Hello and good evening. I'm going to go ahead and call to order this meeting, Thursday, January 8th at 7 p.m. If you could all please stand for the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the
republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Okay, thank you. Roll call. >> Brian Wormer here. >> Krie Miller >> here. Tom Berg >> here, >> James Fipekka
>> here, and Scott Palava >> here. >> Tonight's agenda goes all the way down to item 10H. Are there any additions, deletions, or corrections to the agenda? >> Motion to approve the agenda. >> Motion by War Gersian. >> Second. Second by Palaba. Any further
discussion? All in favor? >> All opposed. All right. Approval of the minutes. Consider approval of the minutes from the December 11, 2025 regular meeting. Are there any additions, deletions, or corrections to the minutes? >> Motion to approve.
>> Motion by Miller. >> Second. >> Second by War Gersian. Any further discussion? All in favor? I. >> All opposed? Okay. There is a public hearing tonight. I'll go ahead and open up this public hearing for ordinance 2026-336,
which is our 2026 fee schedule. Uh Joel Erikson, I'll let you kick this off. >> All right. Thank you, mayor, and members of the council. Since the city adopts its fees by ordinance, uh we're required to uh if we make any changes, we're required to have a public hearing. Um
just I'll review the proposed changes of our uh fees for 2026. Not proposing any changes to our land use fees uh or our whack and sack fees. Uh we are recommending increasing the cost of a water meter and that just covers our
costs um that that we pay which are paid um essentially to or paid with building permits for for new homes. not proposing any changes to water or sewer rates uh nor uh the sewer rate adjustments
which if someone moved in outside of the first quarter of the year um they would be build 8,000 gallons at the most and per month and which is about our average and if they use less than that then their build I would put what their
actual usage is uh no change the finance fees for um for late fees or things like that. Truck, water, and sewer fees. Not proposing any changes. Uh essentially no changes to our our development fees, our civil defense
siren fee, uh development signage, park dedication. As far as building permits, proposing to uh increase inspections for which there is not a fee specifically indicated to $95 and that or 95 per hour. And that is
based off of our contract with uh Metro West. As far as public works and engineering, um proposing to add a penalty for not obtaining a a right-of-way permit of $100. And then with um the compensation study
that was done in 25 uh those increases and then uh cola for 26 uh recommending that um wages just whenever there's an hourly weight rate excuse me for wages uh proposing an
increase of uh 7.6%. So for public works 79 to 85 um illegal dumping this is we kind of had talked about this um during the budget process as far as our basically the compost site, right? Um
uh that what was sent out in the packet to uh the council was a proposed $1,000. I did receive some some feedback on that and um the the feedback was to increase it to
$2,000 for the the first offense and and this is on the table. I'm sorry I should have said that on the table. Um so there there for the fee study there was uh three changes since the packet went out. Uh illegal dumping being the first one.
um we missed adding the the chicken permit on there. So that's on the second page. And then um increasing more than what was recommended the erosion control. So uh as we had talked basically the
I I think it has gotten a lot better um this fall, but essentially the compost site's a free-for-all. I mean, we've, you know, spent thousands of dollars to to put a camera up there, uh, increase um police
presence up there, but but it still happens. It costs about uh $9,000 to grind and have that uh brush pile removed annually. So, as as we talked about in the the budget process, if if we don't do something to to curb the
abuse, which is essentially through enforcement, uh we're going to have to look at uh substantially increasing our expenses for for the compost site. Uh liquor license, no changes to that. the cannabis fees and permits. Uh we
added the ones that um we can charge a a fee for which is compliant with state statute 342. Um the fees are the are proposed at the highest level they they can be essentially it's half or
if it's applica if it's the application fee 500 the renewal a thousand um the the fees charged by the state are substantially higher than that. I mean, I think some are $30,000 for >> 35 >> for uh I'm I can't remember exactly
which one that one was. >> Medical >> medical. >> Uh essentially, we're capped at the 500 and the the thousand as proposed and then did increase the low potency hemp edible retailer fee from our fee of
100 to 125. Uh miscellaneous fees and permits. Uh we're proposing to revise the park reservation fee to include all fields, not just ball fields. Uh increase the field prep costs from $40 to $50 per
field per time. And then it's been a number of years since we increased any fees associated with our adoptive bench program. Um I know it's been discussed at the the park board staff researched what what our costs are. Um, so we're in
there, you know, some substantial increases from 450 to 700 for a a a bench without a back rest and then from 600 to a,000 for a bench with a back rest. Uh, office fees, just looking at
increasing the staff time as I had stated earlier. Uh, public safety fees, again, the same thing. any if anyone asks for any copies, we're basically capped at 25 cents per page uh up to 100 and then after that then we can start charging an hourly rate. So
that's where we've got the over 100 pages of reports and then the increased staff time. Not proposing any changes in fees for our equipment. Um, for now the attorney fees are based off of Campbell Canudson's proposed increase. And then I
received from Bolton and Mink their increases for or their hourly rates for for 26. So I I included those as well. And then again admin is staff time increasing again that 7.6%. Um, essentially the the fiscal impact of
the city is just setting our fees so we can cover our expenses for whether it's equipment, staff, time, um, materials that we use to provide certain services to to residents. Uh, the alternatives would be to uh well
not conduct the public hearing, which we currently are. Uh, discuss and then change uh some or all of the proposed fees for 26. >> All right. Very good. Thank you, Joel. Does anybody >> Sorry. >> Okay. Before I got rudely interrupted,
>> I'm so sorry. >> Help me. >> Does anybody from the public have anything that they want to address during this public hearing for these fee schedules? >> You okay, Mike? Okay. Council, is there anything you want to
add? Does the dump truck fee reflect the new increase that we did a month ago for snow removal? >> Um that is what uh it doesn't. That's what we get charged. All right. So um
anything that we would charge would be if someone for stone removal would be um the $2 a square yard. Um, essentially there are some businesses throughout town, but essentially Main Street where they just don't have any place to put it. So, they push it on the street and
then we >> uh load it and haul it away. The uh fee that we approved is what we get charged when we need additional trucks to to haul. >> And then the chicken permit is buying.
