Street storm water. Uh, and this was brought up by Mr. Bevans. So, I'll hand it over to you, Mr. Beaven.
>> Thank you, Mr. Chair. I had received a request from Mr. Bleg on Anabc Street about a new proposal that he had regarding the the pond, the ponding or the storm water that's gathering in his backyard
that we've already voted on. >> And he had some new information that he thought should come to the council. I said I can help. It's on the agenda. Since then on the
3, there was a email that I asked Tony, which you all got to to see that came in late on Thursday after the agenda was put together between Mr. Sandy and and I really want to thank Paul for
all the effort that he put into that email. There was a lot of information in that regarding this and Mr. Bowling then requested to be removed. So, Mr. Bowling's here. I don't know if there's new information or not, but that's why I asked to have it on the agenda so we
could hear the new information. >> Yeah. And I was a part of that email chain. >> Yeah, you were. I want >> I saw the um explanation from Mr. Sandy. It was impressively detailed. So, thank you for that, Paul. Um, it was basically a a discussion that we had through email
and it was already on the agenda at the time. >> Yeah, the agenda goes out at noon and that didn't come out until late in the afternoon. So, it's still on there. I don't know if you want to if Mr. Bolig, who was here, has more information or not.
>> Okay. Mr. Bolig, if you'd like to, I mean, if you can keep it short, if you want to come up, I I'll let you. But, uh, your email did say you didn't really want to anymore. >> Just a couple of questions. >> Okay. Would they be more towards city council or staff?
>> Both. >> Okay. I don't know if I'm going to have an answer for you, but if you want to ask your questions and we maybe we can have staff get back to you. Go ahead. >> Yeah. Go ahead. >> Can I ask a question real quick about the agenda? >> Um, Kelly um said that something came in
late. I have two emails chains here in my packet. Those are what you're talking about, aren't they? >> This would have been one from Tony G. I asked Tony and she sent it out. It came out what time, Tony? About noon today. >> Yeah, I got that one. But in our in our packet, there is two email exchanges.
>> Correct. Okay. >> Yeah. >> Those are not them. This is the one that came from Tony. >> Thank you, >> Mr. Bully. Go ahead. >> You want my name? Danny Bullig1 Anc Street. >> Thank you. We've uh various discussions and I appreciate all
the work every staff has done, everything's done. But the question I have where do we go from here? Uh this is a problem that city created by the uh where the storm water is getting presented. We've looked at a
number of options. Uh, in this email exchange that Kelly's talking about was it was mentioned that I said no to the options. And the reason why I said no to the options, two of the options included in expanding the the size of the existing
uh pond and it was never designed to be a pond. It was a filtration and you can go to the county and and uh get that information. So we've we've gone from a temporary uh temporary situation which was in the
plat noted as temporary to now discussing a permanent uh without any homeowners uh authorization chance. It was just done. So this is a our feelings are that this
is a problem that city created. I've tried to come forward and give numerous options. Uh some of them are probably more expensive than staff want staff or see who wants to pay for it. But this is a a problem that the city created. Where do
we go from here is the only question. I mean down the line. Where do we go? That's I don't know what kind of discussion you you know you want or but >> I guess the best answer I have for you
right now as we sit here is uh Mr. Sandy has a plan to have our staff along with some of the county staff to get in there clean up some of the stuff. >> I've talked to Paul about that and I >> try to get something. >> That cleanup is supposed to be an ongoing ongoing uh event that's happened
two times in the past and I appreciate any cleanup that you know happens out there but it still doesn't address the problem. Right. It's it's a problem and it's there. We did the study. I don't know how to give you an answer tonight, Denny, but um you know, maybe when staff gets in there, they find some more
information and we'll go from there. So, >> appreciate it. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> All right. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Thank you. Next up, we have uh 9E. This is the final reading of ordinance 604, special events, and I believe this is
community development director James Cranic. Take it away. >> Thank you, Mr. President. Uh, so the ordinance codifies the requirement that organizers of special events on city property must apply for and possess a special event permit in order to hold their event. Uh, those in violation would be subject to a misdemeanor after
receiving a warning from the police department. Uh, staff did draft a special event policy for the parkboard which was reviewed at the last meeting. Uh, the park board was generally in favor of the language. It is attached to the city council agenda. City Council could provide comments or recommendations to the park board prior
to their final consideration at the next meeting. Uh SBW will be also reviewing a policy for events with street closures at a future meeting. So with that, staff recommends to hold a public hearing. Motion conduct the final reading of proposed Ordinance 1604 and dispense
with the actual reading. Motion to adopt ordinance4. Motion to approve resolution approving summary publication of ordinance 1604. And then optional, review the park special event policy and provide comments or recommendations to the park board and I can answer any questions.
