regular meeting to order for Monday, November 3rd, 2025 at 6:30 p.m. All rise 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. Moving on. Item three on the agenda. Roll call. Administrator Pulfus. >> Council member Ball >> present. Council member Jensen >> present. >> Council member >> present. >> Council member Scott
>> present. >> Mayor Rogenamp >> present. Thank you. Item number four, open forum. The city council invites residents to share new ideas or concerns related to city business not already on the agenda. However, individual question and remarks unlimited to three minutes per speaker.
No city council action will be taken, although the council may refer issues to staff for followup or for consideration at a future meeting. The mayor may use discretion if speakers are repeating views already expressed or ask for a spokesperson for groups of individuals with similar views. Speakers should
state their name and home address at the podium before speaking. Is there anybody here that wishes to address the council in open forum? Please come forward. >> Go ahead. >> You sure? >> Okay.
>> State your name and your address, please. >> Bill Tooff, 31877 Green Scene Drive, Breezy Point. And I see the large agenda tonight, so I'm going to cut my comments by twothirds and just go right to the stats. Um this year there have been 18
police call complaints to the concerning the breaking of ordinances and courtesies that the signs prohibiting take place down in the disc golf expansion. We have sent 120 pictures of pictorial evidence of alcohol cannabis
all kinds of cannabis use tobacco use being consumed out of the expansion. These pictures only come from the uh expansion holes. In closing, uh, it's just been another ban a year to us taxpayer residents living on the only
publicly owned disc golf course line with residential homes in the state of Minnesota. Thank you. >> Thank you. Is there anybody else that wishes to address the council in open form? Please come forward. State your name and your address.
>> My name is Amanda Castreva. Um, we live on Aztec Circle. Um, we were first off curious if the city is aware of the Maple River Cailluna transmission project that's coming through. >> Yes. Okay. I I am aware of it. >> Okay.
>> Whether or not the full council is aware of it, that I'm not sure of, but I am aware of it. Yes. >> Okay. So, we were curious if you were um aware because um we recently learned about it likely because what came in the mail was junk
or looked like junk. And so, we went to this open house that happened last week um to learn that we could potentially be losing our home, property, whatever the case might be. So, we were curious if after we've reached out to several
people around us, if there's any way the city is able to make it more public and not look like junk coming in the mail so people are aware of what's happening and what they could potentially be losing.
>> Okay. Thank you. Yeah. And and what you received did not come from the city. >> Right. Right. We were curious if the city is able to take further action to show people of the city how they may be impacted by this because I don't know that it's
>> correct >> very well advertised. >> I think there'll be a lot more coming in the future about it. So >> from the city >> well from everybody. >> Okay. >> Yeah. I I I mean this isn't just a breezy point thing. This is a area thing. So I think there'll be more coming. This is just the starting point
>> for sure. Yeah. >> Yeah. I mean, and what we were told last week or whenever that was, the most recent open house was that the final route would be determined by this spring. >> Um, and so hoping to somehow get the word out before then. What we were told
was basically the louder you are, the better off with complaints and things like that. So, >> that's what we were curious about. >> Great. Thank you for comments. >> Thank you. Is there anybody else that wishes to address the council in open forum?
I'll ask again. Is there anybody who wishes to address the council in open forum? Hearing none, open forum is now closed. Moving on, item five, consent agenda. Consent agenda tonight is 5A. Approve
claims totaling $279,728.73 for checks 14637 to 140716 and e checkeks 4023 to 4038. 5B approve city council meeting minutes
from October 6, 2025. 5 C approve purchase of trailer for police department. 5 D approve law enforcement labor services union number 359 agreement for 2026, 2027 and 2028.
5E authorize city administrator to pursue land acquisition. 5 F approve cost share agreement with Crowing County for Bushman Road project. 5G, approve liquor license renewals for 2026.
5H, Resolution number 30-2025, approved donation of Parkbench. 5 I, Resolution number 31-2025, approved donation from Woodsth and 5J, approved pay application number four for
2025 County Road 11 sanitary sewer extension project. This is the consent agenda as read. Is there any comments or anything from the council hearing? None. Do I have a motion to approve the consent agenda as read?
>> So move. >> I have a motion from council member Moroni. Do I have a second? >> Second. >> Council member Jensen seconded. Any further discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I.
>> Opposed? Abstensions? Motion carries. Moving on to item six, public hearing 6A, public hearing on general obligation, street reconstruction bonds and street reconstruction plan. I'm going to turn it over to administrator Pfouse to get us started.
>> Yes, thank you. Um, as a part of the bond issuance process, the council must hold a public hearing to consider a resolution giving preliminary approval for the general obligation bond for the Bushman Road project. Proper notice of the hearing was in the newspaper. We have Rebecca Curts here from Ellers
tonight to answer any questions you may have about the bonding process. Following the public hearing, we're looking for a resolution adopting the street reconstruction plan and approve the issuance of the general obligation street reconstruction bonds. >> Thank you. Go ahead, Rebecca. >> You go ahead and introduce yourself for us, please.
>> Yes. Uh Rebecca Kurts. I'm a municipal adviser at Ellers and um work closely with Todd Hagen who apologizes that he was not able to be here. So, you got stuck with me instead tonight. Um, but as introduced, what you have before you
is to consider and um take action on a street reconstruction plan, which is the first step in securing financing for the road project. Um, with the plan, a lot of it is statutory language and requirements that um outline what the
law um what the law allows. But a couple things I want to call your attention to is the number in the street reconstruction plan is the maximum that you could bond for. Um so you see under the financing section it is our understanding that the project is
estimated to be 3,690,000 um dollars roughly a little bit some 358 um but with that it is being anticipated that there will be um a $150,000 t cash contribution from Ideal Township
along with the tax levy and the sale of the general obligation bonds. And so while we anticipate that the bond size to finance this project will be closer to $3.22 million, um the plan is
set up to have a maximum bond amount of $3,350,000 and that is only to allow for if there are changes or a little bit of fluctuation when the bids come in. So, um, what you approve or if you do choose to approve this plan, it sets in place
the maximums and then there would be separate action when you actually call for the sale of the bonds and that would be sized appropriately based on the bids that do come in. Um, with this plan, you will also see that it is a five-year
plan that is um, tying out to state statute that is five years reconstruction plan. Um, at this point in time, the only project that is authorized under this plan is the 2026 um, Bushman Road project. And at some
point in the future in the next 5 years, if you do have another project, you always have the ability to come back and amend the plan. Um, so the action tonight, there is a public hearing on the plan. Um after that public hearing, you do have a resolution to consider
that would approve the plan and then um authorize from the general standpoint u moving forward with the bond issue. There is a 30-day reverse referendum period. And so that referendum period
ends on December 3rd. And then um at this point it is anticipated that on December 8th um there would be a special meeting of the council to consider the construction bids and then also call for the sale of the bonds which again would
be the action that would appropriately size the the final bond issue and start that piece of the process. Um I will pause and I'm happy to take any questions you may have. >> Council, any questions? I'm not hearing any. So, thank you for those.
