Okay. At this time, I'll call the order the June 8th, 2026 council meeting to order. Please rise if you can for allegiance. I aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic
for it stands one nation indivisibley and justice for all. Make a motion to adopt tonight's agenda. >> Second. Have a motion in a second. All in favor? >> I >> um any Okay.
Move into the public forum. Uh Derek Lynn Please state your name, address, and everything. >> Thank you, mayor. My name is Derek Lind. I live in Ramsey. I'm with ASIT, the Anobi County Election Integrity Team.
Not sure if you guys recognize me. I've been been here a few times. Uh I've got seven copies. Should be the five council members, city administrator, and the attorney. Uh Tonight the topic again is a pole pads. I've been up here before talking about pole pads. The reason I'm
here is we've had a couple of developments in this case. I'm not going to read through that packet. You can take that home and look at that in your own time. Uh we were trying to talk you guys into going back to paper pole pads and following the city of Oak Grove. The county came out with a felony threat and
tried to stop Oak Grove. Well, recently the Upper Midwest Law Center filed suit against the county uh the Secretary of State and a couple of members at at the county there. So, Upper Midwest Law Center, not sure if you're familiar with that law firm, their nonprofit law firm.
They took that pro bono. They took the case on their own dime and they're going to represent Oak Grove. And that petition goes, there's information on that in the packet. That petition goes, I think it goes straight to the Supreme Court. Uh I'm not real good at that. maybe your attorney. We don't I don't know. He can maybe answer that better
than I can. Um that's the first piece of news. The second piece of news is Liz Colin came out with a movie Minnesota M and Ace it our group was featured in that movie and in that movie we talk about this case we talk about the felony threat of grove and and the pole pad. So
just wanted to make you aware of the court case significant. And then secondly ask you to watch the movie Minnesota M and that that segment that's in there. We emailed that to you and I texted it to your phone numbers too and it's information is in the packets there
too. Uh real quick on the felony threat. What's interesting about that is this is a letter that the county sent out and it says if you use paper pole pads it's a felony. It's an unsigned letter. Six months later the election manager came out and said that he sent it. Now,
what's interesting about that is almost the entire letter is a legal argument. So, how does an election manager write a legal argument? Secondly, how does an election manager threaten citizens with a felony? And of course, UMLC says they don't even think he's reading the
statutes correctly. We tried to tell the county you're misreading the statutes. We felt that Oak Grove had the authority to go back to paper, but they kind of they kind of brushed us off. So, that's where we're at. I'm asking you guys to watch those
movies, look at that lawsuit, and consider going back to paper pole pads. The reason for that is because we can trust paper. I can't tell you if you can trust electronic pole pads. Maybe they're good, maybe they're not. We don't know. It's a third party vendor,
but I think we all can agree that you can trust a piece of paper. It just sits there. So, that being said, you guys have any questions for me? I know you probably weren't expecting me to come in prepared for any questions, but if you do have any questions, the last page of that packet has our website and our
contact information. So, we we feel that this is going to be a city-led movement. If you're waiting for the state or the county to fix this problem, it ain't going to happen. It has to come from you guys. There's there's probably 10 things wrong with our elections right now. You guys are responsible for two. Counting of the
votes, which you already passed the purr. Thank you for doing that. You guys did that a couple of years ago. and going back to paper pole pads. After you do that, you're done. There's nothing more you can do. It's up to the state. So, no questions. >> Well, I have a question. Do you think
these pole pads are interfering anywhere way out in Anoka County? I mean, is there any evidence of anything like that? >> We have no evidence. >> We have no evidence because we can't we can't tell what they're doing. It's a third party vendor. We're not allowed to see inside of them. It's completely
electronic. Can't see. Now, if it was paper, we could look at the paper and say, "Hey, there's something here." Paper leaves a mark. You know, any kind of edits or changes is always going to be, you know, something that you can audit on paper. But no, we have no evidence that there's any problems.