>> Thank you, Mr. Kramvic. Anybody have questions? All right, I don't see any questions. Um, next up, we are just going to hold the public hearing then. So, I will open public hearing is 8:36. If you're here to speak on this item, please come
forward. If you're online, press star three. Doesn't look like we have anybody in here. Anybody online, Max? Oh, Mr. Bedell. >> Dave Bedell, executive director of Briner Community Action, 321 South 7th Street. Uh, Brandon Community Action would just like to thank the city for
taking a look at this as a group that uh often holds events in the city. Uh, it's just good to have clarification and a policy that we can look at so that we know what we have to do in order to get the events in place and what our requirements are to hold those. So, I just want to say that we are in support
of this and that uh it uh going through the park board and all the recommendations that they had as well looks good from our standpoint in terms of an organization that utilizes it often. >> Very good. >> Thank you, Mr. >> Public Office.
>> Yeah, he's a good speaker. >> If there's anybody online, you say no, Max. All right, I'll ask again. If you're here to speak on this, please come forward or press star three. With that, we will close the public hearing as 8:37.
Move >> to conduct the final reading of ordinance604 and dispense with the actual reading. >> Second. >> All right. Motion by Bevans, second by Stunic. Any discussion on that motion? Seeing none, let's go to a vote. All
those in favor say I. I. Again, same sign. >> That motion carries. Next >> motion to adopt ordinance4. >> Second. >> Motion by Bevans, second by Stunnick. Any discussion? >> Tony, please call the RO. >> Johnson, >> yes. >> Dunick,
>> yes. >> Jagger, >> yes. >> Erikson, >> yes. >> Evans, >> yes. >> Chzuk, >> yes. >> OD, >> yes. >> Motion to approve the resolution approving summary publication of ordinance 1604. >> Second. >> Motion by Bevon, second by Stunic. Any
discussion? >> Seeing none, Tony, please call the role. >> Johnson, >> yes. >> Stunic, >> yes. >> Jagger, >> yes. >> Ericson, >> yes. >> Beven, yes. >> Chzac, >> yes. OD. >> Yes. The motion carries. >> Is this next one a motion as well?
>> Review the park special event policy and provide comments or a recommendation to the park board. Do you guys want to provide a recommendation to the park board? Does anybody want to try a motion on that? >> Isn't it their wheelhouse?
>> It is in the parks. >> Okay. Yeah, I mean if if I would I would say if we want to have a comment to the park board if they have any issue with this or if if they want anything similar or changed or if they see any problems they should certainly reach out.
>> Mr. President, >> Mr. President, >> um hasn't this all just been approved? >> Yes. >> And so what would be the need to go to the park board? I'm not >> to undo everything we're doing right now. So >> the policy Mr. Kravik.