>> That is correct. Yes. >> Okay. Is there are we able to add language on that? Uh, we can it's on the I believe it's when I looked the other day. It's on the permit, I believe. >> Okay, cool. Um,
the illegal dumping fee. Um, this one was to take this as serious as possible. I I hear city staff's concerns. I hear the police department's concerns. And um, I think that this is good. I do want to make sure that there
is proper signage of what is um acceptable. I know that we talked about this before >> um size for logs like diameter wise just rough numbers you know and I think it was 3 or 4 in that uh diameter that Joe
was talking about. And then the erosion control violation that was important to do because we're taking our sewers serious. Um I' I've heard this from Jordan Plots and from Joe Dornfeld that
we got to really take consideration into erosion control and um I think that's important to the one issue that I have and I know I've been vocal about this. I really don't think
that we should be uh charging people for small plastic sheds. I know we've talked about it before earlier last year and um that size I'm
not quite sure of. What we feel comfortable as council, but I mean if somebody's just getting a small black plastic shed for 300 bucks, I don't see why they have to pay the city 205. Um, I get the city staff's cost that go
into this along with the inspector and I get uh we want to make sure that it is reflected in our ordinances. But I mean, if somebody's getting a small plastic shed and they're putting it next to or behind their garage or something, I just I have a hard time
with that one. Uh, that's me personally, >> but I don't know how council feels about that one. I agree on that one. >> Yeah, it like I thought it was for over 200 square ft. >> That's uh requires a building permit and that's actually reviewed by our building inspector. Uh anything less than that is
just a zoning permit. >> Okay. >> And um essentially just looking at >> um the location on the the property, >> right? >> Could we kind of match that up then with like a a lower permit fee? >> You can set the fee at whatever you guys
would like. Mhm. >> I I my thing is is that um if people go and buy >> one of those >> sheds at Costco, >> well, one of my neighbors had just boughten a a replacement shed and it
came on a truck and was unloaded, right? And it's a pretty decent size shed. So, I get wanting to make sure that it fits our ordinances,
but I need to determine a certain square footage for say like those those cheaper sheds, the cheaper plastic ones, and um kind of go from there.
But, uh, I don't know about you guys, I can go off of a basic size, whether it's an 8 by8 or a 6x6 or, you know, and then we can add that language in there. But I just I don't see a reason for giving them a permit
>> or maybe it's almost it's almost movable, right? >> Right. >> At that point, it should be movable. I mean, if it's almost movable >> and if you got a fence already in your backyard, which majority houses have. >> Yeah, it's like a swing set or a play set, you know, where it can be moved around one of them, not necessarily like
a rainbow or it's the big big uh wooden ones, but you know, some of those smaller ones, you know, move them around. Some there's plastic playsets, whatever. Um, would we have to adjust the ordinances though? That's I guess the question. So, I think first step would be adjust the ordinance and then we can amend the fee schedule because we
we have to have the ordinance change because our fee schedule wouldn't align with the ordinance then, right? >> I got to admit it's been a few years since I looked at the specifics of the shed ordinance, but um I don't if you have any any
>> we recently amended it a few or a year ago or a year ago. So yeah, that would probably be the proper, you know, accessory structures. You'd probably want to ward it if you want them movable. Anything under say 65 square ft.
>> Mhm. >> Minus pad and foundation, no feet. But once you start the foundation or the pad, it's not movable. >> Then you're going to need a building permit regardless. >> Yeah. Yeah. If you're pouring concrete to put a a cheap shed on, that's a
different story. I wasn't looking at uh getting approval for that tonight. I just know that I brought it up last year and I still have residents talking to me about it and so I want to make sure that we keep it in front of us and uh plan accordingly. >> Yeah, I agree. >> I do too.
>> So, okay. Uh that's all I had. Carrie, Brian, you got anything? >> No, I mean I I I'm I'm glad to see that we're doing something as far as the compost site to put some teeth up there. Um because our all of our alternatives
beyond, you know, having real because I mean I think the last time we talked about the the fine it was like 50 bucks. So it's almost like what's what's the point because it costs more to enforce than to just deal with at that point. But yeah, if we have some teeth in it, I mean our alternatives are expensive.
>> It's staffing, it's fencing, it's, you know, I mean they're a lot more expensive. So So this is step one. If this doesn't fix it, then we talk about getting into those those others. So, I like that. >> All right. Grie,
>> my only question was about fire cost for 500. Is that still a good rate for our department? >> Um, >> I think we got to take that out. We talked about that in the fire board meeting and >> and they were going to just, you know,
so does it cover our cost with, you know, the, you know, equipment that we bought recently and personnel. Um, probably not. We don't charge for a fire call unless we start a pump, >> right? >> Um, no, but there has been conversations about that at our at our fire board
meetings, and we actually have one on February 3rd, whatever the first Monday of February 2nd, whatever the first Monday is. >> Okay. Um and and there there does seem to be some willingness to to increase that. >> Okay. >> Yeah, >> that's all I had.
>> And we've we've done some changes to what they'll respond to, too. So, >> we're not wasting time on some calls that maybe we don't need to be on for the >> for the fire. >> Yeah. >> All right, Jamie.
>> The other thing I had was the sign replacement. Uh, we want the town to look nice and we all know these business signs fade after a while. And if they're replacing it with the exact same thing where having it repainted, charging them $12 when
they're going to spend hundreds if not thousands of dollars on that sign seems a little overkill. I don't think we should be charging them at all. >> So, I hear where you're coming from, Jamie. I think if you match the same
with same but city staff has there been issues with people not replacing same with same where you guys had to kind of talk to them a little bit. >> Has this been an issue? >> Mr. Trying to think recently
>> no >> what replacement signs we've had. Sure. I think they've all changed. >> Yeah, Mr. Mayor. I've been here for a little over two years. As far as replacement plan or signs that have been brought forward, I I can't even give you one as or actually downtown or uh on
Main Street uh with Joanne as far as replacing a sign or moving a sign from another building. Yes. >> Okay. >> She uh she did go through the permitting process. um went through the correct uh channels,
was issued the sign or the signed permit and paid the $102.50. Okay. And you know, you don't want to penalize somebody for revamping things. And I think 100 I mean, if they got multiple signs, I get it if it's a main
street business putting a sign up, a single sign up, but if it's multiples, I mean, do we do we really have to collect that much? I think the clo probably the most recent one that I can think of that would have fallen under this would have been Ivory and Onyx
where it was originally the insurance agency. Now I know they also had a remodel or building permit for remodel and stuff. So I don't know if that was included in there or not but >> separate >> that was that was separate. Okay. Um I mean ultimately you're just changing the
panel inside the existing cabinet. Um, you know, I don't I don't I don't see why that would necessarily >> because I mean, you're going to you're going to probably do it in one run, right? So, if they got >> say if there's five signs that they want
to change or two or three, >> I mean, you're you're already there. You're already checking it out. So what's the representation inund was it 103 I already put it away >> $102 $103 I think it should be wait a
minute signs replacement commercial only >> so that would be for multiple signs right that same price 102 >> or is it per sign
>> uh sign. Well, just signer signs. >> Oh, okay. >> So then under that, not to to skip around, but under that zoning, we've got um erosion control new construction major project. Are we going to increase that as well? Because that's really where we have our
most violations is um new home construction sites. Every site's in violation. Every single one of them. >> Why? >> Because they don't put up a self fence >> or they drive over the bio rolls or >> maintain, right? Yeah.