>> Yeah. I just haven't seen it seems like the problems are in um more congested areas than out here. So, >> Oh, you're talking about your population. >> Yeah. Well, I mean what I think is interesting is the felony threat, the reaction by the county. And I talk about
that in the movie. It's why the overthe-top reaction. Why not just say go ahead Oakrove? Oakrove, I think, has about 8,000 people. Let's say 4,000 6,000 voters. They wanted to go back to paper. Why did the county care so much? Obviously, they did. They threatened
with the felony. By the way, that letter didn't go just to them. It went to everybody. You guys got the letter, too. I believe it went to your election clerk. So, thank you for the question, though. Any other questions? >> All right. Thank you. >> Thanks for your time.
>> Uh, Dustin, >> name and address, please. >> My name is Dustin Kumi. Uh, 4904 217th Avenue Northeast East Bethl. That's where the, uh, temple is. So, should I explain that what we're
trying >> was a different format last time? >> It's a little different for if I may, mayor. >> Well, >> yeah. >> Why don't you hold off on talking now until we bring that up? >> Okay. >> And then you can comment. >> Okay.
>> Because actually, you don't need to be on the public forum because during the process I we you can come up and talk about it. >> Okay. Should I go back? >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> And that' be the same with you, Nicole. You just wait until
we go through the process, then you can come up. All right. >> All right. Thanks. Okay. Moving on to the consent agenda. Make a motion to approve the consent agenda. >> I'll second and I need to abstain from B
and C. >> Okay. We have a motion and a second. I want to pull C. >> And I'd like to pull A. >> C and A. And you're you're abstaining from >> A. >> B and C. >> B and C.
You're pulling them or abstaining from. >> Well, why don't you just pull them and then you can abstain. >> Okay, I'll pull them. >> Okay. So, A, B, and C, we're pulling. All right. With that said, all those in favor of the amended uh consent agenda
>> I. >> Any oppose? >> Item A, I'll be abstaining from the bill list. So, someone would like make a motion to approve. >> I'll make a motion to approve item A.
>> I'll second. I have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? >> Yes, there is. I do have a question on a few here. Um, >> what is the $27,000 bill on Viking Meadow? I haven't seen one that high.
going to uh are you talking about the um the Hackinson got an engineering fee of $27,000? >> That would be that would be the responsibility of the of Capstone Homes. So that's a pass through
engineering work done in there >> probably on the second phase there, >> right? One other question here. No, that was it on the second page going to them. Is there any way we can get that marked a little different so indicate that it's a pass through on
some of these things because it looks like it's build a city >> just for future think about it. But it would >> make it easier. Give it some thought. See what we can do. Thanks. Any other discussion? Nope. Motion, a
second on item A. All those in favor? I >> opposed. Abstain. >> Heard. Item B. >> I'll make a motion to approve item B. >> I'll be abstaining.
>> Yep. >> Second. I have a motion and a second with uh Susanna state standing. Any further discussion? None being heard. All those in favor? >> I
>> I oppos. Okay. Item C, Matt, page 22, line 25 and 29. It says uh Berglin noted. Berglin wasn't
there. It was So, that needs to be changed. And I'm concerned was like every time we got minutes, if you don't read through there, there's a lot of different things that aren't listed or they're listed
wrong. So, I'm kind of I mean, just for this example, it's like if you listen to the meeting, you should have known right off the bat that Eric Larson was sitting there. >> Yeah. Mr. Mayor and Council, I think the primary concern and also change that
we'll need to have is under present they had Scott Bergland which there's no Scott Bergland but Eric Larson they didn't understand that was Eric Larson in there so that kind of precipitated into their notes calling Bergland
>> so we'll we'll get that changed to Larson >> uh I notic that on line 10 also present Scott Berkeland is listed >> that was my question Who is that? >> Right.
>> Okay. Yeah. I'll make a motion to approve item C of the consent agenda. Second. >> I have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? I'm being heard. All in favor? >> I >> abstain. >> Opposed?