>> I'll be here if if during the public hearing anything comes up. >> Excellent. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Yep. >> All right. So, basically next So, the what we're going to do now is we're going to go ahead and open it up
for uh the public hearing. So, I will give a little overview of how that will work so everybody's familiar with it, but basically it is the city council invites residents to voice their comments and concerns related to the public hearing agenda item. Individual marks are limited to three minutes per
speaker. If someone before you has already made your point, feel free to simply state your agreement instead of repeating the same comments and speakers should state their name and home address at the podium before speaking. So, with the directions now being read, I am now going to open the public
hearing uh on um resolution number 32-2025 of adopting a street reconstruction plan and approving the issuance of our bonds for the Bushman Road construction project. Is there anybody here that wishes to address the council in this
open the public hearing? If you would like to please come forward, state your name and your address and again you'll be limited to three minutes for your comments. Bill 31877 Green Scene Drive and I'm also speaking for the Breezy Point
Alliance. Um, Miss Curtis, I'm sorry. The last paperwork I have, it was a 4.475. Is is this new dollar amount going to be 15-year duration? Um >> just to confirm here as we have run
different scenarios yes it is a >> so 15 years what's the average yield on that and what's the average life >> um I do not have all of those details with me we are looking at a um interest
rate at about just under 4%. See, she should have that information for you guys to make an informed decision. Today, the secondary market in general obligation doublea rated Minnesota paper is 2.9 to 3.15. Now, there's some interest rates are a little bit lower
and some are a little bit higher. So, I don't know why we aren't looking at just issuing a 10-year piece of paper at 3%. Given the numbers that I had here, we were going to save $300,000 plus if we were to go that route instead of trunching it like this. I have sold
municipal bonds and stocks for 35 plus years. I'm quasi retired now, but I've never seen anything like this in all honesty. Um maybe there's a good reason. I was never involved in the underwriting and perhaps there is a good reason for it. But I think the interest rate should
be right around 3%, not 3.8 or 3.9, whatever it is. rates haven't changed much since I since this came out at the end of August. Um, I guess that's I guess I would like to have that information. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Is there anybody else that wishes to address the council in the public hearing right now? I will ask again. Is there anybody that wishes to come forward during the public hearing?
I'll ask one more time. Is there anybody here that wishes to address the council in the public hearing? Not hearing others, I will now close the public hearing. All right. So, council, you've heard the information and overview.
Um, do you have any questions, any comments before we move forward? Council member Jensen. >> I mean, I would like to have Mr. Tooff's question
answered. I mean, that is a pretty legitimate question and should be provided with an answer. >> And I find that a little unsettling that the underwriting firm does not have
that information. Okay. Other comments from the council. >> Uh Mr. Mayor, uh my one question I have is if we do approve um what we have in front of us tonight and the bids do not come back favorable, we do not have to
proceed with the selling of the bonds and the calling of bonds. >> Correct. That's how I understand it. Yes. So only only if we approve u a bid >> bid. >> Yes. then we would call for the bonds >> and also if the bonds don't come back at
a favorable rate we can also withdraw. >> Rebecca would you want to come? >> That's a question we'll have to ask. >> Um so to clarify the action tonight you're approving a plan which would provide the authorization to move
forward with a debt issue at the future. Um, with that, it does not obligate you to do anything. It only if if if you approve the resolution tonight in this plan, it only gives you the authorization to issue debt at a future
time. Um, with that, again, there is a 30-day reverse referendum period. And so part of the reason this is being done at this point in time is that it would give time to get through that 30-day period prior to when bids would be opened. And
so um that 30-day period ends December 3rd. Um then after that point, we would look at the construction bids. Um my coworker or myself would be back up here then for the December 8th meeting. Um,
assuming bids were something that you wanted to move forward with and wanted to issue debt for it, at that point in time, there would be a final bond proposed bond structure that you could then move forward with um to call for
the sale of the bonds officially. So, tonight is only approving the bond or only approving the street reconstruction bond with the authority street reconstruction plan with the authority to issue bonds. the bond approval. Um you would call for the sale December 8th
and then um there would be the offering document and we are proposing that bonds be sold on February 2nd of 2026. And at both points in time, either on
December 8th when the bids are called for, you would not need to move forward with a bond sale. And then if bids did not come in um at a point where you would like on February 2nd, you also would not be required to award the bond
sale. Um I do want to comment one bit on the structure. This is set up as a competitive sale um that would be marketed nationally and this is something that um we've had discussions with on staff, but it would be something
we can change if if directed to do so. um with that we are required or the way that that works on a competitive national sale is in $5,000 increments. And so that is um one of the ways that the bonds are are being structured. Um
with that also I will say we do add some cushion because um as as discussed we would not look at selling until February 2nd um with three months um there's a lot of question there. So we we personally
would prefer to um have estimates high especially in the plan because it's a maximum and then continue to um narrow them in as we get closer with the actual bid amount and then um when we get closer to the sale date. Okay.
>> Any other questions or does that help answer some of the or clarify? >> And and to confirm, Mr. Mayor, the the rate is set at what date on the February 2nd date. >> The rate would be set at the February 2nd date. >> Yeah. When we would actually go to issue
because at that point it went for sale. Yes. So, there would be um a refined estimate on December 8th at that special meeting if you chose to call for the sale of bonds, but the actual rate would be set on the February 2nd date. And you
would have the opportunity at that point um to either accept the bids or to reject the bids based on your comfort with that rate. And uh in your past experience, when is the best bidding time for rates?
>> Um you know, you mean as far as like time of year and month? Um you know, really it I don't think I have an answer for the best time of year. It really depends on um the market. One of the things and
where the market is at. I will say one of the things that we do do to try and um control isn't the right word because we can't control the market at all. But one of the things we will watch is as we start to set and refine if we are going
to sell on February 2nd or whatever date ultimately that ends up being um looking at other sales that are happening at that day or during that day. And if there were, for example, 15 other sales of about $3 million happening on that
day, one of our responsibilities as your municipal advisor would be to have that discussion and say, you know, it it's going to be a tougher sale because it's there's a lot of competition, sales exactly like yours. Maybe we want to look at a different date um where there
is not as many sales. And so those are discussions that as we get closer to um the actual sale date we will be having with with staff. >> Thank you. >> Any other questions, comments?
>> I mean I would like to see council I would like to see an answer to Mr. question and that be provided to council because I think it's a legitimate question and Ellers should have been able to answer that in my opinion and um I would like an answer.