>> Yeah. >> Cuz I think that that includes the rock drive hard surface driveway for that. >> Yep. That's all parts and all that >> requirements. >> And you know, like I I would really like to
really respect um what's going down our sewers. Mhm. So, I mean, this state is just going nuts with uh policies. So,
>> I think you could probably up it to 500 for new construction major project. >> So, the permit's 500 and then if you violate it, it's a,000 for the fine. That makes sense. >> Um, well, we do We do charge a fee as part of our building permit.
>> Yeah, I take that back. That's what we charge for the building. >> 295 is the fee. >> So then the penalty would go to what was discussed earlier in the meeting. >> Mhm. >> So that line would get struck out at 295. >> No, we do charge that.
>> But >> but there's something in the building permit as well for erosion control. Yeah, we charge that as part of the built um for a new home construction. Yeah, just the building permit fee, whack and sack, erosion control. >> Okay. You know, >> but I think we're just going to have >> I kind of wonder if we should
>> because every single one of them at every single new home construction is going to be in violation. So, are we prepared to charge the builders a >> Listen up builders >> $1,000
>> for every site? >> Correct. Or per violation. >> The main goal is to prevent it from going down our storm surveill. We should be putting sediment catches in the storms of the catch basins in these new construction areas to prevent that. I'm
thinking more of an existing Mount Lndale where we're considerably having problems is where we really need to be looking at stuff. >> Yeah. I mean, that's a massive violation. I mean, even when the county says no, that would not have lasted more than a
month. But um yeah, I know Joel, I know what you're saying, though. I don't know if we should up now. This soil erosion control, the 295, is that on the permit itself?
>> Yes. Yes, that's what we charge. >> I don't know if we should increase that. Um and the reason why I state that is because >> a wack is still pretty expensive. We hear it everywhere. A whack sack is expensive.
>> Yeah. And I think if they know that there's going to be a sizable fine on them, >> you know, you you got first you got first offense, second offense, and it's just going to keep going. So there's corrective action.
>> Are there different tiers for erosion control violation? >> Uh right now, no. >> No. But as proposed it increases with 2500. So the or I'm sorry I got,000,500 2,000,000,500
2,000. Correct. >> Then the how how many warnings we give people? You guys are phones going to be ringing off the hook. I guarantee it. If what if one visit had multiple violations, does that just fall under one violation or is it going to be if they if there
was an issue with the silt fence, there was an issue with the rock entrance and a bio roll, is that three violations on that site or it one violation, one one visit or >> correct? Yeah, there'd be three corrective actions. >> Yes. >> Okay. But what's going to happen is we're going to go out there. We're going
to say, "Hey builder, your erosion control, your sil fence is, you know, not up or it's not, you know, cut into the ground or your bio rolls are rolled over." So they'll go out there, they'll fix it. 2 days later, the appliance guys just drive right over it. Boom. We got
another violation. >> Yeah. And I think there could be conversations before it and then if it just becomes >> emotion control and I I agree with you guys, >> but my thing is I know where you're coming from where you're like, well, we're just going to hit him with a
violation fee every single time. But you know, when I work construction, we're worried about OSHA showing up and we're worried about getting fined by OSHA and they are not forgiving people. They come and attack us left and right. They'll hit us with everything. We should be no
different and we should be protecting our infrastructure, but also we should be working with people that want to develop and spend money here building up the town. So I think that we can apply this in a serious sense just like you
know um the illegal dumping where it's this is becoming an issue and we're going to start pushing you know always something to fall back on. Um shout out to Joe Kadata for saying that. I'll always remember that one. but something to fall back on to and um essentially
it's going to be up to city staff and then also uh our police department to enforce it and I think it's okay. Um I just don't want to see us increase our building permits when I still believe our our wack be. Um
I I'm not disagreeing with the council that I grow needs to be enforced. We've had numerous meetings with developers and our regulations are no different than any other community, >> right? >> They all know they have to do silk fence or bio rolls and uh you know, clean dirt
off the street, the tracking and everything. >> And that's fine. No one does. >> I mean, I'm not worried. >> No one does it. >> I'm not worried if they they call me and try to I'm just going to state, hey, we're protecting the city, you know. >> Yep. >> And they should know, too. um whether
they care or don't care or their guys don't care at the end of the day. I mean, it's hurting our infrastructure. So, and I don't I don't like that idea. So, um is that all you had, Jamie? >> Yeah.
>> Scott, you got anything? >> Um just, uh along those lines, I I do have I do agree with you on that. Um, it's kind of a I want to say almost like a officer discretion whether they're going to give him a warning or a ticket on site. You can have the conversation.
Doesn't necessarily have to be uh uh a citation immediately. Um, back to the fire call thing. I know we've only been charging when we've been uh powering up a pump. I know many m municipalities do
it for all calls and I'm a little reluctant with minor medical and stuff like are we doing uh police or not police but um motor vehicle accidents that type of a thing too. >> No. >> Um because there there's resources that get consumed for that stuff. There's oil
drivers, you know, stuff like that. It's more than just lights and whatnot. Um I think discussions have been with the uh the fire board is that let's let's first take the step of reducing what we
respond to >> and see how how that helps and then and then go from there. >> Okay. It's a it's a slippery slope that we were discussing was, >> you know, you don't want to penalize somebody for calling um
and make them afraid of calling because they don't have the money. >> I I agree%. >> So then, you know, uh Pumper and and Harry, they sat down and they just kind of hashed it out. They go, "Well, let's just try to cut the calls back." But then if it becomes more of an issue
again, then that's when they have that discussion again. >> Well, I I understand that. I, you know, I don't know >> if my experience has been too in in talking to many people with insurance and whatnot, too. I don't most people don't even realize that their homeowners
insurance has a fighter call provision built in. Most insurance companies will pay $500 to $1,000 per fighter call. That's a standard thing um for uh most homes that are have a mortgage on them shared down which covers the
majority of us. Uh so you know that's just a hey that don't you don't have to panic because you probably do have that coverage. Uh but I just was curious about you know like there's you know medicals and stuff like that not not so much it doesn't require as much uh resource but u MDAs and that sort of a
thing I think you know that was just a thought. >> Yeah I no I can definitely bring it up to the board too. Um, >> no, >> just have to send me a reminder on that to make a note. >> Uh, but yeah, that was uh those items.
And then the like like the sheds, the the smaller um call them consumer sheds, the I'm kind of in agreeance with that. I know people that have, you know, considered, you know, hey, I'm at a store and they're like, hey, we should get one. And then it literally becomes
oh my god what do we have to do to make this work and doesn't doesn't seem so then they end up with a cluttered up garage or cluttered up >> backyard. Majority of that fee is based upon the staking inspection for the building inspector to make sure that
it's going on the applicant's property. Not two feet over into the other property but on the correct property meeting the correct setbacks. You're not just putting it a foot off the property line or on your neighbor's property. >> Yeah.