On abstain. All right. Going down to item 8A, community development. All right. Thank you, Mayor and Council again. Um All right. Again, the request before you this get
it to work. request before you this evening is a variance associated with replacement of failing system at 255 Laurel Road as submitted by owners Nicole and Curtis Lindberg. On the screen you see a
general area. This is in the Lake district. Um their property is approximately 100 by 100 square and the image on the screen shows an approximate location for their proposed septic field. So that kind of gives you a context of
it. Um just show you briefly the this is the front of their home. This is where that green square was and this is the site where the uh septic system is proposed to be installed or the the the drain field if you will
uh on the east side of the property. Again, it's a 100 by 100 square foot corner lot and the applicants seek uh various uh setback um changes or authorizations from the city ordinance
andor the statute. Um specifically u septic holding tanks are proposed to be six feet from a property line where 10 feet is uh normally required. That doesn't help. uh a drain field proposed to be 13 feet
from the home um where 20 feet is typically required and uh down to one foot from the property line to the east where 10t is typically required. So that kind of sets the the stage.
Okay, maybe I just leave this one up. Okay. Staff of the planning commission reviewed the request on the city's variance standards contained in section 04-10. Based upon the application materials the testimony received, the planning commission concluded that the practical
difficulties are largely sight specific arise from the property's relatively small size. The existing home and accessory structure locations, neighboring well location, and separation distances required for the replacement of a septic system.
Obviously, these constraints significantly limit placement of a placement options on the property. The current septic system is in the west side of the property. Um, approximately here. Planning commission also found that the request represents a reasonable use of
the property because it associated with the replacement of a failing system um serving an existing resident. No increase in density or change in use is proposed. Finally, the commission concluded that the approval of requested setbacks would not alter the essential
character of the neighborhood which will certainly will remain residential and in character following the replacement of the of the system. I'm going to go back to we talk about some abuing properties. Some things we will when the application
uh comes in I will be the location of abuing wells. Um this map shows two concentric circles. Um basically the red being the south limit of the uh septic field and the blue being the north limit
of the septic field and 100 ft radius. We don't know the nature of all the abuing wells. Um if it's a a traditional uh or a shallow well then it's a 100 foot radius. If it's a
a drilled well with a casing then it's 50. So uh we are aware of uh the neighbor to the west has a shallow well and it is outside of that 100 foot distance. We know the property to the northeast um also had does have a a traditional
drilled well and that too is beyond 100 ft but that would ordinarily be 50. Um when the applicants do uh submit for a final design, they'll they'll have to review what's uh to the south and to the north, but this is the
data we have today. But um it'll depend on the nature of those wells. >> So talking about wells, there is a proposed deep well for this property as well. >> Yes. Yep. and that is proposed to be back on shown on this drawing uh on the
west side of the property here and would exceed that 50 foot distance. I understand they're going to have to abandon the current drain field um and as part of their uh proposed scope of work um because the old field also applies to that setback. So they'll have
to remove that. Um so the the new proposed is an adequate distance. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> More well more than 50 feet. >> Okay. >> Um so the f the planning commission made those three findings um that it beats
the city's practical difficulties test. So in addition to that variance analysis, uh the planning commission also reviewed the requests relative to Minnesota rules chapter 780, which governs individual sewer treatment systems. Uh during that review, staff
focus on ensuring that the action the city might take would remain consistent with applicable statutes. Um Minnesota rules do allow local governments to review and approve certain setback variances, but we may not wave the underlying septic performance standards
um found in seven well found in Minnesota rules. I won't spare you the the details there and those are the things the city may not wave are parts A, B, C, and D. Um, and in reviewing the application,
um, it would seem the applicant and their contractor should be able to meet those tests. And we'll just touch a base back on that in a minute. Um, ultimately, for that reason, the the proposed resolution, but both by planning commission and and you folks
tonight potentially um is sought to not simply just approve the redu setback reductions, but and then to conclude the review process. Instead, the resolution includes a condition requiring the applicants to provide a final septic design and certification from a
qualified and licensed professional demonstrating compliance uh with the statutes in general, but certainly A through A through D, which are nonwaveable. This allows the city council to consider the variance request based upon the practical difficulties presented by the
