all right it is Monday April 7th at 6:45 We'll call to order the City of Brainard personnel and finance committee meeting And we'll start with introductions Kelly Beans uh city council Nick Broyle city administrator Connie Hillman finance director Chris Schubert
HR director Kevin Stony Goldman at large Teresa Burke Brainer Dispatch Jesse Dean city engineer Jeff Jeff Chznac city council James Brown community development director May Olen Wise Eagle Insurance and Gabe Johnson chair of the
committee We have nine items We're going to switch a couple around real quick here And what is listed as item number five we are going to move up to the top of the agenda The rest of the order will stay in place So that brings us to the accept the resignation of public utilities director Christopher Evans and
discuss interim position Chris on March 24th public utilities director Chris Evans submitted his resignation letter and his last working day was last Friday April 4th In your packet is email correspondence from council member Chzac regarding this matter Um some aside note
staff have contacted GMP consultants to discuss its guarantee that GMP would conduct one additional public utilities director recruitment for the cost of the expenses only GMP typically requires that the city would request reimbur or recruitment assistance within six months
of Mr Evans departure In addition um with his resignation we would ask to have an intro public utilities director and that position would need to be appointed while this position is vacant We do not have a formal policy regarding the selection or compensation for an
interimm position is as that is typically accomplished via an employment agreement So we'll need to discuss if there's options for that as well Staff's recommended actions are a motion to accept the resignation of Mr Evans effective April 4th approve the
appointment of an interim public utilities director and third to authorize staff to work with GMP consultants to hire a full-time public utilities director I shall move Second We have a motion and a second I guess
I'll allow it but that that doesn't address the appointment of the interim public utility director or when we start working with GMP consultants I thought you were just referring to item one Just item one We have a motion a second to accept the resignation All in favor say
I I Oppos Same sign And next up we need to talk about whether we appoint an interim public utilities director right now or if we don't need to or how do we move forward i I I can You're looking at me I I I'll
answer I don't I think we do need an interim but I don't think we need one today I think we've got great employees out there I think they can do they can operate the public utilities for a time I don't think that's the right way to do it but I I really think
we Well I think we've got a lot of other questions to answer We're talking about integration of finance We're talking about integration and expanding public works We're talking about all kinds of stuff I think it would be best to answer
those questions before we get to number three So an interim probably makes the most sense I I I but I have no absolutely no idea I mean outside of our eternal interim every guy Patrick Waso
and I understand he's been discussed Well he's planning a wedding now Yeah I know I saw that Good for him He's doing what but you can We've had married guys before like you know I mean it's it's okay It does work I don't know who Mr Chair my
recommendation would be we look for an interim guy and hold off on number three until our until we know what we're doing as a as a whole team Is that a motion it is a motion I'll second that though Okay So we're holding off on appointing an
interim tonight Well unless unless there's unless we have somebody right well and I don't but I was I was going to say I think we should look for a contract type interim outside to come in to operate for 6 months to a year while we
answer the questions that you brought up We sure could Do we need to put a timet on the interim because the longer we go without an interim then why do we need one why do we need anything well that so do you want to put a timet on your motion well I'd start the process for
looking for an interim public utilities director now But I mean if somebody appointed within 30 days 45 days or that's what I'm going after I don't pardon me I mean do we want to put a timet say let's find an interim within 30 days or within 45 days
or what do you want to do or do we do we even need that i don't think we need that at this point That would be part of the interim com So we're just directing staff to find an interim public Okay I Yeah And in the meantime staff would be reporting to Mr Royals Yep That's part
of my motion Okay I agree with that So the division heads Is that what they're called yep Division managers would be would be reporting to which they kind of do anyway Yeah He's the head of the pyramid anyway So that Does that make sense that makes sense to
me I can repeat that upstairs Okay All in favor say I I Oppose Same sign That motion carries Okay That'll bring us back up to the top here and that is discuss proposed changes to the special assessment
policy Mike Jesse Jesse Thank you Mr Chair Uh so per the direction from the council we've tried to uh reflect the wishes of the council and put a draft together here with changes to the special assessment policy Uh so we've since now put a draft together that
splits the uh deferment sections into two sections hardship and then unemployed property section deferments Uh so just to kind of summarize the uh proposed changes in the two sections So the first one we'll go over is hardships Uh so we clarified that kind of our
