WEBVTT

METADATA
Video-Count: 1
Video-1: youtube.com/watch?v=4X4YTGcdA7U

Part: 1

1
00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:31.440
It's order to call to rise for pledge of allegiance. And roll call, council member Zadrozny and council member Pekin are absent tonight and they did let us know. Next we'll have the public comment. We'll open the floor for public comment. If anybody would like to speak tonight, there's a 3-minute time limit and please

2
00:00:31.440 --> 00:00:52.240
keep it to fiscal city business not personal or political attacks. Just state your name and address for the record. Thank you for coming in and we will have council member Peterson be the timekeeper tonight and he will have a 1-minute sign. >> On. Josh Cosner, I stand here.

3
00:00:52.240 --> 00:01:08.800
I asked multiple times on Facebook for you to respond to any criminal investigation that went to you as while you were sitting there and you haven't responded. In fact, you actually denied that there was a criminal investigation on the city's Facebook page and I'm still just sitting here waiting

4
00:01:08.800 --> 00:01:24.200
for a response. I'm also looking for a response into why the city mayor thinks that it's okay to reach out to the chief of police about a personal matter regarding a police report into them into you that didn't happen. I'm just curious what your thoughts were about this

5
00:01:24.200 --> 00:01:39.200
and why you denied that it actually happened. >> So this is a public comment. Time is not closed. >> This is about a mayor that was under criminal investigation. This is city business and you put it on the city's Facebook page. You made it city business even more. The mayor under criminal

6
00:01:39.200 --> 00:01:54.160
investigation is city business. >> There is no There is no criminal investigation, sir. >> Really? >> It's done. >> There was a criminal investigation so don't say that there wasn't. >> was nothing found with it. >> There was something found with it. Why

7
00:01:54.160 --> 00:02:08.800
was it Why weren't you charged? Did they find Did they not find evidence that you committed it? Did you not actually admit that you posted the video in question? Because I can read the text message you sent to the chief where you said you already posted it. So, again,

8
00:02:08.800 --> 00:02:32.120
which part of this didn't happen? The only What was the reason that they didn't charge you with anything? Waiting. Why weren't you charged? Statute of limitations is the only reason you weren't charged. Did you reach out to the chief of police

9
00:02:32.120 --> 00:02:53.880
for a personal matter regarding the criminal investigation in the year asking if you could edit the police report? Did you reach out to the chief of police because I can bring up the text message right here where you did, in fact, reach out to the chief of police. >> I asked for clarification

10
00:02:53.880 --> 00:03:09.880
on a double >> So, everybody in town, if they have a criminal investigation in them, the first thing they should do is go to the chief of police? >> They can reach out to the police and ask questions. >> To the chief of police? Who's the chief's boss? Does that seem Does that seem appropriate to anybody else? Why don't

11
00:03:09.880 --> 00:03:26.120
we explain What did you do that had the criminal investigation? You posted a video of a woman partially fully nude against her will. Don't shake your head. It's on the police report. You're lying again. You posted a video of her against her

12
00:03:26.120 --> 00:03:46.600
will without her know without her knowing about it, and then you denied that you did it. It's despicable behavior. And then the fact you had the nerve to contact the chief of police and see if you could edit the police report? No other citizen gets to get away with that.

13
00:03:46.600 --> 00:04:04.920
>> The time is up, sir. >> Thank you for denying it again. And putting it on the city's that you didn't do it. >> Thank you for coming in. Is there anybody else for public comment this evening? Come on up, sir. Just give your name and address for the record. Thank you for coming in.

14
00:04:05.680 --> 00:04:22.640
>> Hello. Uh my name is Paul Ganoe. I live at 47390 Acushnet Trail. >> Thank you. >> Uh I'm a part of the Cambridge Asian community. I'm also a proud AFSCME member of 18 years. I understand that AFSCME Council 65 has been negotiating its first contract.

15
00:04:22.640 --> 00:04:37.600
I raise this point to caution the city against possibly being accused of bad faith bargaining. On Facebook, Luke Bergl stated, and I quote, "Unions are just another form of government stealing our money and causing

16
00:04:37.600 --> 00:04:53.200
everything to be more expensive and low quality." I'll have you know that that statement couldn't be any more false. Uh unions in Minnesota boost the economy by raising wages and benefits for both members and non-union

17
00:04:53.200 --> 00:05:09.600
They offer uh strong job security, better health care, and safer working conditions while advocating for public policy like minimum wage hikes and paid leave that alleviate that elevate the overall standard of living for everybody.

18
00:05:10.960 --> 00:05:26.840
Higher wages and benefits, union workers generally earn higher wages compared to non-union counterparts. For example, Latinos, African Ameri- African Americans, and women see even larger gains at 12% above non-union

19
00:05:26.840 --> 00:05:44.720
or higher. Collective bargaining limits unfair dismissals and guarantee guarantees fair treatment and ensures safer occupational health standards, which helps reduce workplace injuries.