property while preserving the building officials ability to conduct final technical review and ensure there is a reasonable technical basis for permit issuance. Again, I and the planning commission are not those people capable reviewing those
designs. So, we'll leave it to those professionals to make that determination. Um uh I understand there's been a letter uh placed at your desk. Um one of the things the city has uh contacted and
communicated both with the planning commission and the applicant that a letter such as this um and making those commitments which are matched to what was found in your resolution um that they will comply with parts A through D
um short of the uh the setback changes. uh this draw this image on your screen shows the the typical 20 foot setbacks uh required structure for an absorption area and that's essentially the the the
major issue here which we're trying to address. Other than that in essence the resolution 26 um-30 and there is a revised version uh uh pres uh placed at your desk and I'll certainly leave it to
the city attorney to talk about those uh amendments. Um uh but generally the requested the resolution approves a requested setback variances as they're justified upon the practical difficulties by the property that the
council generally has no objection to the concepts of the setbacks as shown. But it leaves a final technical review to the building official and qualified professional professionals responsible for septic design um to ensure compliance. Um so with that mayor and
council that is our recommendation the resolution as presented um and revised uh with the version you have at your desk. I'll make a motion to approve the resolution 2026-30
septic system for 255 Laurel Road P number 36-33-23-12-000097 >> second >> motion a second any further discussion >> with the revised language or yes with the revised Any
further discussion? Um, existing septic tank. Is that getting removed? >> Yes, it must be removed. >> I just want to make sure so in case they ever sell it. >> Yeah. >> Somebody ain't going to get hurt.
>> Yeah, it has to come out because they got to put their new well in back in that corner. >> Okay. >> And so that'll be out of there. And I've been working with the Lindbergs, myself and Suzanne, city planner and the septic guy on this whole thing. And this is
basically the only place that we can put it. And uh so I'm fine with it. Planning commission is fine with it as well. >> Any further? Okay, we have a motion and a second to the amended resolution. All those in favor?
>> I opposed. Unheard. Motion passes. Item two. All right. Again, mayor and council, thank you. We have uh before you a site plan and administrative subdivision review for the property at 490427th
Avenue Northeast to facilitate the construction of an accessory structure/shelter. Um the image on your screen is a general representation of the area. Um if you this
structure here is the existing temple. Um this is the current parcel line and the parcel to the west is smaller than the the parcel to the east and you'll see a change in that. Um but ultimately it's designed or the the request here is
to um approve a site plan to allow the construction of of a uh shelter. at this point. Um the it is a Buddhist temple if you didn't know obviously um but uh the
current staff of the of the temple the monks if you will and I apologize if I have that wrong Dustin so uh they live on this prop they live on this property and reside in these homes. So that's
kind of the the lay of the land. Um, this is the slab that they constructed last year and they typically erect a tent on this site and they hold their festivals and and their events outdoors. You can kind of catch to the south and
west the what the temp where the temple is. Um, so I probably have a better picture of that. Oh, yep. There it is. So, I kind of look at the no no green of the trees. So, we've been at we've been
talking about this for a while. So, anyway. Okay. the existing parcel or the the property is where the temple sits um was given a cup in 2022
and one of the requirements of that cup because the property is zoned rural residential for house of worship uh or place of worship um it's only by conditional use permit and the council didn't grant that in 2022 but there is a condition on that CUP that said any new
constructive permanent structures will be required through a site plan review process and and that's that's again the reason in part why you're here tonight I want um here Here's the uh uh site plan in a little more detail. You've
probably seen this in the past when the when the temple was initially constructed. Um but this is the location and the structure itself is approximately 6,400 square feet and it's an open opensided building. Um and basically we've probably all been in in
various parks and things, but that's that's the >> it's essentially just a roof structure >> essentially. Correct. There's no additional parking. There's no additional lighting or anything uh proposed as part of this. Okay.
Sorry. No worries. The structure again is intended to uh provide covered gathering space for religious, cultural, ceremonial, fellowship and community activities associated with the the primary uh approved use of the property, the cup,
the place of worship. The applicant is not proposing any expanded parking areas, exterior lighting, new access drives or any utility extensions as part of the request. Um the structure is propos as proposed is already within a
developed portion of the site and is intended to function as accessory structure serving the existing temple use. So not a standalone facility not to be rented out for um third parties or or the like
to create the most site flexibility for the for the temple site itself as shown on the screen. Um the applicant proposes to combine the existing 20.2 27 acre and that's kind of that was the smaller lot.