typical practice is a 10-year um assessment period uh very similar to what we have for a current practice and the hardship So we would assess interest over a 10-year period for hardships Um this can be changed on a project by project basis if we want to but this is just for staff's guidance essentially
where we default to Um we wanted to get some thoughts from the council Um we removed the statement starting with after 10 years Um so right now after 10 years we don't
require folks to come back and reapply for the deferment It just essentially becomes permanently deferred in perpetuity until the property is sold Um I kind of want them to continue to return uh to continue to apply for those
deferments Um just in case circumstances may have changed after 10 years we don't necessarily get notifications Say somebody has a windfall in income and no longer applies for that after 10 years There's no
incentive for them to come back and tell us about that until again the property is sold We talk about that Um the only thing that uh comes in here uh is maybe an additional piece of this uh should we include language uh to
allow so an example would be after let's say 10 years somebody's been deferring for 10 years how the statute reads is let's say the the property is sold or for whatever reason
that entire 10 years becomes due at once Mhm Plus interest Plus interest The 10 years of interest Yes Whatever Whatever is No we changed the policy No the this is still 10 years of interest is all that would acrewue Y this is the policy
we're talking about So we want infinite interest I want infinite interest just like not for 30 years Just like I thought we were not doing that for financial hardships Oh correct Just just in the hardship section So we're just talking about financial hardships Let's say somebody is deferred for 10 years
they sell the property or let's say they they come into a windfall of money would we allow them to have an option to reertify and have a 10-year assessment again charge interest on the 10 years or is it that
10 years is due or should we address it on one by one as long as they meet the hardship guidelines each and every one of those 10 years right they have to you know what I'm saying because that's a application right and so we're saying to
continue to complete the application even after the 10 years to make sure that you qualify for the hardship So after 10 years let's say somebody had $10,000 of outstanding assessment Yeah After 10 years they no longer qualify to have it deferred It's due It it would become due
all at once $10,000 plus interest plus Well yeah Plus let's just say it's 10,000 for piece of math Would we allow them the option to reertify over the next 10 years not not on a hardship because they don't meet the guidelines anymore Okay So if they make $1 more
than meeting the guidelines they have to pay the $10,000 upfront Correct But we always allow an application to come to the council in that case a dollar we might the council may but they have to apply That would be something that we
can allow on a one by one basis You know we don't have this in the policy but you are welcome to ask the council to certify another 10 years That's right If their property is $1,000 over the minimum or their income is $100 over the minimum it's like well they're still
right there We can't expect them to have $10,000 right now So that's the hardship section Um the new section is the unimproved property So a lot of this language we took kind of out of right out of the statute Um one provision that
isn't um is in regards to splits So really a lot of this the language is in regards to splitting by plat Um but what we have seen especially on one of the beef for dam properties that we're going to be addressing here shortly um is if somebody splinters out a small piece
that doesn't necessarily qualify where they have to subdivide by plat uh we've changed the language in here that the deferred assessment becomes uh split to both
properties Now you can look at you can look at how this kind of triggers in two different ways Um so in the statute it's just by plat but here in this language we have it anytime that that property is split not just by plat the assessment
gets split um and becomes due and becomes due So here's where I'm looking kind of a little bit more for council direction too Is you can look at it two two different ways You can continue to defer like let's say they splinter off a
small piece So somebody can build a on 40 acres they sell two acres correct you can put the the two acres and assess the two acres and then defer the other 38 because it's unimproved 38 acres you know in the majority of let's say
$80,000 Or you can make that become due because the other way to look at it is they're starting to improve their property by splintering that off Um so you can look at it at two different ways Yeah What do you say Kelly i think they
should still be able to defer the 38 in that instance So when they split it off for development that percentage of the land is due is due at that time And they've got to split the parcel too The they have to split the the u you know
the legal description Okay Uh is there is there any guidance you'd like to give on I don't know we also might have to be addressed one by one To what point does does it like trigger all right now you
have become an improved once you're over 28 once you're over half developed just pay then it's triggered something like that I think half sounds a good starting point the other part that's missing Jesse which is going to prohibit me from supporting this this evening is there's
nothing in here as far as deferments on improved property which we have up and down Riverside Drive we've gone through this and those are the people that are the problems the the pursuit to partition and pursuant to council action