20
00:05:44.720 --> 00:06:02.920
Unions provide workers with a democratic mechanism to negotiate for work-life balance, predictable scheduling, and fair workload distribution with employers. There's also benefits for the public. Higher general wage standards are

21
00:06:02.920 --> 00:06:18.880
are a huge part of it. The presence of strong labor organizations forces non-union employers to raise their own wages and benefits to stay competitive, creating a rising economy for the entire state. Labor coalitions regularly champion

22
00:06:18.880 --> 00:06:35.320
legislation that benefits all Minnesota workers, like paid holidays for hourly and industrial workers, and in recent years unions have been the driving force behind the passage of statewide earned sick and safe time. >> You're right. You're at 3 minutes.

23
00:06:35.320 --> 00:06:52.080
>> Before you comment on something, maybe you should think about what you're talking about. You should know what you're talking about. Who you're talking about, and think big picture. The city's represented by dedicated public union workers. And to say anything else is simply not true.

24
00:06:52.080 --> 00:07:09.080
I think you owe all your workers an apology. >> Fair. And that was on my public Facebook, not my my private Facebook, personal Facebook, not the city of Issaquah or mayor Facebook page. I do appreciate your input, sir, and I'll take it to heart. Thank you. Anybody else for public comments this

25
00:07:09.080 --> 00:07:29.760
evening? All right. Hearing none, we will move on to adopting the agenda. Are there any agenda modifications? >> Good evening, Mayor and Council. Yes, I do have an addition of a business item, so BK5, um brought forward by uh discussion at

26
00:07:29.760 --> 00:07:46.360
Committee of the Whole this evening. It would be to add authorizing City Council Member Peterson to replace EB Putnam utilizing a city computer and expense not to exceed $1,000. >> Sounds good. >> Motion to approve the changes.

27
00:07:46.520 --> 00:08:01.200
>> Second. >> Motion from Aldine, second by Peterson. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries 5-0. The agenda is adopted. Uh next we'll move on to approval of the City Council meeting minutes from July 7th, 2026, the City Council budget work session meeting

28
00:08:01.200 --> 00:08:17.320
minutes. Any questions or changes on on that? >> Can we approve both of them at once? >> Sure. >> Motion to approve both. >> Second. >> Sounds good. Uh motion by Aldine, second by Peterson. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries 3-0. The City Council meeting minutes are

29
00:08:17.320 --> 00:08:32.240
approved for both of those. Uh next we'll move on to the announcements. Park and Recreation Board meeting Tuesday, July 28th, 2026 has been canceled due to lack of agenda items. Uh City Council budget work session Wednesday, August 5th, 2026 at 5:00 p.m. Economic Development Authority Wednesday, August

30
00:08:32.240 --> 00:08:49.640
5th, 2026 at 6:30 p.m. City Council meeting Wednesday, August 5th, 2026 at 7:00 p.m. The primary election is Tuesday, August 11th, 2026 from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. The canvassing board meeting is Thursday, August 13th, uh 2026 at 5:00 p.m. And we have a

31
00:08:49.640 --> 00:09:10.200
reception here for Tony Communications. I don't see anybody here from the county. Uh then we'll go into uh council committee reports. >> Are there any? >> All right, well I have a few, so I'll just get started. Uh Arts and Science Academy, uh they've had some budget downfalls and

32
00:09:10.200 --> 00:09:25.560
need to secure some funding to improve their ability to get some new re- refinancing done at a better rate. Uh they they have decided to list one of their commercial prop- prop- commercial parcels on Highway 65 for sale, uh just north of their elementary school. Currently a farm field, so hopefully we'll see some traction in the

33
00:09:25.560 --> 00:09:41.680
development of a business there once it sells. Uh they also hired a financial consultant to help plan the next 5 years. Uh they are in need for members of their board. If anyone is interested in getting involved with the Arts and Science Academy school, uh please feel free to feel free to reach out to them.

34
00:09:41.680 --> 00:09:57.280
Uh the Chamber of Commerce, this month was a member meeting member minutes meeting. So that means every member gets to talk about what's going on. During my my minute there, I mentioned the park fundraiser that we're doing and Stephanie also mentioned the mayor's luncheon, which is an ISD business

35
00:09:57.280 --> 00:10:12.680
appreciation event that is happening tomorrow. Uh fire board, none of the other city council members can make the meeting, but I was able to get there. The board primarily discussed bidding on a used ladder truck, which I thought was a great idea. They set a cap at 60,000.

36
00:10:12.680 --> 00:10:30.160
Unfortunately, it went for 60,250. Um so unfortunately, they didn't get it, but I hope they continue to keep an eye on those type of bargain buys for good used equipment for the department. I think that's like a great strategy if they can pull it off and find good deals. They also asked to transfer $130,000 from the operating account into

37
00:10:30.160 --> 00:10:46.760
their capital fund. Uh that was approved by the board and they had a brief report on the rodeo and it went well. Uh they thought it was interesting that they sold a record number of waters. So that I thought that was a that was a hot topic at the rodeo just talking about waters and uh they went fast, it was hot. Uh the

38
00:10:46.760 --> 00:11:03.320
county asked today to speak on the Flock cameras and asked them to consider having a public comment section at the evening meeting so people can attend and get their voices heard. Sheriff Saybolt gave a presentation with some information. I appreciate the transparency that they showed today through the 1-hour conversation that

39
00:11:03.320 --> 00:11:18.560
they had. It was very in-depth and I appreciate that. They have a public comment section for anybody who wants to speak on the Flock cameras at their August 18th evening meeting. So I highly suggest attending that meeting taking your 2 minutes to give your opinion as a resident of the county if you're interested.