>> Yep. So, I can answer that. So, I wasn't at the last park board meeting. I was out of town on vacation. Um, I don't believe they actually made a formal motion to adopt it. Um, they reviewed the language and were generally in favor of of it. And I believe uh it was made aware to them that was going to be
considered um at the next city council meeting. So, it's just an opportunity to provide comments if there was any issues from city council. And you know, typically when I when I draft an ordinance or policy, um we bring it kind of as a draft um for the first meeting and then the second meeting is when they adopt it. Gives them a chance to to
really review it and make sure they're comfortable with the language. >> Okay. Thank you, James. >> Yeah, Mr. Chair, I was there. Uh there was some dialogue regarding this, but I think they uh the I think I can summarize for the park that they knew fully well that this was going to be coming through and taking the next steps. >> All right. I don't think we really need
a motion on this part of the item. I don't move on. >> Okay. Very good. Next up, we have 9F. This is final reading for ordinance 1605, the airport agreement. Uh, and this is Mr. Broyals. >> Thank you, Mr. President. Again, this is the second reading. Um, so city staff
have been working with county staff, both liaison, Commissioner Barrows and Councilman Joerger to develop an amended agreement to the for the airport. This uh document has been approved by both the county attorney and the city attorney. Um, of note since the first reading, there is one change since the
first reading. Max, if you can go down to page four, please right there for delta, the part that's underlined. So, a question came from from one of the council members. Does
this address the quote unquote twice taxed issue that we've been talking about on and off again for quite some time? So, we added the language that you see underlined there. Um, and we vetted again through Commissioner Barrows, Council Member, Councilman Joerger, and
both attorneys and both finance managers and both administrators, and they will agree with this. So, what our recommendation is as a staff is to conduct a public hearing, conduct the final reading with that change, and dispense with the actual reading, a motion to adopt the ordinance, and adopt the resolution for summary publication.
Very good. Thank you, Mr. Broyals. Questions for staff? Not. We're looking for a motion to conduct. Oh, we're just going to conduct the public hearing. Okay. Right ahead. Open the public hearing. It's 8:42. There's anybody here that would like to address council on this item, please
come forward. If you're online, press star three. Again, if you're here to address council on this, please come forward. Or if you're online, press star three. We're seeing nobody. We will close public hearing. Uh,
>> Mr. Chair, sorry. Oh. Do we have somebody? >> I saw Kelly raise his hand. >> Oh, well I >> I would defer to the airport liaison who's going to make a motion if he's going to talk for 20 minutes. >> Sure. >> I'll make a motion to conduct the final reading on ordinance 165 and dispense
with the actual reading. I so move. >> Second. >> Motion by Jagger, second by >> Stunick. >> Any discussion on that motion? >> Seeing none. Let's go to a vote. >> All those in favor say I. >> I. I again same sign. That motion
carries. Next, we're looking for a motion to adopt ordinance 1605. >> So move Jagger. >> Second by Jagger. Second by Bevans. >> Any discussion on that motion? >> Tony, please call the RO. >> Johnson, yes. >> Stunic, yes. >> Jagger, >> yes. >> Ericson, >> yes. >> Beans, yes.
>> Chzach, >> yes. >> O, yes. Next, we're looking for a motion to adopt a resolution providing for a summary. >> So move Jagger. Sorry. Second. >> All right. Motion by Jagger, second by Stunic. Any discussion? See none. Go to a vote. All those in
favor say I. >> Mr. President. >> Resolution. >> Oh, resolution. Go ahead. Tony >> Johnson. Yes. >> Stun. >> Yes. >> Jagger. Yes. >> Erikson. >> Yes. >> Evans. Chzach. >> Yes. >> OD. >> Yes. >> Those motions carry. >> Moving on from unfinished business into
new business. >> 10A. We have a first reading of ordinance6, the floodplane ordinance. And again, this is community development director James Cranic. >> Thank you, Mr. President. Uh so the flood plane ordinance regulates development in flood flood hazard areas of Brainer. The language is based on
state statute and cannot be changed. Uh Brainer does not have a significant flood plane area with development other than the high school fields, Kowanis and Rotary Park. Uh planning commission unanimously recommend approval of the ordinance as presented. DNR conditional approval letter is attached to the agenda item. Uh so with that, staff
recommends a motion to conduct the first reading of proposed ordinance 606 and dispense with the actual reading. >> Thank you, Mr. Gravick. Does anybody have questions? Seeing none, we're looking for a motion to conduct the first reading of proposed ordinance 1606 and dispense with the
actual reading. >> Move to approve. >> By Ericson, 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.