are both misleading because they both include Here's the first sentence The city does not construct municipal utilities outside of its corporate boundaries until such time as we know that's not true We've got them all We've got people outside of the city of
Bringard in the middle of Riverside Drive that aren't in the city and the sewer goes right by and they didn't have to annex because they're not in the city right so you need a section on and this is the most important one The one that's missing is deferments on improved properties We just had a guy to say the
sewer doesn't go past our only goes in the city of Brainard is a misnomer right you got to include the people who are outside the city of Brainard who just hook up like the guy did two years ago or the people who are
we you know we said we're not going to force you to annex but when your sewer fails or your septic system fails you have to hook up right crowing County is starting to cooperate with that Some of those people are already talking to us You need that section That's the
critical section because that's the point where we have to put a value on that amount based on per project based on comparable as to what somebody paid who was in the city of Brainard plus interest on the whole time because we
wanted to encourage them to sign up to come in this what we call the Sheieler gambit where we wanted them in the city of Brainard and we wanted them to hook up and we didn't want them to have to half price zone uh zoning but do you understand what's missing from this and
that really needs to be in there so I can I can clarify that why that's not necessarily in here So Riverside Riverside being a previous project we we're going to come back with another piece uh for just Riverside It's all the way out to the airport There's a lot of So those
previous projects we can address on a one by one basis for those previous projects for the policy here It's more for projects moving forward And for that part of it the policy as it's written now
currently doesn't have a provision How do I how do I frame this the way the policy is written now is for like an a utility extension project for for example the way it's written now is we don't really establish a connection charge anymore like it was you know 20
years ago for Riverside you would be annexed in and then your assessment would be be placed on your property or you would be deferred until such time that you would connect and we do have the provisions in our code but it might happen again east of town We've got hit
and miss stuff all up and down easy street and all that stuff that people are some people are in some people are not in So to say it going forward we're going to do it that way for the extensions Yeah it may not be You may that might be a pipe
dream cuz not everybody's going to want to do it and we're going to want to do it If half the people want it we're going to want to do another Riverside We may want to I shouldn't say we're gonna and that'll be up to the council This is just how this policy is written is if we
do an extension project I Mr I can live with this the way it is based on but we still have to fix right the other the third situation and and with the understanding that it will be our policy going forward as well
right not just on those projects to make it easier on future councils and James and I have talked a little bit about Riverside already and trying to come up with a plan to bring something to the council to at least address Riverside you know there's going to be more down
the pipeline of Waterland Park and right and so on and so forth but at least just to address Riverside to start with and then move forward Um so we've talked a little bit about this and then there's already an item on this agenda to address part of that um process but um
we just wanted to address at least this part of it with this policy to keep this for projects moving forward Um but for the other parts like Riverside we'll address those for like the annexation So as written here Jesse we're allowing the hardships to continue
to apply and then once they don't meet it they can come to the council and say "I you know plead their case." Why they're still real close If they want to spread it over another 10 years Yep And then on the unimproved how it's written here does that address the the two acres
off the 40 no So it will need to be changed Um okay to allow them to uh continue to defer the larger un may not be the large the un just say the unimproved portion There you go Cuz they
may take on the 40 acres they may take 30 and right and have a 10acre outlot and have a 10acre out So that would that part we would adjust What what did we say once 50% no No
Right So the 50% would take care of So you'd have to you can only defer on the 40 acre example you could only defer up to 19% Mhm Or I'm sorry 49% Yeah Then once you've hit 50 then once you hit 50 then it's then once you sell Yeah paying
for that 20th acre you're paying for all 40 And I'm glad you put in there that it's got to be paid what it's sold So that probably make me cry again Do you have a motion Kevin so move Kelly
Second All right We don't have all day Kelly So the motion and the second is to direct staff to go back to address when Yep unimproved part I think we could conceivably vote on that tonight We or do we have to do we only do this once is
this a one shot deal Jesse or does it It's policy It's a policy It's a policy This is up to you if you want to see it again or if you're okay with making the motion with the why we can't vote on I would vote on it to see Okay Well then let's make the motion is then to approve
the policy with the one change of addressing how larger unapproved parcels are divided and the hardship department They can apply a second that's already there That's included That's okay Good Yeah I'm good with that All in favor say I I post same sign That motion carries