40
00:11:18.560 --> 00:11:33.400
Uh League of Minnesota Cities three of the four committees met today and yesterday in St. Paul. Uh those meetings are 2 and 1/2 hours each so there's a lot to digest. I'll give a full update on those at our next meeting, but the primary areas of concern cited by most cities were around

41
00:11:33.400 --> 00:11:50.680
economic policy, police, fire, EMS, as well as the paid family medical leave and child care shortages and any policy related to that. Uh city council or staff has policy or operational changes that you think should be advocated for as far as what we see here and what doesn't work for the city by saying

42
00:11:50.680 --> 00:12:07.440
this, please feel free to reach out to me and I'll translate those on to the committee there. Uh including the council committee report, we'll move on to business item K1, resolution to consider approving liquor licenses for the Creamery Kitchen and Taphouse.

43
00:12:07.440 --> 00:12:23.840
>> All right, the Creamery Kitchen and Taphouse has submitted applications for multiple liquor licenses to support its food and beverage operations. The licenses include beer, intoxicating on sale, intoxicating Sunday on sale, and wine on sale. They've submitted all the required application materials, fees,

44
00:12:23.840 --> 00:12:41.800
and supporting documentation, and they also have cleared a background check and the police department has reviewed and completed its review to recommend approval. The applicant is here if you have questions, otherwise everything is good to go. >> I'll make a motion for approval.

45
00:12:41.800 --> 00:13:01.320
>> Second. >> Uh motion by Peters, or motion by Lundeen, second by Peterson. All in favor, say aye. >> Aye. >> Any opposed? Motion carries 3-0. Nick, would you like to say anything on this or good to go? >> Thank you for >> All right, well I just had to add

46
00:13:01.320 --> 00:13:17.560
We appreciate you guys coming and getting that spread open and getting that back open and I know a lot of us can't wait, so thank you. Uh item K2, population projections for the wastewater treatment facility plan. >> Good morning, Mayor Arms and Council. So, as discussed previous meeting,

47
00:13:17.560 --> 00:13:33.120
we have Ryan King doing population projections staff in this first phase of the wastewater treatment facility plan. He's completed that and Ryan is here for approval. for example the lighting. >> Yeah, thank you Jason. Good evening

48
00:13:33.120 --> 00:13:48.960
Mayor Council. Um, so there was a memorandum submitted. I just kind of want to step through that briefly with you and then answer questions you might have. Um, and first I'll start by talking about how we looked at the the population and flow projections. So we used a few different methods.

49
00:13:48.960 --> 00:14:05.120
Um, we looked first at the last five years of growth data. And over the last five years the city's average is 1.9% population population growth with the peak being at about 2.3%. So we used those as kind of

50
00:14:05.120 --> 00:14:21.480
a set of parameters for growth. Uh, another um, way we looked at growth was working with staff. We looked at projected land use development over the next 20 years in terms of acreage and residential lots. And then also um, put that into both

51
00:14:21.480 --> 00:14:36.760
residential users, commercial industrial users projected flows from that way. So those are kind of the three ways we looked at growth within the city. Uh, and then that develops the user base and then we have to attribute a flow per

52
00:14:36.760 --> 00:14:54.240
user base. So we use two numbers to do that. Um, it's called gallons per capita per day. How many gallons go to a wastewater plant per person. And this is the the peak month. And the average wet weather term in here is the peak month of flow you have. And so that's your wettest

53
00:14:54.240 --> 00:15:09.640
month of the year where you're going to get the highest flows or or all the water rain water that might find its way into the system because that's what your permit is based on. So our numbers are always looking at your your peak month value. And so I just wanted to point that out in case you maybe

54
00:15:09.640 --> 00:15:23.680
saw some data or asked like, "Well, what are our typical flows?" Typical flows might be lower than this, but that's not what the permit is based on. It's going to be based on the peak. So I just want to clarify that. So through over the last five years when we looked at the population and the

55
00:15:23.680 --> 00:15:40.880
flows, we saw an average per capita wastewater flow during the peak month of 63 gallons per person. And then the maximum year was 69 gallons per person. So, with the population projections, we looked at those two flow rates per

56
00:15:40.880 --> 00:15:57.080
capita to see how uh that would project out in those ranges. And so that's the data that was then presented in the table on the second page. So, I'll just pause there to see if there's any questions on that background information of how the

57
00:15:57.080 --> 00:16:16.920
graphics was used. Okay. Uh so then looking at the projections, um and what we tried to do here with these ranges we used is is maybe look at the absolute slowest possible growth you would see looking at the average growth

58
00:16:16.920 --> 00:16:32.240
rates and then what are some of the higher rates that you could see. And so that's how we see the three different lines presented there. So, that light blue line that projects out the farthest, that was the 63 gallons per capita, so that's the just

59
00:16:32.240 --> 00:16:47.640
average over the last 5 years at your average growth rate of the last 5 years. And as that line projects out, you would hit 85% capacity about 2029 and plant capacity in 2038.