>> Okay. >> I think it's a legitimate question >> as regard to the interest rate. >> Interest rates. Yes, absolutely. which we we won't have a solid feel for what those are till we get closer to that time and we still have the ability to
not move forward if we're not comfortable with the interest rates on the bonds. Well, then at that point I mean I still think it's a a question even though the rate is not set. I I think Mr. To had a legitimate question
and I think based on his question tonight, he should be provided an answer as well as councel. >> Okay. >> So what we're asking is is can we get an answer to that? Absolutely. Regarding interest rates. Okay. >> I can.
>> Okay. And can you provide that then to staff? >> Absolutely. I can provide it to council and she can also provide to the constituent who had the question. >> Absolutely. >> Okay. Perfect. Thank you. >> Yep. That works. Perfect. >> Excellent. All right. Thank you. Are
there any other questions? >> Okay. Thank you. >> All right. So, again, you kind of heard explanation of the resolution and what we're what we're agreeing to do here. This is really just the starting point in the process. And there's a lot of places along the way that we still have
the ability to say, "Nope, we're not moving forward because we don't like the percentage. We don't like the bids. We, you know, a lot of different things. So, um, I think there's opportunities for us. This basically what this
resolution does is start the process, gets us moving in the process of going down the road of of getting these issued, and we need to do it with this because it needs to have that 30-day reverse referendum. And so, it stretches the timeline out a little more because
of that, but you have to have that in place in order to do it this way. So, we're at resolution number 32,2025, adopting a street reconstruction plan and approving the issuance of general obligation street reconstruction bonds. Do I have a motion to approve this
resolution as written? >> So moved. >> I have a motion from council member Jensen. Do I have a second? >> Second. >> I have a second from council member Moroni. Further discussion? I want to just continue to go on the
record. as people of no um I've been you could say the only member of this council who has um given any critical view whatsoever on this project on the amount of money that it involves
on the fact that we really haven't even considered or looked at any alternative ways to improve Bushman Road to increase safety and to increase the efficiency of traffic flow. Um, we've just accepted, you know,
uh, the grand plan of all grand plans, uh, entirely along the way. And I'm sorry, um, if I'm an outlier as an elected official, then I guess I am, but that's not how I view my representation
of, uh, our taxpayers and and of our community. Um, we need to do different. we need to do better than just simply moving forward with a project that in my honest opinion continues to be way overkill.
Um but again, you know, short of allowing opportunity and time to explore alternates um to recognize ways that we can go about effectively improving the overall functionality of Bushman. we all understand it needs a level of
improvement at arguably a lot cheaper cost. Um I I guess that's really all I'm going to continue to say about it. Uh you know, we're seeing double digit tax levy increases proposed already.
Uh looking at this uh debt levy schedule as presented, um yeah, I I have a lot of concern. um about our residents, the taxpayers, and the uh overall effect and impact that
this is going to have on uh the debt burden for this city. Um I wouldn't mind understanding and knowing from some of the council members that have been on the council a little longer than myself. Where did this idea of planning for improvements like this go
to where we're not having to incur this extent of debt? It doesn't take much to look at the debt schedule. Over a million dollars in interest potentially. Uh I don't know how that sits with other people, but when you think about a
little over $3 million debt issue and over a million dollars in interest that all of us as taxpayers are paying, it doesn't seem right to me. >> Any other comments from council?
I know I can uh speak. I was part of the co-op road project. I can't remember what the official title was that started. I think four or five years ago that we started looking at how Bushman can be improved. We actually worked with uh joint ventures with Ideal um and
Peekquat. Um and we looked at the alternatives. We looked at um potentially going up to a county road standard. We worked with the county to see if the county would be willing to take over the road if we upgraded to their standards. Uh what we heard back
from community was that was too much um to ask of the community. Uh and we did not have a full commitment from the county that if we built it to the county standards that they would even take it on. Um we have looked at the safety of of Bushman. We've been trying to repair
it as best as possible throughout the years. Um, I want to say we the council passed and Mr. Zurg can help me out. I want to say it's been looked at since I think 2004. But, um, and maybe I've got the year wrong on that, but it's been in the
works for over 20 years. But unfortunately, no previous council has ever taken action to finalize those up until, like I say, about a four or five year um ago that we started looking at this project. Um, we have looked at alternatives. We've looked at how we can
make it safer at the most effective cost and this is the ultimate where it is. I know you disagree with that. Um but we've had multiple engineers look at it. We've had both in mink. We've had others and we've just concluded that this is the best project moving forward with it.
Um I know you weren't part of the the previous city councils that we started with that project. It was under different administrations at that point. Um, but we've worked closely with other ventures to look at the best alternative for this and and that's where we're at with this. Um, could we have done better
as a city council 10, 15, 20 years ago to start planning for this? Absolutely. Uh, but this is where we're at now. This is why we created the um the the comprehensive road um upgrade project is because we don't want to be caught with this situation again. Um, is it unfortunate that where we're at we're
at? Yes, it is. But uh it has been on record that it is unsafe as it is today and so in improvements need to be done and we have spent um a number of hours number of financial dollars to investigate that and that's where we're at today.
Then and I would echo that being on the formal the council before when we first started the project. I wasn't in at the very beginning but pretty close and we did spend a lot of time looking at different options. How can we do this? How can we make this work? How can we do
it in the best interest of the citizens so that we can get a safe road? Um and I agree with Council Member this is the best option moving forward to get this road rebuilt up to standards and be a safe road for people to use. Um, is it
a big chunk of money? It is. And I don't deny that. And do I do I like the fact that we're adding that debt? No, I don't. But we're in a situation now that we need to do something about that road and it needs to move forward. And so this is the best option we have
available to be able to do this. So, um, yeah, I wish there was a different scenario and an easier way to get it done, too, but there's not. And I agree that there's been a lot of talk over the years about Bush Moro. It continues to be talked about. Um, and so I think it's
important that we just understand that this has to happen to move forward. And I agree with Council Member too. We're putting in place something so that we don't put somebody else as a council 20 years down the road or 15 years down the road in
the same position that we're in right now. And that's no blame to anybody in the past or at all. It's just it's it's the way it works. Things change, times change. Uh where we were 20 years ago as a city and where we are today are two totally different situations. The amount
of traffic, the amount of people, the people who live here, it's all changed. Um and and what happens sometimes is that it takes a little while to catch up and that's what we're trying to do right now. And and that's an unfortunate situation, but that's where we're at. So, um I wish there was a different
scenario, too. But I still feel that we're doing what's best overall for the citizens of the city to get that road upgraded, improved, and safe so that it it can be there and we can plan then for the future so that we're not facing the
same kind of thing again. All right, any other comments? Any other discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor of the resolution passing res. We have a motion. >> I don't think we have a motion. >> Yeah, we do. We have a motion in a
second. We might have discussion. A lot of >> discussion. My apologies. >> There was a lot of discussion. That's okay. >> Which is good. >> Oh. All right. So, so resolution number 32 2025 adopting a street reconstruction plan and approving
the issuance of general obligation street reconstruction bonds. All those in favor of the motion signify by saying I. >> I. I >> opposed. >> I >> abstensions. The motion passes. >> Moving on. 6 C. Public hearing to assess
delinquent sewer bills. Janette, would you like to give us a little overview? >> Yes. >> Thank you, mayor and council. Um so with this each year the city certifies delinquent sewer utility charges for
collection um with the property taxes in the following year. Uh this ensures that the city will receive unpaid sewer um services that we've provided to these property owners.