Moving on to 10B. This is a discussion on council committee structure. This was brought by council member Chzach. Mr. Chzach. >> Yes. Thank you, Mr. President. Um, so we've been operating for eternity with our two council committees prior to the
council meeting as everyone knows and um there are a number of times where we have one item or two or more in a committee and we get back here and there's lots of more a lot more discussion and it it's redundant. Um,
I've heard that tonight already where we've talked in committee and then it's repeated again here. We've have staff time involved. Uh, for the public's concern, um, if there was anything starting at the PNF meeting tonight at 7:15 of your two items and you were here, I know we finished a little earlier, but they they lap. They
overlap. So, you can't be in two places at once. And I was um hoping that we would consider if nothing else a workshop to have further discussion or just put it to bed or have a consideration uh to come up with a
different um idea, a different uh a different structure. We could still have committee chairs when needed. There are times when we might want to have more robust discussion or uh information given out to a committee. And um we the only thing that would change is uh we say we have everything at a council
meeting. Instead of having our committees, we say we meet at 6:30 or 7 instead of uh what we currently do now. It can randomly go from 7:15 back to 6:30 sometimes 6:45. And so it there I think the whole point of this is why are
we doing it this way? Is it because we've always done it this way? because there's been some issues raised about the lateness we start our council meetings. Um we could again start earlier. Everything's on the agenda. We just have a discussion. We voted up or
down just like we do anyway. We don't have to have reports. And that was just my thought to see what the council's thoughts were on that idea. I know it's been brought up before in 2023 at a workshop we had. It was mentioned and there was some push back because it seemed like it would take too much time.
>> That was some of the comments that were made. Yeah. >> And I I think if you really stop and consider, is it really going to take more time doing it differently or continue doing it the way we are? >> Okay. >> That's where I'm at. >> Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chzac. Does anybody
else want to chime in on this? >> Mr. Beavens, >> as as the ancient mariner of the council, um I I certainly have no problem and support Mr. Ch. You know, you always got to look at the way we do things and see if there's a better way
to do them in the I, you know, I always hate to say this because I've been here for 24 years, but the whole reasoning behind it was to give it wasn't for staff and it wasn't for the council. It was for the citizens, right? It was to
give them an opportunity to speak before a smaller, less formal group. and and at the time when I came on the council they were non- televised so there was much less pressure on the citizens nerves
>> and that was the whole purpose I mean that wasn't the whole purpose it was the primary purpose was to just give citizens a chance to speak >> about their issues remember we we also had lines of people coming in for parking tickets and it was
>> issues like that that were that were dispensed with much easier much less formally in the committee. So, and all planning and zoning issues, fence issues, all the things that that that come up that really impact our citizens.
Doesn't mean we Mr. Chess isn't right. There might be a way we could we could do it better, but I'm just saying I'm just explaining answering Jeff's question as to why to my knowledge we do it this way. >> Very good. Thank you, Mr. Beaven. I I have no idea or no nothing against
changes, nothing against having the discussion. I don't know it any other way. The way that we've been doing it is what I've been used to for, you know, coming up on six years, I think. So, um but if if we want to have that discussion, I'm going to leave that up to you guys to if you want to make a
motion for that. Um, I can see us doing it without the smaller committees and just having the two chairs essentially run that part of the meeting. Uh, those items be taken over by the chairs as we go through what
would other otherwise be in their committee. I'd be fine with that. Would it be taking longer? Would it be shorter? I I don't know. We'd have to do it to find out, I guess. But we'd certainly have to start a little earlier. Yeah. It's up to you guys if you want to have a workshop.