60
00:16:47.640 --> 00:17:03.520
So, that was what we saw as the absolute slowest growth that you would like to see. If we use the uh maximum growth rate over the last 5 years and then the peak per capita usage, that created that

61
00:17:03.520 --> 00:17:18.720
purple line in the middle, uh which would intersect the 85% capacity in 2028 hitting plant capacity in 2035. And then uh the green line is looking at the land use projections that we looked

62
00:17:18.720 --> 00:17:35.640
at as staff in terms of acreages. And when we did that projection, we have different values put in for commercial, industrial growth versus residential. So, we looked at the amount of acres that would be residential and attributed

63
00:17:35.640 --> 00:17:51.440
growth to that. And then we looked at the commercial industrial growth. Uh and that's what plotted that line. And when we looked at that growth, uh part of the reason that curve is a little faster is it actually projects more commercial industrial growth

64
00:17:51.440 --> 00:18:07.400
than the other two uh plots do. Um which attributed to that higher rate. And it also had higher residential rate. So, those things combined made that one uh the steepest line. Um So, in general, you know, we do

65
00:18:07.400 --> 00:18:24.320
expect to hit that 85% capacity sometime in the next 2 or 3 years here and regardless of the growth rate um from these three options. And then it's likely that that plant capacity is going to get hit probably sometime in the next 6 to 10 years

66
00:18:24.320 --> 00:18:40.120
just depending on how growth continues. Um One thing I wanted to clear up, too, from the last time as we talked about the facility plan and how long that's good for, we we talked about how it's after it's approved, it's good for 5 years.

67
00:18:40.120 --> 00:18:57.000
Um and it's going to take a couple of years to complete, so that was making it good for 7 years. Um Jason said to me that well, in reality, that just gets you to construction. And then if you add a 3-year construction phase, you would be able to build after that. So, realistically speaking, that

68
00:18:57.000 --> 00:19:14.440
approved facility plan probably gets you 10 years out in the future, not seven. So, it's actually longer than I than as we discussed last time. So, really our recommendation as we look at this is that um given the length of time we talked about

69
00:19:14.440 --> 00:19:30.960
that it takes to actually get projects to where they're built and operational and the likelihood that sooner rather than later you're going to to need this facility, we would recommend taking kind of the next step which is submitting the loading requests

70
00:19:30.960 --> 00:19:47.800
to the MPCA to see what your future limits would be cuz this will start to determine them what the options would be. Um and whether that's you know, expanding plant, building new plant, some sort of regionalization we can start to then dig deeper into

71
00:19:47.800 --> 00:20:03.600
what those options look like. And we don't necessarily have to go submit the facility plan either. If we start to go down this road and start to develop alternatives and see how that goes. You're not necessarily forced to submit

72
00:20:03.600 --> 00:20:19.040
that facility plan within the timeline we talked about. And so it's really just kind of taking these steps forward to have you guys in a position to be prepared as these growth rates come. Um so for all those reasons we we would recommend going on to kind of the next

73
00:20:19.040 --> 00:20:36.040
step. I'm happy to answer any questions. >> Is this sort of what you expected to find? I know we had talked about it. We were kind of thinking it'd be around this 6 to 10 year range. >> Yeah, I think when when we looked at the projections a year ago,

74
00:20:36.040 --> 00:20:52.680
um they had landed in about 34 35. Um and then actually 2025 dipped down a year and it's just because of that average wet weather flow. It might have to do with number of precipitation and rain events. And so um

75
00:20:52.680 --> 00:21:08.400
so it actually kind of backed it off slightly, but it kind of stays in line with what we've been seeing uh the trends we're seeing in growth. And so nothing real surprising. Um I think probably the most surprising thing is when we looked at the projected land use

76
00:21:08.400 --> 00:21:24.320
that how how fast that trend actually is here in Green Bay. So, just the fact that there is even a potential here where things could happen faster gives us even more reason to just want to be prepared

77
00:21:24.320 --> 00:21:40.280
for what may come. And like I said, as you work through this process, if if if we start to develop things and we get 18 months into it and things for whatever reason look like they're slowing down, you know, we can always update the submitted that facility plan.