Um, we sent out, according to state statute, we're supposed to give notice to these property owners with the delinquent accounts. Those letters were sent out on October 8th, um, giving them time to pay before we assess. Uh, the
assessment date is going to be the last week in November. So, if they pay prior to that, of course, they will not be assessed then. Um, so we have a total of 14 properties to certify to the 2026
property taxes. Um, and with that, we would need a resolution. And by approving that resolution, you would be approving the certification of these 14 accounts to
the property taxes to be paid in 2026. >> Okay. Thank you, Janette. So, as a part of this, we do have another public hearing as a part of this in case there are constituents that want to come forward and address the council regarding their uh delinquent sewer, uh,
bills. Um, so at this time, again, uh, the city council invites residents to voice their comments and concerns related to the public hearing agenda item. Individual remarks are limited to three minutes per speaker. If someone before you has already made your point, feel free to simply state your agreement
instead of repeating same comments. Speakers should state their name, home address at the podium before speaking. So with that, I will open uh the public hearing. Is there anybody here that wishes to address the council and public hearing regarding uh delinquent sewer uh
bills? I will ask again, is there anybody here that wishes to address the council in public hearing to address the delinquent sewer bills? I will ask one more time. Is there anybody here that wishes to address the
council in the public hearing to assess on delinquent sewer bills? Hearing none, the public hearing is now closed. So, moving forward, we do have a resolution 332025
placing delinquent sewer charges against specified properties in front of us. Um, there is a clarification to make on the resolution that's been put before us. Two of them, PID106073
and P10210558 have now been paid in full. So those two are are now at a zero balance. All right, just so everybody's aware of that when we go to pass this resolution. So with that being stated, do I have a
motion to pass resolution 33 20225 placing delinquent sewer charges against specified properties um with the changes that I that were so stated? >> So move I have a motion from I have a motion from council member Do I
have a second? A second. >> I have a second from council member Ball. Any further discussion? >> One point of clarification. Uh while in the agenda it labels it as uh resolution 33-2025 in the packet the cover is listed as
32-2025. So just a clarification this is for 33-2025. >> Thank you. Yep. You are correct. So all right. So yes, this would be for 33-2025. Any further discussion
hearing? None. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Opposed. Abstensions. The motion carries. Thank you, Janette. All right, moving on. Seven. Seven. Business item 7A. Approve pay
application number 13 for city hall facility. Administer Poose. >> Yes, thank you. Um, tonight we're asking for approval of pay application number 13 to Hi-Tech. Um, I spoke with them and there should be one more pay application for council approval after this.
>> Okay. All right. All right. Do I have a motion to approve pay application number 13 for city hall facility? >> So move. >> I have a motion from council member Moroni. Do I have a second? >> Second. >> A second from council member Jensen.
Any discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. Opposed. >> I. >> Abstensions. Motion carries. 7B. Wastewater treatment facility results. Nick.
>> Good evening, council. My name is Nick. I'm with Woods. Um, in conjunction with city staff, we prepared a wastewater facility plan to proactively assess uh the city's wastewater flows, uh treatment plant capacity, and infrastructure.
Uh due to our findings, we shared this executive summary with recommendations uh and put the submittal of the facility plan on hold for now. Uh the primary concern uh the primary concern from city staff uh was the available winter storage. Uh
we collected surveyed field data in the winter of 2024 and the spring of 2025 to analyze the inplace volume of the ponds. Based on our calculated inplace volume and projecting uh recorded winter influent from the last 20 years by the
city, uh it's anticipated the treatment facility will reach 85% capacity in 2036. uh that 85% capacity threshold is kind of the baseline for uh recommended expansion of your uh secondary treatment
ponds. Um so the city staff requested an eru which is equivalent residential unit capacity for the facility. We looked into that. Um the city reported uh roughly a growth of 22 ERUs per year
since uh 2010. Um with the reported growth over the last 15 years and the increase in influence not lining up the way that we would anticipate and I get that there's some factors in this community that are different with seasonal versus
non-seasonal things like that. Um we don't necessarily recommend using erus as a forecasting method for this facility. Um however uh conservatively we'd recommend a range of 60 to 80 erus
roughly before you're going to start getting closer to that 85% where it's recommended to uh start down the path of an ex expansion project. Um so in recommendations uh to better predict what improvements will be
required, we would recommend installing two mag meters on the two influent lines going into the facility. Uh the one main uh and then the one coming from the camping cluster. Uh we provided a rough
installation cost including engineering of $7 to $90,000 to install two manholes and two mag meters. Uh those mag meters are uh electronic flow meters that will record influent data into the facility.
Gives a very uh accurate representation of the amount of influent that's actually going into the ponds rather than a measuring technique which is also fairly standard. Uh, a second recommendation would be to install benchmarks at each of the ponds so city
staff has a a more efficient and easier and more accurate way to measure depth of the ponds. Um, any questions? Council, any questions for Nick? I think they're good recommendations that bear
merit and we should be doing that um so we can accurately forecast when we have to expand the current system. >> Right. No, I agree. I would I would think that uh staff will take these recommendations under consideration and be able to bring some action items back to the council in a future time so we
can take a look at that. But I agree that's the whole purpose of having the study done is to find out what we can do to better calculate and estimate what's going on. Um I it's good to hear kind of where we're at as far as when we think we're going to meet that threshold. Um
and I know that there's a rate study and other things being put into place and we'll continue to take a look at how we we get ourselves prepared for that because that's coming. So um all right, any other questions from council comments? >> Uh additionally, uh the facility plan we
did put together and have some reviews with city staff on that. uh the timeline for submitting that is is just not necessary right now. So, we have um we have that and the city has that and once we go forward and and get
a little better data into the future, we'll be prepared to submit that and update it with the with the data that's recorded. So, >> perfect. Excellent. Thank you, Nick, for that extra added comment. Perfect. All right. Sounds good. Well, there's no action to be taken, but appreciate the
information on that and uh like I said, I'm sure staff will be coming back to us in the future with some things as we move forward off those recommendations. So, thank you, Nick. Uh, moving on. 7C, review and approve 2026 fee schedule. Administrator Pulpus.