That that current lot line is about here with a joining 16.25 acre tract creating a new 36.52 acre parcel leaving the remaining separate parcel of 24.27 acres. The request qualifies as
administrative subdivision under chapter 66. It is not a lot boundary adjust. it sorry it is a lot boundary adjustment between existing parcels does not create additional lots does not increase residential density does not require any public roads or utility extensions and
results in parcels that meet the city's frontage and lot area requirements um but from a planning perspective the subdivision does serve a couple other important purposes one it consolidates the temple campus and proposed shelter
area into one common parcel I mentioned mentioned that right now the monks live on this property and where what they might ultimately do with this lot is you know we don't know and maybe they don't know either but uh the the shelter will
serve the temple and to have that on a separate parcel with an unknown future um it's best to have that on the the house of wor or the the place of worship directly um and it remained subordinate to the temple itself
Uh second, the larger parcel increases the amount of accessory accessory structure available under the rural res rural residential zoning district uh regulations and creates more practical framework for the applicant. In the end,
um they I think they have some discussions in the in the future of maybe adding a residential piece here to the west side or someplace on the site and and have the monks move from this this these homes and and maybe over here
to something more contemporary, I guess, but uh it's just uh early early conversations. Um so the planning commission reviewed the site plan um and uh approved uh that
proposal. They were comfortable with uh its layout and and and form. Um and similarly tonight uh mayor and councel the based on the application materials the existing cup the proposed administrative subdivision and planning
commission recommendation uh staff finds the request consistent with city subdivision regulations the rural residential zoning district standards and the conditions of the existing conditional use permit. So, um,
uh, we would recommend approval of resolution 2026-31, which approves the subdivision and the site. Make a motion to approve resolution 2023-31. >> Second. I have a motion and a second.
Any further discussion? Oh, I have some questions because first, um, the property with a house is essentially giving the temple property more land. So, it's still it's not three lots, it's
two lots. >> That is correct. >> Okay. Um, because my other question is, isn't there a rule that a a lot can only be split once? We do
>> they already split it. So is this okay according to that rule? >> Well, I don't know if they've I don't know the history of these are currently all in meets and bounds description um right now. These this has not been platted um to the best of my knowledge. Um there the city does have a rule in
its ordinance. It talks about if something's been split um it can't be split again. Um one of the challenges with that rule is it doesn't have any kind of timeline. It doesn't have any kind of parameter that says
this was split in 1975 and how far back is the city going to be willing to look if if it was creating a different parcel with the intention of intensification of the property. I think you could make that case or anybody
could make the case saying hey no you need to go through a platting process but that is not what's happening here. It might it have been split in the past. I am not aware of it. We didn't do a title search or any kind of that work.
Um far as I know, it's between a property owner amongst themselves of land they own. Okay. >> I know. Um but I thought it was split before that. one of those things that maybe as the
city looks at some of its ordinance ordinance updates and in whatever future that is future that is that could clarify um because what you to your point you don't want people to say well I'm going to split this now and then so I sell it off and then I somebody else wants to
split it again to get around the platting or for development purposes that certainly isn't what's happening here but um what you're saying is something that an ordinance wants to prevent um uh some cities have a fiveyear look back window or a 10-year
look back window. You know, legacy properties with long-term owners, you know, they have children and they want to split it. And so, how do you really judge those things? It's hard. Um but there is no timeline in your ordinance.
>> Yeah. And and I don't really mind this. I and I know it's to help limit development on property. So, I don't really mind this. I just wanted to make sure it was not violating that particular rule because uh I don't want to get in trouble in the future.
>> Neither do I, mayor, mayor council. But one thing to note is maybe that's one clarification the city can take a look at is that timeline. >> Right. Okay. I don't have anything else. Did um
you guys look into this is in the significant environmental area? >> Um do you realize that? And the reason I bring this up is because the 20 acres to the north of this pro deal, she when I first come on came to me,
she wanted to do a lot split and the city was going to force her to do a PUD in order just to do a lot split because she was in this significant environmental area. We did look we did I don't know if that would change >> a protected area.