78
00:21:40.280 --> 00:21:57.680
But, it's really just about being prepared for what might come. You guys have any questions? Sounds like we're about the right time frame though to to look into it. Yes, I would agree and I and I know especially and I had this in here, um, you know, if we if any type of

79
00:21:57.680 --> 00:22:13.920
regionalization becomes a potential, that's going to add a couple years to your timeline. I I talked to some other colleagues on recent projects they've done with the regionalization and they kind of said, you know,

80
00:22:13.920 --> 00:22:30.960
8 to 12 years just depending on the complexity. Um, and if we were to talk to other communities, it's just an expensive process. So, keep all your options open. I would definitely >> And that would be determined in the next

81
00:22:30.960 --> 00:22:46.840
phase. >> Yes, so what I would see happening now would be um, we're going to submit a loading request to the MPCA and we will actually give them multiple different flows. So, we can take these projections and come up what we're

82
00:22:46.840 --> 00:23:02.520
actually going to do is look at probably a 2055 design year because by the time you build this, you want it to last for 20 years. And so, if we look at maybe 2035, we're going to actually look at flows in 2055. Um,

83
00:23:02.520 --> 00:23:18.680
and we'll use a couple ranges and we'll give that PCA a few different flow ranges. That way when the the limits come back, it will actually show you guys okay, if we built the facility for this flow, this is what we would need. If we thought about this flow, we might

84
00:23:18.680 --> 00:23:34.040
need this. And it might show you how to phase the project. Because the limits might be stringent with the higher flow to where you can plan some improvements and then as you hit those higher flows then you might need to add say

85
00:23:34.040 --> 00:23:49.560
different technology to meet the limits. And so we'll get that back from MPCA to see what these limits would be and then I think we would just do kind of a preliminary review to give you guys an idea of in general what it's telling us.

86
00:23:49.560 --> 00:24:05.800
You know is there an option to expand it? Is there what type of treatment would you need? How soon would you need it? These different technologies. And kind of back you guys with just kind of a preliminary evaluation based on what we're seeing from from MPCA limits.

87
00:24:05.800 --> 00:24:22.080
And those it's probably going to take a month or two to get the limits back from MPCA. So we're probably looking at fall sometime to kind of have another update with these sometime once we get those limits back. >> Okay. Guess I have no questions. It's kind of

88
00:24:22.080 --> 00:24:39.080
what we expected. I think. Yeah. Well, we're going to go on to the next video. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> I'll make a motion to go ahead with the next phase of the project. >> Second. >> Motion by myself, second by Wandine. All in favor say aye. >> Aye.

89
00:24:39.080 --> 00:24:55.280
>> Any opposed? Motion carries 3-0. Thank you for coming in. Thanks for the info. >> Thank you. >> All right, we'll move on to item three, ordinance to consider repealing or replacing chapter 278 special events. Ms. Wood. >> Mayor and council, so the chapter 278

90
00:24:55.280 --> 00:25:10.360
that governs how the city has guidelines for special events within the city. Was hasn't been changed since 2009. So, one thing that, you know, we don't charge for any of those permits that come in and they do take a considerable

91
00:25:10.360 --> 00:25:26.880
amount of time for our applicants to fill out, as well as staff, multiple staff department heads to review those. Um, so in talking with council through committee the whole and going through some things, we did really find that this ordinance needed to be, um, revised and it was, um,

92
00:25:26.880 --> 00:25:43.600
easier with all the language changes to do a repeal replacement. So, I'll just read through the, um, kind of highlights of the changes that were discussed, um, through our conversations at committee, um, that's resulting in this final draft here. The city administrator has the ability to approve special event permits that do

93
00:25:43.600 --> 00:25:59.880
not have alcohol, gambling, or significant road closures or traffic congestion. That is to alleviate, um, a lot of memos and resolutions and time spent by staff to bring those to council when they're things that we know is kind of standard operating

94
00:25:59.880 --> 00:26:17.080
events that don't cause a lot of, um, concern. Uh, all family gatherings and peaceful assembly and protests are permitted without a special event permit. Events taking place in a city park rental, for example, the amphitheater, um, or park facility being used for its intended purpose are permitted without a

95
00:26:17.080 --> 00:26:32.040
special event permit. This is to reduce the redundancy. People were filling out a reservation form for their event in a park at a shelter or at the amphitheater, but then also did this because it just wasn't clear before. Um, traffic control and parking plans

96
00:26:32.040 --> 00:26:48.040
may be required. Security plans required when attendance is over 1,000 and or alcohol or intoxicating substances are being served. Special event permits will not be required to have a mobile food unit on private property. Um, this this was for graduation

97
00:26:48.040 --> 00:27:03.480
parties. We had a number of or a few requests come in and if I have a grad party my house, I can't have a food truck because it's not permitted. So, I kind of clarified that. Um we removed the cleanup fee and the sign permit fee as we looked back through years of special event permits.

98
00:27:03.480 --> 00:27:21.320
Um most I would say 95% of the time they were asking for those to be waived, and council did waive them. So, why are we requiring it? Um we did I do have language in there that states that if they don't uh clean up after their event, though, any future permit request could be um

99
00:27:21.320 --> 00:27:37.800
not permitted uh because of that. Uh we did removal of the notification within 350 ft of the event. The city would charge applicants if they failed to clean up after their event, and future permit requests could be impacted. And then there's revised language when a permit may be terminated

100
00:27:37.800 --> 00:27:52.840
if the city incurred costs if the applicant withdrew or canceled their event. Uh so, this ordinance has been posted for the required 10 days, and um the one thing that this does not include, and that was intentional, was any specifics

101
00:27:52.840 --> 00:28:10.080
um in regards to um cost sharing or any kind of events that the city partakes in or doesn't partake in. If that is the desire of council to look into anything like that, my recommendation is that we do that by a policy, by resolution, and not within the ordinance. It's very

102
00:28:10.080 --> 00:28:27.440
costly to revise ordinances. As you know, we put them in paper, and there's a lot of work that goes involved in that. I think that this is a solid ordinance that governs all the rules that um council staff has been looking for over the years. Um but anything further than that, we can draft a policy.