>> Yes, thank you. Um, every year the city sets a fee schedule which authorizes the city to charge its residents for services provided. Staff met to review the schedule in depth. the previous year schedule in depth and proposed recommendations to the finance committee. The finance committee then
met to discuss the recommendations and approve um and recommended to approve as presented in the packet tonight. If the council wishes to see additional changes, we will include those um for approval in December. Otherwise, staff recommends approval of the fee schedule
as presented. >> All right, council. Hopefully, you had a chance to review uh the schedule. Uh it was looked over and there were some changes made, some from staff recommendations, some from committee recommendations. Um but we're bringing
this back to you. So, I don't know if there's any discussion, excuse me, questions or comments on on the schedule as it was presented. >> Yeah, I've got a question. Um actually a couple. So just to clarify the
charges proposed for 26 then are uh the amounts otherwise highlighted in red. >> Correct. >> Correct. So noticing the short-term rental license
uh it's a doubling of the fee. Just interested to know what's behind that. Why why such an increase? >> Yep. So we um kind of compiled our surrounding communities to see where our fees fit within there. Most communities
charge between 500 and 750. A main driver for the 750 is the addition of a safety and structural inspection which will be performed by um our building inspector and that costs $250.
So that fee is meant to encompass the $250. um the time spent with staff um and we're kind of beefing up our application process too which will take more time. So I would say comparable to surrounding cities the inclusion of the inspection
and then additional staff time um to process those applications. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Any other questions from councel? Okay. Hearing none. Do I have a motion to approve the 2026 fee schedule as
presented? >> So moved. >> I have a a motion from Council Member Ball. Do I have a second? >> Second. >> Second from Council Member Moroni. Nope. Council member Jensen. Sorry, I thought I was I'm getting used to the
mics yet, guys. Sorry. From Council Member Jensen. Uh, excuse me. Any further discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Opposed. Abstensions. The motion
carries. All right. 7D. Review and approve special assessment policy. Commissioner Public. >> Here we are again. >> Um, at the last city council meeting, the council directed staff to prepare policy language that includes a shared cost between the city and property
owners, establishes a maximum assessment cap, and considers the inclusion of a special benefit appraisal. After discussing with legal counsel, he advised us to not include the special benefit appraisal requirement unless the council intends to complete an appraisal
every year for every project. Um the council, however, may choose to order a special benefit appraisal on a case-byase basis whenever they choose. Um staff would typically recommend this when a project is more complex or controversial or um has higher costs
associated with the project. Um, the council retains the flexibility to modify this policy at any time, even after approval tonight. So, staff recommends approving the policy as presented, allowing adjustments to be made in the future as we have experience with the implementation and identify any
issues that arise. >> Okay. Thank you, >> council. Any thoughts, comments? I guess I would just assume like to see the special benefit language um as a part of the policy. If I remember as
council has discussed this, that's been a pretty pretty key part to how we think about assessments and understanding of the process where, you know, alls it takes is for one property owner to challenge the amount of the assessment and the city's going to be likely doing
an appraisal to understand if the amount of the assessment is within sort of those tolerances of a benefited increase in property value to the property owner. Um, I I can in some ways appreciate uh
maybe why we wouldn't want it in there, but I see it I see it serving future councils and and uh those impacted by road improvements very well down the road just eliminating any question whatsoever as to the uh reasonleness and validity
of the amount of the assessment being proposed. Okay, other comments. >> I agree with Council Member Scott. I mean, can we put in generic language at the discretion of council? You know, just being in there. That's >> included. It's in there already.
>> So, you guys go order me to do it tomorrow and I could do it for the projects. Um, legal council advised to not require it unless you're going to do it each year. Otherwise, because I think I'd presented like it'd be done every three to five years,
>> right? It's under item C >> on page 101 of the pack. >> Um, but he recommended against that in the case that someone would challenge it. Um, it may not be valid after 3 to 5 years. >> Clarification
>> on a road improvement, we typically do 429 if we're assessing anything. Mhm. Is it possible that if you communicate to residents of what that process is? Well, let me ask this. Can these can that appraisal be a cost that the
residents must pay for if if it moves forward on the 420? Can that be an absorbed cost in the project cost? >> I don't know the Nick, do you know the answer to that? >> Would you mind restating the question? Absolutely. So the the appraisal, can you c can that be part ABS can that be
absorbed into the project cost if it moves forward >> after the assessments have already been issued? Are you saying or >> So are you just saying every project from here on out we just tack on five grand? Here's here's where my mind was trying to wrap around is if if we're looking at a an improvement project and
we notify residents of said project, can they wave if we get like an example of of how many people wave their right for the the the how am I trying to think of it? >> So, are you are you looking at something where there's language that they can
wave the right to have the appraisal done? >> Correct. Because it will be a cost passed on to them if the project goes on that they can choose to wave that. Therefore, they don't have to pay for that if they're already annoying. Throwing something to the dart board here. >> I believe the answer to that question is
yes, but I'd like to also double check on that and get back to you. >> I mean, I think language in Certainly. >> I have somebody podium, please announce, please. >> Jerry Bolk and planning
>> and zoning administrator. Um, answer to Councilman Moron's question is yes, that can be included in the the cost of the project. I don't I think there's a difference. I I think we're talking about doing an appraisal that takes one piece of
property and says this is what the benefit is. You're not doing an appraisal on every one of those pieces of property. you're you're looking at a a uh a sample of what >> right >> the benefit is for like project like
properties in that neighborhood at the time. You're not looking for an individual appraisal on every piece of property that is there. If in fact you get to a point where individual properties
um appeal the assessment or the special benefit, you may be required to defend that by doing an appraisal on each individual property, but that won't happen unless you have an appraisal. I
mean, unless you have an appeal. The reason to do the the special benefit appraisal upfront is to show the the the area or the the patrons that this is the
benefit. We can prove this amount of benefit. We're not assessing any more than what that amount of benefit is. >> Jerry, >> we're not doing everyone of those properties at that time. >> Right. >> Am I correct in saying that they give you a range as well? It's not a number,
it's a range. Correct. In the benefit, >> typically they they would look at what the Yeah, the range goes from $500 to to $1,000 or something like that, but uh there's no exact science to it, but it's the best that we have at that time.
It prepares you, but yes, you can it can be applied to the cost of the project. It's no different than engineering and and financing and all those costs that get thrown into it. >> Hope that helps. >> Thank you, Jerry.