>> Yeah. No, Corey, I I agree with you. I know we've talked about it. Um I just had a lot of people that said, "Well, I got a fence in my yard and I only want like a 6x6 shed. Why do I got to pay, you know, 205 bucks to the city when I
paid 300?" And so that's what I kind of want to have leniency with. Um, and just kind of a little bit more of a conversation of how we can improve it. >> That's all I have. >> Okay. All right. Does anybody else have
anything they want to add? >> Motion to close the public hearing. >> All right. Motion by Warren discussion. >> Second. >> Second by Miller. Any further discussion? All in favor? >> All opposed. All right. This meeting is now closed. on to presentation of
citizens petitions and comments. Comments limited to two minutes. All you have to do is state your first name, last name, and your address for the record. Okay. All right. Nothing on the consent agenda. There is
no old business. Uh to new business, uh consider approval of ordinance 2026-336, the 2026 fee schedule, an ordinance amending ordinance 2025-329, the 2025 fee schedule. Uh Joel Ericson.
>> Well, we had the public hearing just just recently just closed a couple seconds ago. Um council had some good discussion on proposed fees. So I guess it would be staff's recommend recommendation to approve uh the proposed resolution with the
uh addition of the il illegal dumping fees that we just talked about addition of the the chicken permit and erosion control violation. All right, very good. Anybody have anything else they want to add to this? >> All right, I'll entertain a motion.
>> I'll make a motion to approve. >> Motion by Miller. >> Second. >> Second by Palava. Any further discussion? All in favor? >> I. >> All opposed. All right. Item B, consider approval of resolution 2026-01, a resolution designating official
depositories for city funds. Julen. >> Thank you, mayor and members of the council. This is a annual resolution that is adopted at the first meeting of the year. Uh, per state statute. Um we're required to within the first 30
days of our fiscal year adopt um banks essentially depositories for for city funds. If not done within the first 30 days the city treasurer um can select no more than four official banks. Uh the following are being proposed. Fran Bank and Trust First National Bank, Premier
Bank of Northfield and MBIA which is the the 4N plus fund are investment funds through the the League of Minnesota Cities. They're the same as the ones that were adopted last year. Uh in addition, uh myself and the city treasurer are authorized to designate
deposiitories and make investments compliant with uh state statute 118A, which is uh the investment uh statute. And then we also have our own investment policy. Uh with rates increasing over the last several years, we were able to invest the funds and receive a high rate
of return. uh with rates coming down. I'm anticipating that that revenue will will be less in in 26 compared to recent years uh no fiscal impact in determining the or designating the the depositories. Alternatives would be to select
additional depositories or reject certain proposed depositories for city funds. And then included with staff's report is uh proposed resolution 2020 2026-01 uh sections of state statute 118.8 A and
then our uh city investment policy. Unless there's any questions, staff would recommend approval of resolution 2026-01. >> All right. Very good. Thank you. Krie, you got anything? >> Nope. This is just housekeeping. >> Jamie, >> no. >> Scott, >> nothing.
>> Ryan, no. >> You know, shout out to our our two local banks, FMB and uh Francon, and uh enjoy doing business with you. Entertain a motion. So move. >> Second. >> All right. Motion by Palava, second by
Murmur Scrion. Any further discussion? >> All in favor? >> All opposed. >> All right. Consider approval of resolution 2026-02, a resolution designating official newspaper, Joel Ericson. >> All right. Thank you, Mayor, members of the council. Again, um another
resolution that needs to be uh adopted at the council's first meeting of the year. Uh basically state statute 331A designates how cities are to designate um official newspapers. The first is
actually being having a a office in town. There are none that have that. The second is a secondary office. Um that's not the case either. The third which we fall into would be just a newspaper of general circulation.
Uh, everyone gets the Londale Area News Review for free. Um, I don't know what the delivery rate of the Montgomery Messenger is in town, but I'm confident to say it's not 75% which would be the the requirement. Um, so so based on
that, our option is the uh Lndale area news review. And then with staff report is the proposed resolution and then uh sections of state statute 412 and 331A. >> All right. Thank you Joel. Jamie, you got anything? >> No.
>> Scott? >> Nope. >> Right. >> Nope. >> Gary, >> no. Just thank you for the good coverage for month from the newspaper. >> Yeah. Yeah. Colton, you got another year. You hear me? All right. Entertain a motion. >> I'll make the motion.
>> Motion by Miller. >> Second. Morris Gersian seconded. Any further discussion? >> No. >> All in favor? >> All opposed. All right. Consider approval of resolution 2026-3 resolution designating official
appointments for 2026. Um, this is on me today. So, um, every year we go through appointments. I didn't change all too much. Um, the only changes I have is I've worked with all of you for a year
and I'd like to do something a little different with mayor is I'd like to kind of switch around mayor prom a little bit. Uh, Brian, you did a phenomenal job in 2024 and then 2025 you're my mayor prom and I thank you for that. And
Jamie, I'm going to ask for you to be my mayor prom. >> Thank you. And then uh Ki Brian, you guys are still on the Lonsdale liquor store. You're on the liquor board. Curry, you're on park and recreation and founders day committee.