Thank you Jesse Next up is a real quick review of the municipal cannabis dispensary proposals James Yes Thank Mr Chair So this is an agenda item for council to review the proposals for a municipal dispensary partnership Uh no action is needed Council elected to not
move forward with the licensing at this time for a municipal dispensary Uh the company submitting the proposals did indicate to staff that they are still interested in a potential future partnership Um however the terms and conditions may change So the council can review it There are some slight
differences between either one of them These have been the two groups that have probably approached the city the the most So right it looked like one was promising a 25% of revenue model and the other one was going to operate it at a fixed fee Y and give us 100% after
indicating that that uh part the 25% model may have issues with state statute and and laws So you know giving us time to see how other ones are operating you know may be beneficial legality wise for the city assuming they ever open the application process But there is some
money that can be made in these You are correct Yeah potentially potentially if people as long as people don't stop smoking pot I I haven't actually So any questions from
I don't think so Thanks James Thank you Okay Next up is insurance renewal county Yes So we have uh Nate Oland and Kelly Machi is online to discuss our uh 2025 26 renewal So I'll turn it over to them Thank you Connie Committee members
council members and staff Um let me just say that Weisenegger Engel is proud to represent the taxpayers and financial stewardship that you've entrusted with us for the city brings I'm a city resident that take it very seriously Um there's three factors that go into your insurance premium every year and I can
go deep as deep on this as you want but the first is the rates second is the exposure and the third is your claims experience League of Minnesota City's insurance trust is very healthy Uh they've actually got a rate decrease which is not common in today's uh property
casualty world So that's a good thing Um the exposure you guys have has gone up a little bit Building values have gone up You've seven more vehicles than last year You know the more you have the more you have to insure right that affects premium And the third is claims whether
they're from the public whether they're from employees whether they're vehicle accidents etc and your claims experience is very good I'd say above average but yet everybody still has some room for improvement until the the culture is zero So with that said overall there was
a budget forecast for insurance and it's very close to but not quite at budget Unfortunately the div the trust has dividends this year Uh after that I can go as deep as you want into in the details on this or um I'm here for you
all I have no questions I have no questions I just wanted to state that we did add coverage for the RFB signs for the October 21st council meeting Um and then our um Now I have questions Yeah Yes Are
we going to replace that RFB sign on Poke Street anytime soon i would have to ask Jesse on that Right Well but that one won't be covered under insurance because it was occurred before we had a coverage But yes the RFP signs will have a five signs have a $5,000 deductible I'm not sure the value of those They're
over Yeah Um the other thing to what do we have coverage for cyber security i know we went through training last year and I think we were able to get that back up to have an optional cyber Yes I want to give a shout out to Sean Strong and those of you involved in taking the training Sean did a nice job with that
That limit was increased from $250,000 to a half million dollars Uh the trust is looking at next year increasing limits uh but will also require some additional training in cyber security risk management to be eligible for higher limits because they're seeing
more claims That's our largest increase percentage is the cyber security Yes it is Yeah it's ours 50 What about these street performers you know no I'm serious We're going to consider that later on guys on guy's juggling with a monkey on
a unicycle falls over cracks his skull He's got a permit from the city of Brainard saying it's okay to juggle with a unicycle and a monkey And uh turns out he was We don't know if he was doing anything he shouldn't have but he didn't know how to do it He was terrible
Smelled like pot Oh wait That's legal Do we cover the monkey too well you know Councilman Beans it's a good question because anybody can sue anybody for anything these days Got it The league has defense for you is do we have insurance for that for street performers there's no street performer exclusion
and you do have event liability insurance Okay just simple Just don't allow it and we're not worried about it Well that may may be where we go Who knows that's an option We had enough performers downtown A very quick shout out to uh we work
with about 14 different cities and municipalities and the staff here is sets the bar uh whether it's what Connie does and Jesse does to keep track of the ongoing exposure changes with properties Nick and the culture he's creating with safety and risk management Mike Hamorst and what he's doing to review claims
that occur monthly Sean with it And I mean there's a lot to surround between the city and the public utilities and we just want to thank you for your cooperation and and really buying into that risk management culture And I give a shout out to Kelly She's wonderful You are one who worked with us too but I
work with Kelly more So let's give it to Kelly She's amazing She is Move to accept the renewal Second We have a motion in a second to accept the renewal Any other discussion all in favor say I I Oppose Same sign That motion carries