>> Other comments. >> I mean, I think it's okay as it is. I I just had one I know we talked about potentially and that maybe this is just something that we keep in mind and look at maybe every year when we do the budget, but potentially
working our way into, you know, not assessing individual homeowners. I know we talked about that. It's not in here and I don't know that it should be, >> but I just that's just something that I noticed. we talked about last time and it's not addressed, but it's probably shouldn't be because you want to
actually know what the assessment is now and not have it so wishy-washy. But >> am I hearing you right as as far as moving towards something where there's no policy, but there's an assessment citywide? >> Yeah. Well, where it's Yes, correct. It's a built into the levy. >> Yes, exactly. Built into the levy. Yeah.
And and I would I would state yes, you're correct that you wouldn't want something like that in here. I think that's something that ultimately Yes. I think the council should continue to look at and probably every year when we go to do the budget and looking at it, how is it and what does it look like
because I I think ultimately that might be where we want to get to eventually and I heard that from the council when we had discussions earlier. So I think this is a starting point and gets us moving in that direction, but that's that's a that's a process to be taken up and worked on as we move forward. I
think in 2026 whether we do it via surveys, mailings, you know, a survey just to kind of >> within the community, what do people think? Yeah. I mean, explain >> this is why we're heading to this because I agree. I mean, it it has merit. Everybody uses the streets, but
what does, you know, what do the taxpayers think >> and survey is not that hard online surveys just to get a feel for what the community thinks? Well, and to add to that, you can give them information and say, "Okay, this is a potential. Here's here's a here's a a hypothetical what it
could look like if we went this route, and here's how it'll affect you." And you can give them that information as a as an educational piece. Um, you there's a lot of different ways we can we can work with the community and let them know, hey, this is something the council is considering. What do you think and
what is your thoughts? So, I I agree. I I don't I'm I'm not opposed to that at all. I think it's a great idea. So, um, all right. Well, with that being said, I'm not hearing anything else. Do I have
an emo do I have a motion to approve the special assessment policy as pre presented to us today? >> So, moved. >> I have a motion from council member Ball. Do I have a second? >> I'll second. >> I have a second from council member Moroni. Further discussion?
Hearing none. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> I. Opposed. >> I >> abstensions. Motion carries. >> And and again you heard administrator
PFU was this is something we can revisit. So this is not set in stone by any means. This is what we're using now, but it's been amended in the past and it can be changed again in the future. But I think this is a step in the right direction for us to get us moving where we need to go with regards to this being
more equitable and fair to our our community members. And moving on 7E Breezy Point Parks ordinance. Administrator Posus. >> Yes, thank you. Um staff has been made aware that the council may be interested in establishing an ordinance for public
parks to establish clear rules for use and also provide the authority for the police department to enforce these rules and site uh or issue citations if necessary. The council has an existing ordinance governing the public beach which be which would act as a good
starting point for a broader ordinance. Tonight, we're looking for direction from the council on if they want to begin drafting an all-encompassing park ordinance or if the council wishes to continue with the current operations and patrol uh of the Breezy Point Parks.
>> All right. Well, I'll I'll I'll start us off. Um so, yes, I can't speak for the council, but I can speak for myself. We do need to do something about our park ordinance. We need to have something put in place. I think it's changed a lot when we look at our parks from what it
used to be many years ago. Again, we're looking at something that's been on the books for a long time, but we don't just have a public beach anymore. We have our park here at city hall. We've got our disc golf course. We've got um you know, fishing dock. We've got four season trails. We've got a lot of stuff. And I
think the plan is, if I'm reading our park uh committee, right, park and recck committee, that they're they're looking at doing more things in the future, adding more amenities. So, I think it's important for us to start looking at this and saying, "Okay, what what works?
What what can we do?" And I would say this, remember that no size fits all? and that while we try to address as many items and things as we can, we probably won't hit everything. That's just the way of it is. You never going to find an
ordinance that covers all the bases. Just it won't happen. But I think we can do a good job uh trying to get something in place and I know staff uh is definitely capable of putting something together and bringing it back to us. So that's my thoughts on does that yes, we do need to do something. Other council
members, >> I would 100% agree. Um, we should have had a global ordinance years ago. Um, that being said, we just need to move forward. The parks and recreation, you know, the ordinance for the public beach
needs to be tweaked, but we need to give our police department something that they can enforce. Obviously, one of the driving factors in my opinion has been the expansion disc golf course. Um,
it it's a no-brainer to proceed with it. Um, if Chief Sandell has input as to what, you know, the police department's thoughts are. I mean, we don't want this ordinance that's too much. We want it focused and targeted to, you know,
what the police can enforce and not overburden them with things that really do not need to be addressed in an ordinance. Other comments, thoughts. >> I too a good idea. I think it's a good
timing, too. If it was started now, there would give us a little bit of time to get something out before >> I agree. >> Yeah. >> Now's the time to do it is is get something so we're set for spring. >> Yeah. >> Council member Scott, you had a comment? >> Yeah. I mean, it's not that I disagree
with um the benefits of having a park ordinance. to me goes more towards and this is by no means uh meant to um point the fingers either at law enforcement from an enforcement standpoint or city staff. The realization here, I think
what we've come to know to be the case with park and wreck use, uh, is whether ordinance, existing policy, rules, whatever you call them,
awfully difficult, if not impossible to enforce. I mean, enforcement in my mind comes to the place of actually observing somebody misusing or violating ordinance at the time it's happening.
And I'm sorry, I don't see that. It's no different than the countless times that residents are coming forward, whether they live on adjoining Parkland or not, and expressing concern with conduct of people, with ongoing
behavior, with the fact that we've got policy right now that says you can't drink on city property. And yet time after time, picture after picture, alcoholic beverages in garbage cans.
And you know, I I I know that the council understands that I have brought up before my concern with the fact that we have been and continue to be put on notice
of current city policy violations. and this council is doing nothing to address it. So again, to me, well, I think anything we can do to provide
more clear guard rails, if you will, in terms of how people use parkland, I would like to see us as a council take a look at and get serious about how we engage our residents, how this community gets involved in these important decisions.
Let's not forget in my opinion a lot of the issues that we're experiencing with the disc golf course especially the expansion comes from the fact that residents didn't know what was happening
to me it's a systemic issue within how councils have approached any number of things in this city we need to do better we need to figure out how we inform communicate and have a dialogue with our residents as these things are happening.
Um, I think anyone would be hardpressed to say that had we done that, had there been a level of effort and time and attention paid on the front end of a disc golf course going in people's backyards that we would probably not be dealing with near the extent of ongoing
issues that we are today. So, in support of anything we can do, whether it be by ordinance or otherwise, but I honestly feel until this council takes a few steps back and says, you know what, we have requirements anytime
that a private entity wants to come in and develop land in the city, why should we be exempt? We should be beholden ourselves to the same requirements in our zoning ordinances, to the same process of
notifying property owners as we expect every other person that comes to the city wanting to develop land. >> Any other comments? >> I mean, I think council member Scott brings up some good points. I mean, I think the communication piece of the
city is in place. Staff has done an excellent job. Um, you have to have an ordinance so that the police department can enforce anything. I mean, that's the first step. Um, and I, you know, there's a workshop topic. You know, is that
something that want to be discussed? I think Brad brings up some good points. Um, but the bottom line is we need to start with an ordinance. Administrator Pus >> if I may. Um, ordinances do require a public hearing. Yep. >> So that Yep.