Jamie, you're on street department. Scott, you're on water and sewer department. I'm on police department, fire department, and human resource committee. Myself, Brian, and Joel. Uh yeah, I mean the only other change is
uh planning and zoning commission. I'll be an exeicio to fill in the uh well Jamie will fill in the vacancy for the one-year term as a voting member on planning and zoning and then I'll take his ex official slot. And then also I
had a really good interview for EDA and this is uh Morgan Kudson here. Um, Morgan, do you want to come up and introduce yourself? >> Sure, I can. >> All right. Good evening, mayor, council
members, staff. Uh, my name is Morgan Kudson. I have lived in Lndale for 5 and a half years, and I don't know about you, but reading the Lndale news review, I was like, "Oh, there's a spot on the EDA open." And I am an absolute policy wonk. So, little bit about me is so I've
previously worked for the city of St. Paul running a federal grant program. I have my masters in public administration and I currently work for the city of Bloomington as a business analyst and on top of that um did a little stint in higher ed for 10 years where I actually
worked with businesses uh to figure out how do we actually do workforce development and train future workers in higher education. And so how do you develop those mutually beneficial relationships between businesses and other entities? And so when I saw what the EDA does, I was like, "Oh, this
could be fun." Um, and we're really at the cusp, I think, of something unique here in Lonsdale in that we have opportunities to really be strategic on what businesses we invite here, what businesses we approve, and I think, you
know, let's set up the next 20 years to be really special here in Lawale. >> Awesome. >> I'd agree with you, Morgan, and I appreciate you. Uh, you you got a six-year term. Are you ready for that? >> Hey, I'm I'm here for the long haul. >> Okay, good. >> I just finished my I'm almost finished
with my doctorate and that's been an 8-year adventure. So, why not for my next long adventure? >> All right. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Uh Jeremy Brainer, uh he's back on a thirdyear term, too, or a three-year
term. Um, Mary Turk and Shirley Larson both reuped on library board and I'm really appreciative to both of them to be on that board. And then uh shout out to our founders day committee. Oh, Dana Nickel also got a four-year term. Thank
you, Dana. And then founders day committee, of course, Ki uh Corey Hinszer. Uh, we have Grace for a one-year term, Steve Jurnney for a one-year term, Mark Hart, Mike Harding for a two-year term, Josh Hillen for a three-year term, Sophie Orlock for a
four-year term, and then of course our consulting engineer will be Bolton and Mink, and then our consulting attorney uh is going to be Campbell Canudson. So, does anything does anybody have anything to add? Uh, Scott, did I leave off with
you last time? Then mark it down. Uh, >> I'll let you kick it off. >> No. Uh, no. Um, I think everything uh looks well there. Welcome. Uh, Morgan, I guess we're a little preemptive, but you know, welcome to the EDA. Um, think
you'll be a great fit. Um, yeah. Other than that, everything looks good. >> Great. Ryan, >> um, were we ever going to look at attorneys? I know we talked about the bidding and all that. >> Yep. it was brought up. Um I did review
those with the holidays. It was like So >> I I suppose at this point we'd have to go back out to bid. >> Uh you could go back out for bid or we could just um contact the the three firms that submitted and >> ask them to repric. >> Correct. Or one, hey, are you still
interested? >> Right. >> Two, um you know, because you got to give them a shot to if they want to designate a different attorney. Sure. Sure. I was just curious. I mean, um, I know we we talked about it. We talked
about it quite a bit for quite a while and then it kind of just withered on the vine. So, um, Morgan, also looking forward to working with you on the EDA. See you next Thursday. >> Yeah, >> that's all I got. >> All right, Curry. >> I'm not on the EDA, but I love your
passion and excitement. It's going to be awesome. And I work in Bloomington, too. So, if you ever want to carpool, we could go. >> I work for the schools, so yeah. Um, and I'm just excited for all of the people in the community who are um, willing to
join these groups and give us their input and help us make lawn sale amazing. So, that's all I have. Thank you, >> Jamie. Uh, thanks for the opportunity to be mayor promp and um, thanks for coming and signing up for the ADA. It is a
volunteer position which most people don't realize. So, that's a lot of dedication for little to no gain. Thank you. >> Yeah. Um, thank you for everybody re-uping and, uh, Morgan, I think you're
going to do a great job. I think you're going to fit in and, uh, EDA's on track to do some pretty cool stuff. So, um, with that, I'll entertain a motion. >> I'll make a motion. >> Motion by Miller. Second. >> Second by Vapa. Any further discussion?
All in favor? >> All opposed. All right. Motion carries. Thank you. Consider approval of application for payment number seven, the final payment in the amount of $55,22649
to Metcon Construction, Inc. for the city hall project. Joel. All right. Thank you, members of the council. Uh pay request number six consists of the essentially the project retainage of 5% that's held until uh the punch list is
complete. It also includes change order five and six. Um the work's complete. It's been approved by the city and we've been occupying this building since the end of May. Uh we're anticipating the one-year walkthrough to be scheduled for late March or early April. So it can be
done by by the end of May. Um we've been provided the O andM and warranty documents and Metcon has been good to work with um if any issues have arisen. So fiscal impact uh as the mayor just stated 55,22649.
Uh there were a total of six change orders uh totaling uh 24,75958 um just 2.4% of the initial bid. Uh overall the project cost uh reconstruction and a remodel and purchasing the property 3 million uh or
to date we still have a few things coming in um minor things here and there 3,24,51.91. Any questions? Staff would recommend approval of application for payment number seven. >> All right. Thank you. Joel Brian, you got anything? >> Nope. I mean got to pay the bills.
>> Gary, >> no. Jamie, no. Scott, >> uh the only thing is so uh warranty period that on it is that that's upon this final payment. That's when the warranty starts or >> um when uh occupy the
>> when occupied. >> Correct. That's why we're doing the one-year walk through at um you know late late spring. >> Okay. And what's our warranty period on this one? >> Just one year total. Okay. Right. >> All right. I'll entertain a motion. So move. >> All right. Motion by Palawa.
>> Second. >> Second by Sipka. Any further discussion? All in favor? >> I. >> All opposed. >> All right. Consider approval of a proposal submitted by Bolton and Mink and the not to exceed amount of $63,300
for the design and construction administration observ observation for the Bixby development lift station. Joel Ericson. >> Uh thank you, mayor, members of the council. Uh this was discussed at our December 11th meeting I believe one of
them in December where uh we were looking for direction from the council um on essentially how do we want the lift station designed? Do we want it to be designed just for uh this specific parcel that's going to be developed or
do we want to look bigger picture, see what the um sewer shed area is and um have the developer upsize it with the city cost sharing so that the the property adjacent to it can just um dump into that. uh at that December 11th, at
that meeting, the council decided to um not cost share and just have the uh list station sized accordingly for for that development's needs, but then also um that the city would take the lead on the the design, turn that over
to the developer for bidding uh and construction. And then throughout the whole development, including the the lift station, um we would have construction observation uh to make sure that the contractor was was meeting our our construction plans and and
specifications. So as proposed, it has a wet well and a valve valve or valve vault. Um and the developer has questioned the need for these two structures. He believes only one is necessary. uh in
speaking with staff, the propos proposed design with the two structures is recommended. Um my understanding is is that's the way that they're designed now. And then also our uh only lift station we have is at the intersection of um Willow Creek Drive and Industrial
Drive Southeast. And that's the way that is designed as well. uh submersible pumps, internal piping. There' be a 4-in PVC force mane uh which would dump into our existing sanitary system at 4th Avenue Northwest.
Uh site design, including the paved driveway, uh electrical control panel, lighting. Um I know there was talk about uh uh requiring a generator. I'm anticipating that we'll be having conversations with the developer on on that. uh final design uh site plan, plan
and profile, electrical detail, uh technical specs. Uh they are proposing to do one one soil boring at the location of the list station and then we're anticipating that we'll be able to uh be provided the survey work that is
being done by the the developer on site. construction administration uh part-time construction observation be present at the initial startup organize a kickoff meeting review the drawings materials and suppliers provided by um the
developer respond to question or I'm sorry contractor uh respond to questions punch list and then prepare the asbuilts fiscal impact u since it's development driven uh should be expected that the developer would be responsible for for
these costs since it uh is needed for for the development and development pay score itself. Alternatives will be to not approve the proposal submitted by Bolton and Mink and then included with staff's report is the proposal and task order number six.
Unless there's any questions, staff would recommend approval of the proposal submitted by uh Fton Mink. >> All right, Carrie, you got anything? Jamie, >> I know we said not to the north for development, but for if that one acre
adjacent to the Bixby property would happen to be bought and they'd build a couple houses on there, could this accept the sewage from that or are we going to be over capacity? >> We could uh look at that within our design to size it accordingly for for
something like that. Typically the pumps and and wet well sizing has some factor of safety in it as well. So it would be able to handle the entire development. But um I think a larger question would be making sure that the utilities from
that parcel can somehow reach the infrastructure being installed with this development. >> All right. >> That's kind of in the middle, right? >> It's Edward's old shed. It's right on the northwest. that that fenced in area.