>> Yeah. I don't know if it would change the the nature of a lot split. It might change how it's used. The fact that something might be zoned or have an overlay on it. Um let's see. I might have
one more map. I might have it. Yeah, this is it. So, it's hard to see on this green on this map. Um but the green hatched is this
impacted or is this significant natural environment area? >> Yeah. It goes through both of his properties. >> Yep. And and to the north. I mean it's And in this case, we when we looked at it, all of the land that
this is has already been graded, changed. You know, >> the reason I bring it up is because the resident to the north there was being told she would had to put out all this money and go through a >> PUD. >> Oh, okay. Hi, K. I didn't even see you.
>> I didn't see you, K. >> We We don't know what the exact proposal is until that you get that. It's hard to say what those what >> because she was trying to split her line. >> Yeah, >> I have much better
Good. >> So, we did look at it again that where they're proposing is all well impacted. If you remember the picture, it was all cleared already. And I don't know what was there before the temple. So that's >> I just wanted to clarify that we've
looked at this and >> I didn't want to have her call on me tomorrow. >> Well, again, I don't know if it's a the if it's the environmentally sensitive is question for what their proposal might be, but we'll look at whatever they want
to suggest. >> Yeah. I've just Yeah. First time I ever seen that part of the environmental bill was when she approached me on it. So, >> sure. >> Any other further discussion? >> None being heard. There's been a motion
and a second. All in favor? >> I >> I >> opposed. Not heard. Motion passes. All right. This is the administrator. >> Uh Mr. Mayor and Council, I got a couple of updates for you. Um,
uh, on June 5th, the bonding bill was signed by the governor. So, we have successfully secured $3 million from the state. Nothing is secured until it's actually signed. So, that's good. Uh, that's across the finish line. Uh, next
year we'll be going for um 4 and a.5 million the balance. Uh, and I've already had conversations with the senator, Senator Bar, that um that we may be looking at six and a half million based on uh other reductions and
um construction inflation, that sort of thing. So, he seemed to think that that was reasonable given the given some of the reductions that have come in. Um, I want to also report that we've successfully navigated and accomplished
a um domain name change through the US federal government, which believe it or not is a heavy lift uh to try and get done. But anyways, um we have not changed as of yet, but we're going to a.gov and it'll be eastbeammn.gov.
So it'll be no more hyphenated, no more difficult to to understand email address. So um as we're changing the website and that we'll be moving to that.gov, which will simplify matters as well. I wanted to um say that we're
about just about a month out uh to the booster day festival. I want to remind folks if they want a booth to contact the city, uh we can get that set up or if they have a parade entry um to uh contact us as well. we'll put you in contact with the people that are
actually coordinating that. And then finally, uh, the newsletter by all accounts, I think, has been pretty well received with the changes. Um, and, um, and we are selling ads for that. So, if you're a business in East Bethl and you want to, uh, be in the new newsletter
and a full color ad, uh, now is your time. So, uh, we're more than willing to assist if businesses want to place ads in that. And that of course offsets the cost of it as well. So, um, if council or mayor, you guys know of businesses that might benefit from that, be sure to
send them our way and we'll we'll sign them up. Aside from that, that concludes my report unless there's questions. >> No, council reports. >> So, I got the booster day meeting on
Wednesday. I just echo what uh Mr. Look said. that uh it's coming up quick here. We're in the J months, June, July. So, it's always a great time. Encourage people to come out to booster days. And
if there's anybody that would like to volunteer on the day of just for an hour or two, we will happily accept your volunteerism. Um, otherwise we will be having the booster day meeting here Wednesday at
6:30 and Thursday at a sunrise meeting. >> Anybody else? >> Okay. Yep. I um I actually have a question regarding um businesses that are
accused of dumping water into Cedar Creek. And photos of that business have um torn up tennis courts where if somebody were to play tennis, they would probably trip because there's grass and weeds growing through the cracks. Does a
city automatically go to businesses and do safety inspections like that or do they have to be called in or complaintbased or how does that work? >> Um Mr. Mayor and Council to answer that two different ways. Um, first of all, if we receive a complaint, we'll follow up