Any reason you guys see that we would need our insurance agents upstairs for the full council can't imagine You're free for the night Go watch basketball You're not free Yeah Don't fall down the steps Thank you Thank you Kelly Kelly you have to stay
though This Kelly's out of here Okay Next up is consider waving council approval for grant applications for the water treatment plant as requested by the wastewater treatment management board Thank you Mr Chair Uh as you
mentioned this as is a request This is coming before council at the at the request of this joint board This is a Briner Baxter board for water treatment Um basically um current policy is that any grant more than $5,000 um we need to notify the council and get
authority to uh apply for that grant And when we had this meeting the last most recent meeting with the wastewater treatment plant board um it was it was um pointed out that there may be instances coming up with the wastewater plant where we're going to have limited
notice for grant applications So the board is requesting council to consider an exemption to the grant policy as it relates to the wastewater treatment plan So I think the council is really only limited here by your imagination Number one you could make no changes with the
policy as is Number two you could have a carve out for the wastewater treatment plant and authorize staff to uh apply for those grants administratively Um option three as we talked to some of the other department heads um we could wave the dollar amount and we could just
bring things to council if they meet some criteria such as if the grant will create a new asset a park a vehicle equipment bridge etc if a required match is not included or cannot be absorbed into the budget things of that nature So really the C we're only limited by the council's imagination here Do you want
to carve out just a wastewater treatment plant do you want to make no changes or do you want it's all a cart You guys can approve whatever you want to approve If you want to have the staff administratively apply for grants I think in most cases if not all cases I can't think of a case where we apply for
a grant where we obligate any funds We can we are not obligated when we apply for a grant So most grants have a have a match component Many do Right But if but we apply and if we get accepted we could still not choose not to participate in the grant Right And then we look bad
Yeah Exactly So that's that's a risk But I like the idea of letting staff just administratively take care of it And like Nick said if we get it and we don't don't like it we don't have to date it It gives them the authority to do that Plus I would presume as part of that
though FYI us Correct If if if the if if the council goes the way that you're suggesting if a grant comes in um I would probably talk to the appropriate chair and say "Hey we got a grant here Do you have any issues we're going to apply for it." I mean I I I would declare myself the appropriate chair on
every single grant application I don't have a problem with that So I'd make that a motion Yep Second Okay You have to give you have to call Gabe and then he won't answer and we'll call you back So you got to send a text You have to send a text So basically we're not doing one two or three We're doing something
completely different Well we'll see what the motion is I think I'm understand it but I just So the motion is to authorize staff amend the policy to amend the policy to allow allowing for exemptions for
grants for the wastewater treatment plant as long as uh for a specific purpose Do you want to go a timeline six months Six months Confused So I just I I'm hearing two different things Yeah I think I think Kevin was saying I never want to hear about a grant again as long
as I'm on the council So I think we're doing option number three with the exception of adding in that um we probably the staff shall obtain explicit approval We should change that to be approval by city administrator and our PNF chair unless it does these things
Can it just be have the city administrator work with the chair chair of PNF yeah ma'am But I think you should put a time thing on a time Get rid of the $5,000 and just say we'll work together and all Yeah Okay But can we revisit this in 6 months whatever Sure
Yeah I I think I think we should revisit with each new council You're not always going to have personnel finance year Right That's true So I'll review in six months There's a motion Yep Okay I'll accept that motion to amend
the policy to to obtain explicit approval from the city administrator and chair of personal finance further to review this in six months Okay Any other discussion no All in favor say I I Post Same sign That motion carries
Okay We got that one done Approve Voluntary demotion of Mitch Lacel to journeyman line worker position Chris Oh Chris is back Yes So we uh advertised for both our journeyman linemen and our apprentice line worker positions We received 12
applications for the journeyman and 68 for the apprentice line worker After reviewing all of the applications it was determined that our current electric distribution supervisor Mitch Lacult was the most qualified He worked as a journeyman lineman for us for 5 years
before he was promoted to this current electric distribution supervisor position Um to give you a little bit more history after the positions were posted Mr Lacelt submitted his application and then he informed the management team that he does not feel that his current management role is the
right fit for him He is requesting a voluntary demotion to his previous position Per our council guidance um for initial step placement the highest step that staff can offer someone is step four He is asking for step six So um at