Yeah, correct. So, so there >> the the property encompasses around it. It's right on the road. So, it's kind of in almost in the middle on the the north side. So, to the question of the infrastructure reaching
it, it should because you're going to have part of the Bixby development to the west of it and to the east of it and to the south of it. So, I think that that parcel is to the northwest of the Bixby parcel. >> Um,
>> but it's not the very far northwest corner. >> I believe it is. >> Is it? >> It is. >> I thought there was some >> That's Donnie Mhik's property east or west of it. >> I cuz I I I was under the impression that there was another bit of it, but to
the south of it >> to the south of it there is. >> Yeah. Would be part of the the Bixby property. >> Yep. Um, and the developer's current concept shows rear yards butting up to that adjacent parcel. >> Um, so again, the the harder task would
be figuring out how to get utilities from that smaller parcel into the rightway within uh the Bixby parcel. >> All right, >> Scott, you got anything? Um just I I guess I don't know exactly where we're
sitting on this the whole project overall. So we you know want to move forward with this. Do we turn we reconstruct this and then they reimburse us for it? >> Yep. So, we had a meeting on um the the
the wetland delineation that was done, the notice of determination that was was sent out by the T panel uh earlier this week and um and I made them aware of this situation as well. I don't want the developer to to have any surprises of oh
and I have this cost too. >> Okay. >> So, regardless they would have the cost. >> Okay. So, and and there's no risk that this all gets done and then the developer says, you know, I don't want to build here. So, now we've built a
lift station for uh well, yeah, I don't see us we're going through those conversations right now. Um they've asked about um concept plans, the platting process. So, we've provided them that information, but I to your point, we
should have some type of of commitment from the developer that that they're going to proceed. >> Yeah. Just we've been we've been down to the 11th hour and stuff before and the rug gets pulled out and we don't want to be investing more into this. We have to.
So, that's all I had. >> Okay. Ryan. >> No, I I don't have any more. So, we're paying for the design. >> Um, I can kind of understand why the
developer wouldn't want to do the valve vault. And I'll just say it. I I have a hard time with this one because I I support my staff because they're at the end of the day, they're they're going to be the ones that are working on
it. I know it cost quite a bit of money. Um but we want this to pencil out. We want it to go forward. So, I I really want to work with this developer that's going to be building these houses because we absolutely need it. Um, we have no more
buildable lots in town and we need something. So, as long as we can make sure that we're working with these developers and getting stuff done, um, I'm okay. But I also want to make sure public works gets taken care of, too.
So, uh, maybe there might be another cost saving or cost sharing effort later. I mean, at the end of the day, I think it was 30 houses he was pitching for this year, >> correct? >> I mean, you're going to see property taxes coming back and you're going to
see park dedication of Wacka sack off of those and then you'll see another round of 25 or 30 houses the next year. So, there's always ways that we can work with developers on developing. just want to make sure that we continue our best
foot forward to work with those developers. So, I'll entertain a motion. >> So, I'm sorry. I don't want to mean to interrupt, but So, do we want are we not requiring the valve vault then?
>> See, that's the hard part is I wish Joe was here. >> Well, I mean, I don't want to speak for him, but his recommendation was >> Sure. And I I just kind of wonder if if we >> no >> if he doesn't want to do it, but we're
requiring it. And then there's other things um that might come up that need a little bit more cost sharing. I mean, this is a big job and we're just at the start of it. I just want to make sure that we're
supporting this to go through. That's all I'm getting at. So, if we're going to require the the valve vault, um, I'd like to make sure that we work together on something else. You know, I think we had talked about some
other things before this meeting that uh we would have to help out on. So, that's all I want to put in front of council. Um, I'm kind of still sticking with staff's recommendation. So, it's kind of where I'm at. Just want to
make sure it's set. I don't like this lift station idea. I'm just going to be honest. I don't like it. I >> Oh, yeah. There's the only other option is to take it what? All the way to fourth northwest. >> Mhm. >> And the cost of that is you're >> essentially reconstructing, which at
some point's going to need to get reconstructed anyway, but you know, 70th Street all the way basically to H Hallstead. Yeah. You know, and then and also keeping this lift station just to service this property. There's going to be another lift station right across the street on the north side
>> if it ever >> if that ever goes. Yeah. >> When No, >> if >> I mean that's >> it's a long time from now. Mhm. >> You know, I think we planned it out where if it ever does get developed, I
mean, that list station would need to be rehabilitated anyway by the time that comes. I'm sure of it. So, all right. Does anybody have anything else they want to add to this?
>> Okay. I entertain a motion. >> I'll make the motion. >> Motion by Palava. >> Second. >> Second by warm description. Any further discussion? All in favor? >> I. >> All opposed. All right. Consider approval of the
plans and specifications for the city's 2026 mill overlay project and authorize staff to bid for the project. Jason Malikica, city engineer. >> Yes. Thank you, mayor, members of the council. Uh the 2026 mill and overlay project consists of the following
roadways. It's 8th Avenue Northwest from Arizona Street Northwest to approximately 240 feet north of Arizona Street Northwest. Singing Hills Drive from about 540 ft south of Woodidge Court to Willow Creek Drive Southeast
and Woodidge Court Southeast. Um, city staff recommended that these roadway segments be improved based on existing conditions being poor and in need of repair. Pavement cores were obtained for each roadway segment to determine the depth and integrity of the
existing pavements and to determine the recommended improvements. The existing pavement depths varied from two and 3/4 to 5 1/2 in um with pavement cores on Singing Hills Drive between Bluff Heights Drive and Woodidge Court showing
high signs of or sorry showing signs of high severity stripping and deterioration. For this reason, a bid alternate has been included to incorporate full depth reclamation along Sunni Hills Drive and Woodriidge Court. A summary of each bid alternate is
provided below. So, bid alternate A would include a 2in mill overlay on 8th Avenue and full depth pavement removal and patching on Singing Hills Drive from Bluff Heights Drive to approximately 100 ft south of Woodidge Court and on
Woodidge Court. uh from Singing Hills Drive to approximately 200 feet east. Um that area that's being proposed for full pavement removal and replacement is kind of a a educated estimate at this point
based on what the pavement cores showed. Um so during construction, uh that area would be evaluated to determine if less or more of that pavement would need to be removed. Um outside of that pavement removal area, there'd be a inch and a half millaning overlay on the remaining
portions of Singing Hills Drive and Woodidge Court. Bid alternate B consists of a 2-in milan overlay on 8th Avenue and a full depth reclamation on Singing Hills Drive in Woodidge Court. The project quantities assume 10% of the
mill and overlay areas will require full depth pavement removal and patching as a contingency for both bid alternates. After the pavement is initially mil uh on 8th Avenue Northwest, the condition of the pavement will be reviewed in the field to determine if additional removal
is necessary. Similarly for bid alternate A, after the pavement on Singing Hills Drive in Woodriidge Court Southeast is initially mil, the pavement conditions will be evaluated to determine the extents of the full pavement removal and replacement. Um the
full depth reclamation kind of as I alluded to earlier on Singing Hills Drive and Woodri Court um which is incorporated into Bid alternate B would remove this evaluation component um with just reclaiming the entire uh streets in
that area of the project area. Um which bid alternate the city decides to proceed with will be determined after the bids have been opened and evaluated and compared to the available project budget. No drainage or utility improvements are proposed with this
project aside from the cast and gate valve adjustments required within the project limits. The proposed schedule for upcoming project actions are as follows. Um so approval of the plans and specs order
for advertisement for bids uh would be this evening January 8th. Assuming that that order goes through, uh we would advertise in finance and commerce in the Lndale area news review on February 3rd and February 10th with uh bid openings
scheduled for February 17th. And then city council would receive the bids and award the project at the February 26th meeting. The exact fiscal impact for the city is dependent on the bidding process, but funding for the project was budgeted in
the amount of $214,500. The alternatives this evening are to approve the plans and specifications and order the advertising for bids for the 2026 mill overlay project or do not approve the plans and specifications and do not order the advertisement for bids
for the 2026 Milan overlay project. With that, I will take any questions. >> All right. Thank you, Jason. Jamie, you got anything? >> Nope. >> Scott? Um, >> not yet. Brian? >> Nope. I know we've discussed this project uh in the past and probably
multiple times. So, it'll be interesting to see what the bids come back to. And we're always early on them, so we usually get some pretty good pricing. >> Carrie, >> nothing at this time. >> Okay. Entertain a motion. >> So move.