>> I know everybody loves going to workshops in the middle of summer. >> What do we really need a workshop? Can we just put this on the agenda next time and pound it out, make a decision? >> Okay, I'm fine with that. >> I I missed your what you said exactly. >> Well, I was just saying I just for me, I don't need a workshop. I just need a
couple staff to present a couple options and make a decision >> instead of having an extra meeting. I move that we have staff come back with a couple of options what they would like to see um based on some of our comments maybe they have some ideas and uh come back at our next meeting
>> second motion by Chzach second by Jagger any discussion seeing none let's go to a vote all those in favor say I >> against same sign >> that motion carries >> appreciate it everybody >> next we have staff reports
>> Tony Gage here. >> Chief Holmes, >> Chief Rundy, >> Max Hen, >> anything to add to your report, Jennifer? >> Nothing. >> Jennifer Tu, >> anything from the dispatch today?
>> All right, Connie Hillman. >> James Cranic. >> Yes. Thank you, Mr. President. Couple items. >> There we go. >> Planning Commission will be reviewing a draft draft ordinance, the comp plan update at uh next Wednesday at 5:00 PM before the regular meeting. City Council is invited to the meeting if they'd like
to um see some of the updates to that and it will be noticed that the quorum may be present. Um also at the regular meeting uh the planning commission will be reviewing a preliminary plat and PUB uh for the Brainer Oaks development from Level Contracting. Uh potentially 10 uh
duplexes would be a part of that development. >> Very good. Thank you, Mr. Cranic. Mr. Langel, >> Britney come >> Paul Sandy. >> Thank you, Mr. President. The only thing I want to add to my report is uh per the council's request, I added um a lot of
project information into my reports and um any pending change orders that the council might be seeing in the near future um at different levels of status, I'll call it, you know, negotiation phase, that kind of thing. So, um if you have any questions about my report, just reach out.
>> Thank you very much, Mr. Sandy. Anybody online? We have Eric Sharper. >> Nothing this evening. >> Thanks, Eric. >> Mr. Royals. >> I am very excited. If uh all goes well, we will be fully staffed in our senior
staff positions before the month is out. So, that is great news. Uh thank you, council, for being supportive of staff. >> Very good. Thank you. And next up, we have the honorable Mayor Bedau. >> Oh, never gets old hearing that honorable.
What a what an honorable gentleman. Uh first of all, you called Teresa the press, the dispatch. No, she is treasure hunter champion. Treasure hunter finder. Treasure the the winner of >> treasure hunting.
>> National treasure. >> National treasure. I will say this though. I think we almost broke some friendships. Dispatch included. Uh we learned two weeks is too long for a treasure hunt. So remind me of that in the future.
Also, when I said that only 10% of people would finish, I was right. But I didn't think about the fact that that means 90% of people will not finish the treasure hunt. Uh my math was a little skewed from the start. Uh fantastic Fourth of July events. Congratulations
to the dispatch and winning. Uh firefighters were in second place by about 15 minutes and they got called out on an emergency in the last hour. So it was unfair. The emergency was valid. >> Uh, yes, the emergency was valid.
>> Dispatch valid. >> The emergency was valid. I will not say whether or not members of the public were making comments about those things happening along the way. I said, "You can't say those things to the mayor. That's a bad idea. Don't tell me your plans. Something does happen." But anyways, it was a really good time. I want to
appreciate everybody that participated in that. Way too long of a process. But, uh, congratulations to downtown for having a good time during that. Uh, I want to say thank you to our staff for the 4th of July. It went fantastic as always. Uh, fire chief homes and and our
um emergency planning goes very very smoothly. Fire or the police department first year with the new changeoo of the of the management of that team and it went fantastic as well. Thank you to the school district for all their work, but also thank you to the streets department
and all the work that they do. Um, it went very very well and it went very smoothly which is what we can hope for. So, uh, and I don't know if you guys saw or not, but we blew up the sky. We blew up the sky pretty big. So, that was a lot of fun. So, thank you to everybody involved with that. And then you already
heard me say it once, but I'm going to say it again. Police versus firefighter. Uh, little switcheroo this year. I think we're going to combine the teams. I think we're going to I'm telling these guys for the first time. I think we're going to do a draft. I think we're Yo, the police is shaking their head. No,
cuz he's >> I police are going to be the fire department this year. So, we win. >> Yeah. We're just going to switch shirts. We're just going to switch shirts. >> I No, no. You're going to be doing the picking. >> You get to be the captain. You get to be the captain. I think we're going to pick teams this year. >> Date and time.