103
00:28:27.440 --> 00:28:42.840
>> Sure. So, I have a one question on that. With the fee, um it says they can be charged a fee. Is that Is that laid out, or would that just be how much time it takes to clean up? >> Um yeah, it would be per our fee schedule cuz it would be public works time. >> Public works time. Okay. Sounds good.

104
00:28:42.840 --> 00:28:59.680
And then uh I would like to um discuss further uh potentially in the next council meeting uh some sort of policy because there's seems to be vagueness in our event policy and and our costs incurred. So, I talked to legal legal counsel of the League of Minnesota Cities uh regarding what other cities

105
00:28:59.680 --> 00:29:15.000
have in place for policy on special events um costs incurred for non-city events. Uh they highly recommended that we have a more formal policy uh like many cities across Minnesota have. Uh so, I think we should talk more about that and cleaning up some of the

106
00:29:15.000 --> 00:29:30.400
ambiguity of what we've done in the past just to make sure it's more clear and transparent for everybody. Um so, I'm hoping that we can have that on the next Committee of the Whole meeting for discussion when everybody's here. Does that sound good to you guys? >> Did they provide you with example policies?

107
00:29:30.400 --> 00:29:46.520
>> Uh yeah, there's a few examples and I know Miss Wood uh has a a couple that she looked at briefly as well. Um it's just something I think we should just sit down and talk about a few different examples and see if any of them fit. If we think one is just great, we can just implement it or we can do ours. I think it's great and what like

108
00:29:46.520 --> 00:30:02.000
what Miss Wood said, it would be a policy by resolution so it wouldn't have to be changing the whole um ordinance. It's just in the ordinance it says attached is the resolution that we would follow. So, that could be changed, adjusted um

109
00:30:02.000 --> 00:30:19.880
>> Yeah, so the specific sentence that he's referencing states special events may be further defined and regulated in the special events policy approved by council. I think that's something that we >> Do you uh quantify how much time is it that it takes a it takes a lot of time but how

110
00:30:19.880 --> 00:30:36.680
much time goes in for the applicant and for city staff currently? >> You know, I did not put together like a table or anything and it really does depend on the event. Um I mean maybe a good example would be Rum River BMX. They submit a number

111
00:30:36.680 --> 00:30:53.880
probably they're probably our highest uh special event permit requests that come through. They typically do that earlier in the year. Um they're very very similar to each other, but we they have to fill out a new application, new indemnification form, new layout, um

112
00:30:53.880 --> 00:31:11.640
parking plan, everything for every event that they do, even though they're very similar. Um I I don't want to speak for them about how much time it takes, but it's not a it's not a small application that we have, and the application is being revised to be and once it once this gets

113
00:31:11.640 --> 00:31:28.240
approved um or once it's approved and once it goes through uh that there'll be a more simpler process for people to complete that and that'll be all available online too through our website. Um so I won't I don't know exactly how much time it would go down for the applicant, but it will go down

114
00:31:28.240 --> 00:31:44.440
guaranteed. And then the other thing is the cost for them of notifying the 350 ft um in some areas would if that's a lot of mailings potentially. Um so that's a reduction for them. For staff time, we have

115
00:31:44.440 --> 00:31:59.760
at least a minimum of four department heads um and the parks coordinator um or supervisor and four department heads in addition to myself that review every single special event permit and then writing you know

116
00:31:59.760 --> 00:32:19.960
some of those you can maybe assume, but we review through them all very closely to make sure that something wasn't changing. So if if there's a lot of review and time there. >> And uh do you know what most of our neighbors do or how other tent operators is more

117
00:32:19.960 --> 00:32:34.520
towards them or more towards us? >> This This is more towards them. The only difference is is I did not find any city that does not charge like us. You're the only one that I could find and I did look at numerous cities. Um some were as low as $50, some were up

118
00:32:34.520 --> 00:32:52.120
as twice $350 all depend on the size of the event. We are different in that we don't charge anything. But otherwise, I think yeah, most of the language in here is very consistent with with what I saw in other cities. >> And with these events, would these be

119
00:32:52.120 --> 00:33:10.160
included in the admin updates like once they're approved so that we're we're aware of them? >> Yes. Absolutely. >> My concern with this with the removal of the fees that if there is an issue it would be I would assume more costly to try and

120
00:33:10.160 --> 00:33:25.800
claim that through the PD than just having money up front. Is there a way to have it where if there's a first-time event holder they would have a fee and then people who are doing it consecutively or consistently that they would do a fee waiver? >> That's a good idea.