>> Motion by Palava. >> Second. >> Second by Miller. Any further discussion? All in favor? >> All opposed. All right. Thank you, Jason. All right. On to the last item of due business is discuss economic development
goals, priorities for 2026. Joel Ericson, city administrator. >> All right. Thank you, mayor, members of the council. um basically looking at the council having a discussion on you know what what is the city willing to offer as far as as
incentives and and I know my staff report I say everything's on a case-byase basis but at the end of the day after it's introductions it's what's the city gonna do for me >> and if we don't have those answers um I
just think it reflects poorly on the city that we're not prepared, we're new to the development game, things like that. Um, you know, no city has a smoking gun that because of this policy
they have, everyone's coming to their community, right? They're going to look at what's best what's the best location for for my business whether it's um you know transportation proximity to the market things like that. So they're
going to identify their geographic area and then they're going to call us. They're going to call New Craig. They're going to call Elco New Market whoever else Montgomery and then the bidding war begins right who's going to give me the best deal? And then that information is
used by whether it's the developer or uh the business owner to to to make the final decision. Um you know some things that that we've talked about here recently um feasibility studies and we had a a hotel developer come to our our last council
meeting and give a presentation on a project that they would like to consider for Lndale. But, you know, the the the conversation ended with, you know, for this to happen, the city, they want the city to pay for the the feasibility
study. Um, is the city willing to to do that? Um there there should be an answer to that hopefully tonight because we have our EDA meeting next Thursday and it would be I think we need to know that because if we're not then we might as
well just save their time and not drive down from from Peekquat Lakes to to attend a meeting. Uh reduce city fees, you know, that can be a a slippery slope. You know, hey, let's reduce the wack and sac fees for for this
development. Hey, what about me over here? I'm, you know, a third the size or I'm twice the size. Um, you know, I think that just becomes a slippery slope. Tax abatement. Um, we we just went through that. Uh,
tiff discounted land prices. Um, you know, uh, the mayor and I have talked to a couple businesses and and threw out some land prices and, um, I I I don't think we want to get too far out in front of the council >> and, you know, and, you know, we want to
be truthful and intransparent with with these developers and say, "Hey, man, this is our this is our best deal." you know, um, you know, and and a lot of the times for these businesses to access
other incentives, say tax abatement through Rice County, uh, not only Rice County, but deed, they're expecting the city to have some skin in the game as well. Um, and we've been able to to do that in the business park with reduced land costs.
uh our revolving loan fund and we're going to be rolling out here um in the next couple days the EDA's facade rehabilitation deferred loan grant program. So I I think there just needs to be a
conversation amongst the council as to what what's acceptable and and what's not because if it's not then we certainly won't be uh offering that or say that it's a a possibility or you know
just I guess want to be truthful and and straight up with with builders. you know, they they all know each other or developers, they all know each other, they all talk and, you know, the more indecisive we are or or quite frankly um the less incentives
um probably doesn't bode too well for Londale. Mhm. >> And the other thing is too is you don't want them to go and spend all this money and then at the end just say no and then
it it really beats up the city a lot. Um I know that when I talk to a lot of businesses and when I talk to a lot of developers and it's always hey it it's hard with Lawndale. It's always been difficult with Lawndale. You got to
really truly understand the condition of the city in which it is. We we built a bunch of houses on a swamp, you know. Um some of the land that we have, you know, yeah, there's soil corrections. There's a lot. Um I know that even with the 12.6
or 11.6 acres that we have in the business park, that's not going to be cheap for anybody to start putting a a pad on. Um I already talked with one and there was a significant amount of um grading corrections that had to come
from it. So these incentives are our tools. They are in our tool box. Um this isn't political, okay? This is real life. Um there's real value added.
Tax abatement, you know. Um let's expand on it a little bit. If you don't own the land, you can't give a discounted price on land. Um, if you do own the land, uh, you can get that full price from your land up front and then go for abatement.