with that complaint. Or in this particular case, that property owner contacted the city and said that a lot of the pictures were AI pictures. They were not actual photos and um kind of gave a layout of this is where the, you know, emptying of the pool goes and that
sort of thing. It's not near the creek. It's not dumping directly into the creek. >> Somebody went out there and confirmed that or they just went with his that person's word. We went with that person's word. Um and uh we addressed this in the staff meeting as well uh
last Tuesday, but essentially uh they are looking at um harassment of the business and they certainly like to identify who their harasser is to press charges. Um but um so far that's
they said that they were bouncing off of um servers and some other country to try and avoid detection. So um unfortunately it's while it's a sensitive matter. I understand that. Um I I don't know that
they're necessarily operating illegally and um and they shouldn't be harassed uh you know by people that don't agree with their lifestyle and things of that nature. So >> well I agree with that but I also
think that somebody from the city should confirm you know you have both sides of two sides of a story. So, I think it should be confirmed because I I don't want that to be going on, but I also don't want
false statements posted all over the internet and people calling me and say, "Hey, you're you're responsible if somebody gets hurt out there." I'm like, "No, I'm not." >> Right. No, they would have they would have um insurance to cover their
operations out there. Well, with that said, I attended the um Anoka Blaine Airport Advisory Commission meeting and there was some interesting things came up. The Blaine city manager, Eric Thoro,
um mentioned that Blaine is finally starting to run out of land. So, I'm like, finally because uh they maybe have 20 room for 20,000 more residents. So, I'm like enough. Um they are getting a
Jerry's and uh the business park. They're going to have a sevenstory hotel and increased tourism. 105th should be open by now. They said um the he talked about the Anoka County
Commissioner's big vote coming up for flock and drones and Anoka wants to spend almost $2 million which affects our taxes too because we are in Anoka County and these this these flock and
drones have facial recognition. They license plate readers and stuff like that. And I know our commissioner in this area is not going to vote for it. However, if you know people in the Rapids, the Blaine, the Ramsey area,
call tell those people to call their commissioners and tell them not to vote for this. Um July 11th, the Flying Cow airport is having a Father's Day flyin on June and
then there's another event on June 21st there. the EAA, that's the Young Eagles. Um, that's an amazing program. If you have kids who are interested in flying, they should go. They're having a pancake
breakfast on June 27th and um, uh, something else on June 21st. I can't read my writing. Um, September 19th, there's a big event for girls in aviation because they have a great women's program down there. And um what
else? On June 19th through the 27th, Lane is going to be really busy with the Special Olympics. There's going to be over 3,000 flights coming in um transporting
all these kids to participate in Special Olympics. So, you might want to not be in that area. Um the airport is getting a automated weather observing systems and two of their gates are getting replaced.
So um oh we are still working on this festival um for next year and we are looking for volunteers to um participate. Most of the meetings are on teams and um if you know people who are
good organizers of city events, they want this to be pretty big and have ideas, um contact me and I'll get you hooked up to attend the next meeting. It's usually the third Thursday at around 3:30, 4 o'clock in the afternoon.
Um, and EAA also has that learn to fly program. And I think that's all I've got. On uh last Monday, we attended uh with the Upper Rum River uh a day out on Lake
George and u we were there with Oakrove City Council. It was nice to meet those people. Um the In Noa County uh Conservation Board was out there. Lake Association. Two residents uh volunteered their big pontoons and they
took us out, showed us how they checked the water, checked on projects that were being done out on the lake. Um learned a lot about the lake uh and the park system itself. I was um to say blown away by finding out that they have over
a million people visit that park a year. That's pretty uh pretty large number and they keep that park really nice. So, hats off to the Lake Association and everybody over there. We thank them for that. Uh, I did want to mention that u I
coach eight and under baseball here and our fields over at Booster are phenomenal. So, hats off to Nate and his crew for keeping a uh for doing a great job over there. So, thank you to that. Doesn't
make our team any better, but the fields really look good. And that's all I have. That it. >> Yes. >> I'll entertain a motion to adjurnn. >> Motion to adjurnn. >> Second. >> Have a motion second. All in favor? I
opposed. Motion to adjourn. Did >> you have something?