121
00:33:25.800 --> 00:33:42.880
>> It's possible, but then I would wonder and ask that if they ask for it to be waived it's been waived. I didn't find any instances of council not waiving a a request for the clean-up fee and the sign permit fee. >> All right. Most of the time they'll do

122
00:33:42.880 --> 00:33:58.840
it because they have some kind of rapport or history of not being an issue. But if it's possible to have it where we have like the first-time applicant or a new event having that test and if they if there's no problems then they'll be

123
00:33:58.840 --> 00:34:17.679
waived going forward. >> That's your call. >> way to Is there an amendment to the word that cuz I don't have it? >> Yeah, we can I mean we can word it that way. I can double-check too that we have not taken it out of the fee schedule which is chapter 160

124
00:34:17.679 --> 00:34:33.280
to remove it out of chapter 160 that would be an ordinance change which we wouldn't like to do for it so that should still be in there. Um but I can look at at changing that language to add it in for first-time offenders.

125
00:34:33.280 --> 00:34:49.360
>> I think that's a good idea. >> what you think about that. >> I think it's you're going to charge you're going to charge. >> You know we not. >> You you're charging for this and not that. It's going to muddy up the waters. It's going to make just as much work for them to do at all time.

126
00:34:49.360 --> 00:35:06.200
>> It's much easier to hold a deposit than it is to try and get get recompensed through the through the PD. >> For example >> money in hand. >> I mean we haven't had any issues >> don't feel I just don't feel that you

127
00:35:06.200 --> 00:35:20.920
you're going to muddy up waters when you do this and you're going to still make just as much work for the staff to do it. You're trying to eliminate staff time cutting costs. That ain't the way you're doing it.

128
00:35:20.920 --> 00:35:37.720
If you if you break the law and Travis goes over and writes them out a ticket and they don't pay the fine, it's going to cost them a lot more at the end of the day. So he's going to write out a ticket or a fine for that for not being cleaned up. >> What is the cost in getting that money

129
00:35:37.720 --> 00:35:53.160
though? >> There's a cost in doing everything Nick. And you there's a cost in everything. You want them to to only do certain ones and then a new event. I'm going to be honest with you in 16 years I've been up here

130
00:35:53.160 --> 00:36:09.280
I could probably name one, maybe two new things that came in on the request of a special event. In 16 years. >> So there's one or two that would have required that a law would have been broken. >> But I I just don't I I don't like it. I don't want it. I don't know against it. >> I could and we can change the process.

131
00:36:09.280 --> 00:36:23.720
I'm not saying that we shouldn't do it if that's your desire, but it does change the process because it would be um the way that we're taking deposits for like the community center, they do it online and it'll have to go through that system to take any kind of funds. It'd

132
00:36:23.720 --> 00:36:40.200
be different than an online form because it takes a credit card transaction, charges a credit card fee, and then we cut a check which through finance cuts a check back for the deposit. So, it's not just we don't hold checks anymore. Just so you're aware. So, there is a little bit more involved

133
00:36:40.200 --> 00:36:58.160
with taking a the deposit. >> Josh, do you have concerns with this? You would be the guy, so if it if worst case happened. >> I don't really have any concerns with it. >> Okay. I'm okay with it then as written. Uh

134
00:36:58.160 --> 00:37:15.000
worst case, if it >> If it becomes a problem, we could amend it and address it at that time. >> at the end of the day, Travis would be responsible for going and trying to get the money to clean up for the clean up fee. >> And >> Travis, is it because the chapter states

135
00:37:15.000 --> 00:37:31.200
that it could be a misdemeanor if they are in violation, is that something they can do if they didn't clean up, or how does that work? >> So, if it as long as it says, "No." Then yes, but it would have to say that it's a violation to leave debris or something like that.

136
00:37:31.200 --> 00:37:50.200
Right? They'd have to change that ordinance to say that it's a violation to leave a mess. You can't even report that, but as it is now, no, and no, we couldn't collect it cuz you're using law enforcement to use a civil process. But if it says like like our nuisance

137
00:37:50.200 --> 00:38:10.760
ordinance is written that way, you know, then you write it the same to criminal citation that way. Uh however, the city wouldn't really have an opportunity to that. You know, they would have to recoup costs. >> I guess I'm I'm fine with it the way

138
00:38:10.760 --> 00:38:29.240
it's written, I think. Um hopefully it's not a problem. But I guess if it is, or do you Do you guys want to wait till we have all five of us here to decide? Or four? It's probably not going to matter cuz I don't think it'll change much.

139
00:38:29.240 --> 00:38:46.000
I could be persuaded. I I would be nice to get these two their opinion on it. So. No rush. We can waste Is there a rush? So we can have this on the next city council meeting and then we have further discussion on clarifying the

140
00:38:46.000 --> 00:39:01.600
um city costs incurred with events and how to recoup that at the next town meeting. Does that sound appropriate to you guys? >> But the question is just on the Do you want that to How much time it takes cuz we're not looking at charging a fee for it, right? It's just for the clean up deposit.