>> It's just a given. >> Yep. So the people will have a chance to give input. Yeah. I mean I think the ordinance is the first step. It's kind of like um I'll use this old thing. I'll go back to when I was a kid. Hated to clean my
room. Where do I start? Mom, she said just start somewhere. Okay. So, this is a tough one to tackle, but the idea is that we need to start somewhere. And so, I think the ordinance is the first step in that direction to put something
together. So, um I'm kind of hearing across the board that we need to have something. I didn't hear anything from council member, but I didn't hear any disagreement either, but >> no, I I agreed with majority of you there. We need it should be an ordinance
across all public parcels. Um, right now it's clarified just as the beach. And I think um, all residents should be able to um, have ease of access of what those ordinances are and not have to search through the website to figure out what is allowed, what's not allowed. It's got
to be ease of access. Um, cuz right now you show up to any public facility, you don't know what the rules are. Um, I know I believe the public beach does have hours posted, but I think that's the only one that does have hours posted at this point. Um so whatever the
ordinance does follow suit with is we need to make sure we clearly communicate not only to local residents but those who are visiting our area um so they are well aware um and they can have access to to said things. Um of recent I
visited a a park down near Prior Lake and there's a QR code that I had to scan. uh it was a it was a a paid park that I had to be part of. But paying that also agreed to their terms and conditions and and even following that it it uh notified you saying citations
will be um granted if you did not follow suit with this. Um and that was even beyond the first initial sign that says scan in here, sign in here, and then the next, you know, 100 feet down the line was if you didn't sign in, citations will be. So, it was double double whammy
that you were able to see that there's rules and regulations here that you must follow. So, yeah, and I I agree. I mean, I think you put the ordinance together, then you got to get some communication out about it. You could be signage, could be a lot of different ways we go about putting it
out there, but I I agree also easily accessible, easy to find, easy to understand, not lost in a lot of language that most people are going to go, what are they talking about? So, yeah, I agree. We make it easy to understand, simple, and straightforward. Um, and then have the ability for our
law enforcement to enforce when when they know when when we see there's a violation taking place. So, um, so what I'm hearing, and correct me if I'm wrong, council, but I'm hearing that staff, what we'd like to see is, um, put
your put your thinking hats on, get your staff together, work with law enforcement, others who are a part of it, and put together some proposals that we can start taking a look at, draft up something based on probably looking at what's in the surrounding areas, as well
as what you see in other parts of the hate. I would encourage, yeah, don't stay local, go beyond because I think you can learn some good things from outside communities that are doing things too that maybe have been doing a lot more of it than that we're doing. So, you know, put something together and then bring it back to us and we can
start the process there. >> Okay. Hopefully, you'll see it January, February would be my goal. >> Sounds good. Excellent. Thank you. >> All right. Moving on. Number eight, departmental updates. 8A, schedule special meeting. City Administrator Povus.
>> Yes, thank you. We kind of touched on it earlier tonight, but we need to hold a special meeting after December 3rd um to award the contract for the Bushman Road project and review the pre-sale report and call for the bonds as um Rebecca was
saying. So, she was mentioning December 8th. I just threw that out there to them. Um but we are open to any other dates. I keep it in the first half of December. Um, so up to you guys, but just have some discussion about date and time. Should not be a very long meeting.
Um, under 30 minutes, I'd hope 20 minutes. >> Well, I'll start off by saying December 8th works for me. It's the Monday following our council meeting. So, the council meeting would be on the 1st. >> So, this would be the following Monday on the 8th. So, um, I'm fine with the
8th, but I don't know about the rest of the council. And if there's an alternative date, again, we need to keep it in the front half of December as well. >> Works for me right now. >> I'm fine with the ETH. >> The ETH, >> but I'll defer to the rest of
>> Yeah. I mean, I can change it, too. I'm just saying what works for me. And I am o I'm open to other dates, too. So, >> and and we're talking at uh after hours again 6:30 start time. >> Sure. Yeah, we'll do whatever you guys want to call it. >> We'll do a evening start time. I think
that works better for people's schedules work-wise, >> familywise, all that. So, yes, I want to be respectful of that. >> Okay. >> Yeah, December 8th would work for me as well. Um, if that works for the rest,
>> I'm sorry with Rebecca. As far as things go now, it should work. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Well, we got three that says the ETH will work for sure and two possible. So, we're going to go with the ETH. >> Sounds good. >> Let's >> ETH at 6:30. I'll send out a meeting report.
>> 6:30 work for everybody >> council. >> 6:30. >> Okay. 6:30 is December 8th special meeting. >> Okay. >> All right. Then, uh 8B schedule 2026 strategic planning session. >> Yes, Administrator
>> Puss. Thank you. Um we are going to put the 2026 calendar on the next agenda. As a part of that, I'd like to schedule a strategic planning meeting. um kind of an early spring, late winter. I threw in there some dates that are unavailable in
February. I would like to shoot for February, but we can do March as well. I just like in that first quarter of the year after January. So, I just we can talk about dates um and I can send out a meeting request for
that as well. >> Well, I can tell you right now the first two weeks of February work for me. uh the third week of February is out completely for me. >> Okay. >> So um but any of the dates within those first two weeks. So that's basically the
2nd through the 6th or the 9th through the 13th. >> We could do it before the meeting. That does get to be a long day. So we want it separate. >> I want it separate. >> Okay. Okay. >> Yeah, I would agree. Yeah, I I think we
need to have it separate and I don't want to try to cram it all in. Um >> so >> nobody's feeling the pressure then and we can be relaxed about it and really put some process into it if that's what we want to do which I think is the goal. So um rest of the council
>> need to be like three to four hours or can we do two meetings? Is it easier to just do one? I just don't know if I can commit to four hours being but it might things might be different in February. It's a long ways away. I had that thought though. I mean, if you schedule it at 6:30
>> and we're here to 10:30, right? Yeah. >> How productive I'll be after >> my last hour. >> Well, why don't we do this? Let's do one and do a 2hour block and then let's see where we're at after 2 hours >> if I may. >> And then Yes. Go ahead. >> We've also scheduled them at like 4:30
to 7:30 starting earlier, too. Just because it is that's >> sometimes it gets tough for people's schedules. >> True. >> Kids, school. I understand >> things like that. So, we're trying >> and I know that we we need to be conscious of that. I Well,
>> I say let's do this. Let's do two. Let's do one. Start with one. Let's plan one. Do two hours and see where we're at. >> And then we can schedule. >> Exactly. If we need to feel, then we can schedule another one at the end of the two hours and say, "Hey, let's get back to this at what date?" Let's set it then. We'll do it then. What's the rest
of the council think of that? Not opposed, but I I haven't been opposed to doing a three or four hour block as well. >> I'm not either. I'm just trying to be conscientious of Yeah. of everybody in in their schedules. >> I I think if we could start it maybe at a 4:00 time frame,
>> um you know, if we started at 4:00, >> we could go till 8 and we're done. >> And then we're done. It's a one one shot. Um I I know majority majority of us work here. Um, so hopefully maybe a four o'clock start time would not be out of the realm, but I know it may be
difficult for some. Um, during those weeks, I know Fridays are for sure out for me. >> Well, let's let's talk about this. What days of the week? We've got days here that are out. We see that 2nd, 10th, 12th, 16th, 18th. Those are no good. Um,
the week of the 16th is completely out for me because I'll be gone the whole week. Um, but the 2nd through the 6th, the 9th through the 13th, or the 23rd through the 27th. And now we're getting to the end of February. So, I'm thinking you'd like to have it in early February if possible. Correct. First half.