>> Shake things out. Date and time. It is Thursday, July 23rd. Mill Stadium, 6:00 p. p.m. start time. Gates open at 5 hopefully. Um, should be a lot of fun. We're trying to come up with some fun ideas of how we can keep it festive and keep things moving. But uh yeah, I this
the first time I'm telling you live on air that we're we're doing old switcheroo. Listen, >> you got an umpire? >> I we've got a couple umpires, but last year we had a surprise umpire and we might make a surprise might make a surprise appearance again. >> If anybody's getting too far ahead, could we put some council members to
slow them down? >> I think it's a good idea. >> I think it's a great idea. >> Speed bumps. >> Speed speed bumps out there. But that should be a lot of fun and and it's a great partnership with uh the parks department. So, we're really excited for that once again. So, thank you to everybody and and once again, just thank
you to the public for uh the 4th of July. Uh that can be a a stressful time for a lot of people that are involved in things and uh it went really really smooth and people are very polite. I will say this, most people, 90% of
people love to pick up their trash. 10% of people like to just leave everything where it is. >> Those 10% of people, I want to shake my hand at you and go, I'm the one picking it up. I'm the guy picking up the trash. So, please, the 10%, just pick up your
trash. >> Now that they know, you think it's going to get better. >> Probably worse. But to the 90% of people out there that just do a great job and and and celebrate, uh, thank you. And to all the families out there, cuz that's really what it's all about. Um, I hope you had a wonderful fourth. I hope you had a great time hanging out with your
family. and uh we hope to continue to do so for many many years. So, end of report. >> Very good. Thank you, Mayor Baux. Uh let's start with Councilman Chzach. >> Yes, sir. Thank you, Mr. President. I have nothing but thanks for everybody for their cooperation tonight.
>> Thank you, Mr. Chzach. Mr. Studik, >> I have nothing. The mayor said it all. >> All right. Excellent. Mr. Jagger. >> Yeah. Real quick, uh le uh my first leazison role is the park board. I just want to let you know we the park board created the a PMT project uh management for the skate park that consists of JD
Burns, John Miller, uh Jake Renker, and James Cranvic. They'll be working as kind of a little private team to kind of help streamline the process. And then my uh second hat at the airport, the airport report, um you'll be happy to know July 6th, we approved our budget
for 2027 through 2031. I'll be presenting that next week to you guys or at the next uh meeting to you guys. So, uh, kudos to those guys and also again big thank you to everyone that worked on 1605. Much appreciated. That's all >> you did. >> Thank you, Mr. Jagger. >> Mr. Beavens,
>> just a special thanks to Community Action Golly from uh, Arts in the Park. I went to the parade. I The band was fantastic. And those fireworks, my my ears are still ringing. It was absolutely >> good. They were good. >> Awesome. >> Made quite a few kids cry.
>> Oh, yeah. Made me cry. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Evans, Chairman Ericson, >> uh, nothing further. >> Chairman Johnson, >> nothing to add. >> All right. I'll just say uh, thank you to Community Action as well and Mayor Bedau for running a great Fourth of July. Again, it was a lot of fun. I know
you put a lot of effort into uh, the arts in the park, too. I wasn't able to be there, but I heard it was great. Um, one more thing. The last couple weeks before the 4th of July, I know staff put in a lot of extra effort making the boulevards and the parks and everything look great and I was able to drive all
over the city in the days before and on the 4th of July everything looked amazing. So that's what we need and we appreciate you and thank you for doing what you do. With that looking forward >> so move adjourn. >> Motion by Stunic, second by Bevans. All those in favor say I.
>> I. Journ.