141
00:39:01.600 --> 00:39:17.840
>> No, I was just curious as far as where we're at for the time load versus where we're at now. I just >> Okay. >> Not trying to charge it, just looking for >> Okay. So if you could get a motion to postpone to the August 5th meeting. >> Yeah. Motion.

142
00:39:17.840 --> 00:39:35.880
>> Second. >> Motion by Peterson, second by Lund. You know all in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries 3-0. We'll talk about that at the next meeting. Item K4, ordinance to consider amending chapter 245, peddlers, solicitors, transient merchants, and mobile food

143
00:39:35.880 --> 00:39:52.360
food units. >> So due to the changes made in the chapter 278, and I think that this is fine regardless of the deposit issue, is that there were some um discrepancies with our mobile mobile food units. So now um we did need to do

144
00:39:52.360 --> 00:40:08.440
an amendment for that, and mobile food units are permitted with a family event such as a graduation without a special event permit, just so it matches what we have for the other language doesn't conflict. Mobile food units may operate on private property with required state licensures, again because they weren't

145
00:40:08.440 --> 00:40:25.160
permitted before. And then lastly, ice cream and similar type mobile food units are permitted in residential districts. Kind of the same thing, parties and graduation parties. And this has been posted for the required 10 days and

146
00:40:25.160 --> 00:40:41.280
>> So, this would this would be like if they want to go to a food truck on their property, not on the city street. >> Correct. >> Okay. >> Right. And they would need to put it in their driveway. >> Yep. Okay. I'm fine with it. >> Motion to approve. >> Second. >> Motion by Lundine, second by Peterson. All in favor say aye. >> Aye.

147
00:40:41.280 --> 00:40:57.040
>> Any opposed? Motion carries 3-0. Uh next we have AV equipment, which was a late addition to the agenda. And I don't know, Ms. Wood, you want to take that? >> Sure. So, at Committee of the Whole this evening, we discussed that there are um equipment failures within with our

148
00:40:57.040 --> 00:41:12.840
current AV system, as most people are aware, which is why we're not able to stream our typical streaming to Facebook and YouTube. Uh the hardware costs are pretty substantial. And after discussion at Committee of the Whole, it was uh brought up that Council Member Peterson

149
00:41:12.840 --> 00:41:28.040
is familiar with doing a different kind of AV system that might suit the city very well at a very small cost in comparison. And so, this would be for um the city to, which we already have a computer not being used,

150
00:41:28.040 --> 00:41:45.640
to use a computer to put on um a different type of system. >> OBS? >> OBS. I wrote it somewhere, but not on my note here. Um OBS system um in an amount not to exceed a thousand dollars. Might be low Should be lower, but not to exceed a

151
00:41:45.640 --> 00:42:02.880
thousand, um which is substantially lower than the equipment replacement that we were quoting. >> Correct. And we're doing that just purely because of failure of old equipment, which we've had nothing but problems with. >> And then we've tried piecemealing and um band-aiding. It just

152
00:42:02.880 --> 00:42:20.560
isn't working. So. >> Motion to approve. >> I'll second that. Motion by uh by second by myself. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries 3-0. I'm happy that will be hopefully getting fixed soon, if um anything

153
00:42:20.560 --> 00:42:36.640
>> Yeah, we'll have um if you just want to coordinate with me on when it works, I think that would be best. >> I'm good. Thank you Nick for doing that, and I know that's a very important thing for us as transparency with all the meetings and everything, so I appreciate that. Um consent agenda, are there any questions or concerns on the consent

154
00:42:36.640 --> 00:42:50.920
agenda or anything you would like to go over? >> Motion to approve. >> Motion by Lundine, second by Peterson. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries 3-0. Any other communications or questions from council or staff? >> I would just like to make an

155
00:42:50.920 --> 00:43:07.720
announcement. Um the city did receive an outdoor recreation grant from the DNR for Bluebird Park for $180,000, $180,461, which is a 50% match for um to continue with phases

156
00:43:07.720 --> 00:43:24.920
phase three of the skate park skate park upgrades, as well as pickleball courts, which is four eight pickleball courts, um and a few trail connections, as well as relocating the outdoor skating rink um with lighting to be closer to the um

157
00:43:24.920 --> 00:43:42.080
indoor skating rink um as well. So, pretty exciting, and we'll find out more. We don't have the official um contract or anything, but just wanted to share that good news. >> Well, thank you for the good news. That is exciting, something that we've been working towards for a few years, so uh I'm I'm really stoked on that, and

158
00:43:42.080 --> 00:43:58.440
we'll continue to add to our parks, and that kind of goes hand-in-hand with the park sponsorship um that we're rolling out, so I think it's a good opportunity if any businesses want to get involved uh with advertising for any of the park stuff, uh feel free to reach out, and then just continue to grow the parks without taxpayer money dollars, so thank

159
00:43:58.440 --> 00:44:11.720
you. Any other questions or concerns? >> Motion to adjourn. >> Motion to adjourn by Lundine, second by Peterson. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries 3-0. We are adjourned.