this point the Public Utilities Commission at their March 25th meeting recommended that Mr Leo be reclassified and that he be placed on step six based on his qualifications They also recommended that the council authorized back filling his current electric
distribution supervisor position internally and if no qualified candidates apply to proceed with an external posting Was Mitch on step six before we promoted him yes he was So there are a couple of recommended
actions One is to approve his volunt voluntary demotion as we've talked about and also back Can we do them both together yeah I move I move to approve the step six and the start the back fill All right Second All right All in favor
say I I Same sign That motion carries and that would be effective tomorrow Um okay Next up is anou extending the time frame along IDW We missed one No no no Oh no We want a public utilities department full-time laborer position
Chris tell me about it So the public utilities department has determined there are some needs throughout all of their divisions for coverage and that needs are custodial maintenance and grounds management They are asking that the council um allow hiring of an
additional labor for flexibility instead of the facilities custodian position that they originally had budgeted for So that is the recommended action to authorize staff to begin the hiring process for a full-time laborer for the public Is this the guy that goes to the bank no that's the meter I shall move on
the motion Second Is this one of the guy Chris that was our labor helps with every crew here was it proposed in the budget that they just presented to us as a custodian and now they're switching it to a labor which is the budget effects as NA but I can't imagine they're the
exact they're the exact same step um or the exact same class the labor is less the labor is saving a little bit of money okay any discussion after that all in favor say I oppose the same sign that motion carries eight approve theou extending the time
frame allowing IBW to work at the hydro facility Chris Yes So the United Steel Workers Union has agreed to extend the memorandum of agreement allowing the IBW public utility department employees to temporarily perform work at the hydro um
facility Previous extensions were to were to 1231 to 24 and 4 or April 1st to 25 We have now negotiated another extension The union has asked that we only go to May 1st So they have signed this extension They believe we should be
able to negotiate a contract before that date and we have negotiations settled or set with them for April 21st How many left how many people are left one at this point And then when we automate we'll figure out what we need and if there'll be steel worker employees and
what'll happen at that point So asking that um we approve the MOA I should tell you the IBW union has signed off on this MOA over the weekend So moved Second Uh what have we been
doing the last six days um the steel workers had approved it beforehand So we were we did have since they approved it We were over there The IBW was over there working Right It's a steel workers facility So if they allowed it it was allowing other Yeah Okay And then we
have a negotiating session scheduled with steel worker on April 21st And if we don't get anything finalized that day we could ask for another month or something Oh
hopefully Yes Okay Motion approve Yeah All in favor say I I Same Yes That motion carries Authorize request for proposals to obtain plan design proposals for pricing quotes for private
MN paid family and medical leave options Chris the Minnesota paid family medical leave law is scheduled to go effect on January 1st The city of Brainard as an employer is subject to that law and information about the law was attached in your packet Um this law allows
employers the option to elect to either utilize the state administered plan or a private plan offered by insurance carriers that are approved by the state The private plan offering must meet or exceed the state plan Staff has discussed this concept with our
ancillary benefits broker Bill Dmer from Integrity Benefits and we recommend that the council authorize conducting an RFP to obtain plan to sign proposals and pricing quotes for a private option Um bill is online if there are any
questions Um one thing that we want to make sure you're aware of is that the RFP will reflect there is not a time commitment to stay with the private plan beyond that initial year Therefore the city could switch to the state plan beginning in the second year 2027 after
the state plan is fully operational We did have a sample RFP in the packet Also um just to give you a little bit more information this state law right now the premium is set to be8% of payroll So right now the
employer must pay at least 50% The employee can pay up to 50% Do we have to talk about that with the unions we are hoping by utilizing this plan we might get a reduction in that premium amount And the reason why that may occur is
because these insurance carriers are working with other plans in other states Minnesota is the 13th state to enact this law So they're already doing this in other areas So and potentially the least efficient government on the right We want we don't know if the state will
be ready by January 1st It will be administered just like unemployment Then the employee would have to file a claim and then the state would have to reply in timely communication So concerns about that as well I move we go up for our fees as proposed Second We have a
motion and a second Any discussion all in favor say I I That motion Am I wrong anything else i don't not yet Okay Anything else to come before the committee tonight then we're adjourned We got about 7 minutes to