>> Yep. So, I would say 345 911. >> 3 4 5 9 and 11. So, those are our dates. The 3rd, the 4th, the 5th, the 9th, or the 11th. >> Four hours is a long time as well. I mean, we could wrap it up in two. I
don't know. I've never done it with this council. So, it really it's up to you guys how long it goes. >> Well, let's split the difference and do three hours. >> I've had >> the art of compromise at work. Again, we could do three hours, too. So, let let
me ask the next question. So, if we have the Let's find a date first. Let's do that. So, we have the 3rd, the 4th, the 5th, the 9th, and the 11th. Rebecca. >> Uh, I'm gonna say a Wednesday.
>> Okay. >> Just because I think that'll work. I have less going on on Wednesday. >> So, the 4th or the 11th? >> Would you prefer one or the other? >> Uh, I don't think it matters right now. >> Okay. All right. So, we're looking at a Wednesday. Does that work for you, Brad?
No. Wednesdays are bad for you, aren't they? That's right. I knew this was going to get interesting. What I could do, I could take those days and set out like a doodle poll and you guys can enter your availability. >> Let's do that cuz it's Yeah, that's the
best way. Okay, do that and then set some times. >> I can do that >> and do some times and some things and then let's see what the majority comes up with and we'll go with that. >> And I'll even do it later into November so you guys it can maybe know more by then about February. >> Okay, everybody comfortable with that? council. She's going to send out a
little doodle poll for us and we'll we'll come up with some stuff. >> Just give it your best shot and we'll go from there. It's always challenging to put one together, but we do need to have one. So, >> okay. >> All right. And then, um, we just had the, uh, police department summary was
there. Uh, was there anything of significance, Chief, that you wanted to highlight in your report? >> Not that I can think of off the top of my head. >> Okay. Right. Sometimes, you know, there's something there that's whoa, you know, maybe you want to let the council know about, but I didn't see anything, but
>> nothing crazy. >> Okay, sounds good. That's good. We don't like crazy. So, me either. >> All right. I have one more thing. It's not on the agenda, but I'm going to give a brief update on the uh the joint powers met on the 13th of October. Um,
and so there wasn't a lot of stuff that was covered. Uh, updates uh the the two trucks. Um, so the 350 skid unit, that one is um, in use and so they're using it already. It's working out really
well. They're very happy with it. And the 550, that's their new rescue truck. So the 550 is the new rescue truck. That's the one that took a little longer to get um, done, but it looks like they're going to have that one in use by December. So uh, Chief Schwankl actually
got a call from him said, "Hey, we got the stuff. Can you come to Iowa today?" He says, "Yeah, I think I can do it." So, he drove clear to Iowa with the truck, got it down there so they could fit it. And then on the way back, he says, "Well, hey, the guy with the lights has got it, so we'll swing in there." And he did the lights. So, he's
chief has gone out of his way to make that happen. So, that's that's going good. Um, they did they've been working on a a severe windstorm exercise. Very interesting. working with the Breezy Point Police Department uh and some other entities, Crowing County Risk
Management uh about this, it's like a wind event. So, if you think of what happened in Baiji this summer, um they actually did a tabletop version of that, meaning they kind of did a simulation. Uh and they're actually looking at the fall of 2026 to do the exercise, actual
exercise in Breezy Point. So, a lot of great things going on that. So, that would be like a how would they handle it? How's the response to it? How do we deal with it? How does the fire district respond? How does the police departments respond? How does risk management crowing county handle it? So, I think
that's a great thing that they're working on. And it's, you know, you see what happened in Baiji this summer. That's a possibility here. We never want to think about it, but it is okay because we live with a lot of trees around us. So, um, so they were working on that. I thought that was really neat.
Um, and then they did a golf scramble fundraiser. Uh, and this was the the relief association did this, but they raised about 15,000. That's 72. Uh, I think they had 72 teams. No, they're looking they had 36 teams this
year, but they're looking to go 72 teams next year, full day. So, if any of you like to golf and you want to help support the local fire district, see Chief Schwankl and see about getting a team. He said they had a lot of fun. Really enjoyed it. It was a good time. Um, and they raised some money. Um, and
then let's see what else. Um, they got a $10,000 grant was a joint comp here financial grant. It was applied for and received together with the Cross Lake Fire Department to uh
replace all the rope rescue equipment. So, the rope rescue equipment was getting dated and they felt like they need to get it updated. So, they wrote a grant with Cross Lake and they got $10,000 that'll be applied towards that. So, they're getting new um new rope rescue equipment. I think I think that
was I think that was it. Um they are looking at some Sourcewell public safety match funds. It's a grant. Uh they have to match I believe 20% and they're looking for using it for turnout gear. It's new pants and that kind of stuff.
Uh updating to have backups. So, they have to they they need to have backups in case something happens. Um, so they're looking at it's a $52,000 grant. That's what it is. And they're matching uh there's a match. So they're working on that, too. So I don't did I did I
miss anything, Council Ball? >> No, I don't think so. >> I think I covered most of it. So yeah. All right. And then just FYI, the chair will transfer at the end of this year uh back to Peekquat. So Mayor Gardner will then become the chair of the joint
powers. It rotates every year. So um All right. So that's all I have. All right, with that I'm to number nine. Adjourn. Do I have a motion to adjurnn? >> So move. >> I have a motion from council member Rooney. Do I have a second? >> Second.
>> Second from council member Jensen. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. >> I. Opposed. Abstensions. Motion carries. me is adjourned at 7:50