But when you talk to a lot of businesses, even in the business park, we just talked to Scander Filtration, um, they have straight up said if it wasn't for the abatement through the county, they wouldn't be able to be here. They wouldn't be able to build. And that's the reality whether it's
housing, whether it's business, whether it's rehabilitating a building, you know, um I get uh the politics of offering these incentives. I think we can have better
conversations. We have good policy. I think we can revamp our policy a little bit more uh through another look through the attorney. Um but I think the policy is good. Um, and that's, you know, kind of behind the curtain of what a lot of
residents don't see. You know, uh, tax incremental financing tiff is really something that, let's say, if out here, for instance, I'll give you a good picture out here when you go down commerce because the city didn't build
the library or the city hall, that master plan over there. Now you got a lot more that you got to figure out because at first if you look at the drawing it was supposed to be a massive parking lot. Um now because we got the city hall here now what are we going to
do over there? Because telling a developer you're not going to give them any incentives but you want them to build it the way you want to. Um nobody's going to do that. Nobody's going to invest money into doing that. Um so that's where you'd see that tax
and financing. um applying it to uh you know even the villages along a lot of cities do that where they have 50 to 55 plus you'll give them tiff and then it's hey we want a space for
our library we want our space for something there um it's tax and grim financing is really to help push for something that a council wants right um discounted land price usually uh Joel hit it right on the had um
you know I have always said a really good one-two punch to to really try to get business or even a developer in the town cut the deal on the land price and the county mandeed they'll they'll say that's enough you know skin on the game
where we can get behind with abatement but at the same time um we need to understand that as homeowners you get taxed even on business owners you get taxed through three identities. So, you have to be really cognizant of that as well because the county has needs, school districts
have needs, city has needs. Um, so I mean I I really I really want you guys to understand. I just don't think incentives are the worst thing to apply. Um,
and Ldale is in in a unique position where, you know, I get the comments of, well, we're going to just be Lakeville if we keep growing or why does Lzville have to change or grow? And and the reality of it is
we'll never be the size of Lakeville. We'll never be able to be Lakeville or Fairbolt. Um, I for sure know I'm not going to be alive long enough to ever see that. Um but the reality is is we want to make sure that we bring people into town. We
got our businesses that are being looked after. Um we we want it to be a we want to just emphasize it being a small town and I know a lot of people in town they they would love to work in town. It's been
one of their biggest dreams um to work in town. um they love supporting the small town shops. They love doing all this kind of stuff. And as long as we focus on our needs and our comprehensive 2040 plan, um I just don't want you guys thinking
incentives are are the worst thing to ever exist. Um I've highlighted our debt service quite a bit uh in length. Um we do have one of the lowest tax rates in Rice County and in Minnesota.
There's a lot of potential here for Lonel. Um, and we got to just make sure that we're working with others because as soon as you start not working with others, just like Joel said, it it goes everywhere. I mean, it travels to other cities, it travels to other developers, and then we
get into this. Why doesn't anybody want to work with us? And I don't think that's any of the intentions of any of the council members up here tonight. Um, I don't think that's the intentions of staff, but we need to make sure that we have an honest
conversation tonight and let city staff know because there are people that want to do good things for the city of Londale. Um, as far as the feasibility study goes for the hotel, I'll just say it out loud. I don't I don't think we're ready for it. Um, I don't I don't think
we should spend taxpayer money on a feasibility study. I think because they came to us, I think they can pay for it. Um, but and I'd be willing to review it and and see what it yields to, but right now
I think in probably 5 years you'll see a better deal for a hotel than you would right now. Um, that's my honest opinion. But we need to make sure we're not wasting people's time and just being honest, you know. um let's not take them
down a path and then and then vote it down in the final minute. So with that, I'll get off my podium. Um Scott, I'll let you go. Uh well, I you know, I do agree with you on, you know, and Joel on, you know, many of these items. Uh yeah, as as far
as the feasibility study goes for the the uh hotel, I know that that's been discussed and trying to incorporate that into the um the business um uh drawing a blank to the market study. >> Market study. Yes, thank you. Uh the
market study to see, you know, but I I do agree that I think that's we're getting a little bit ahead of ourselves uh with that, but it'd be interesting to see what the you know, if the market study did indicate that would be a worthwhile thing. Um, you know, and I I guess one of the things, you know, going
back, these are supposed to be incentives. I I guess I I like the term, you know, the incentive is something that's supposed to help spur something, not necessarily carry the the pro the project. I guess that's my opinion on that. Um,
uh, so that that's supposed to be a little bit extra, uh, to to make it happen, not be a one of the most integral parts of it. So, um, but yeah, I do agree that we need to, uh, be more upfront, uh, with with that information ahead of the time so we're not wasting
people's time and resources. So, thank you, >> Brian. So, um, I think this a lot of this is really good discussion that should be had with the EDA. I think, you know, a lot of
this should originate through EDA. Um, you know, just running through the list, I you know, I I want to make it very clear that I'm not opposed to incentives. Um, I I I it depends, right? The answer is
always it depends. Um, you know, I'm not an attorney, but I know that's a phrase they like to use. It depends. And in this case, it really does depend. Depends on the project, depends on what it's bringing to the city. What does the city get for it? You know, you talked about TIFF. Um, absolutely. We did TIFF
for villages. We got a library in there, right? That was part of the project. Um, an incentive with no return other than what we would get regardless of giving an incentive is frankly us
giving away and getting nothing in return. You know, I mean the question is to the developer, you know, developer comes to us, what is the city going to give me? Well, what are you going to give the city? What is the city going to get out of this this particular project? Whe it's x number of jobs, it's
increased tax base, it's this, it's that, it's, you know, amenities that that will be provided to the public. Um, those are the questions that I look to when determining does an incentive fit this particular
project. Um, you know, right off the bat, right off the top of my head, an easy one to say yes to with housing is deferred sack and whack. Okay, you're building houses, you're building a 100 houses. Sure, we'll defer
it. When it closes, that's when the sack and whack fee gets paid. So, the developer is not carrying the cost of all the the connection fees in their development costs. It's part of the closing cost on the particular property. That's something I think it's an easy thing to say, "Sure, yeah, that makes
sense." Um, you know, it gets the project done. We know the the the money's going to come in. Um, you know, we could look at, you know, absolutely lower land val or uh uh cut a deal on the land. Bring me somebody that wants to make an offer on some of this land
that we've got and I'll talk all day long about um cutting them a deal on the land. >> So, >> I guess the question is is what if you don't own the land? >> What? >> Yeah. What if you don't own the land? >> If you don't own the land, then it depends on the project. Again, like I
was saying, you know, I mean, if if it's a housing project, like somebody's coming in and building a bunch of houses and they want to defer sack and whack fees till it closes on on the individual houses, sure, that's a great starting point for a conversation. It depends on
what they're asking for, what we get in return. Um, you know, I'm not opposed to incentives by any means at all. Um, I think it's important that we talk about it, but again, it it depends. It depends on
the project. It depends on what they're trying to develop. It depends on where they want to build, what they're coming to do. Is it residential development? Is it commercial development? You know, um, all that kind of stuff. Those are the kinds of things. And you know, can we do
things to help make sure that they can get other incentives from other agencies? Absolutely. I'll talk to you about that all day long. But again, it depends on the project. If it's just a I want to build something, you know, like we talked about the hotel, they came to us, you know, feasibility study. We
talked about it when they were here. EDA is already in the process of doing, you know, a market study. We're talking about putting this market study together. We said, "Let's see what it would cost to do the feasibility study in conjunction with that or as part of
that, you know." So, I don't think we're we're saying no. I mean, the apartment project, they came to us, asked us to do the feasibility study, and we did it, and we paid for it. So, um, you know,
we've already set the precedence of we'll do it. doesn't mean that we're going to agree to everything else, but we did it. Um, so yeah, I mean, I'm open to this kind of stuff. I'm open to all of these things, like you said, and I think it's the very that's the best way to put it.
These are all tools in our tool box, and depending on the job that needs to be done at the particular moment, i.e. the project coming before us determines which tool we're going to pull out or tools, you know, and frankly, we can have a back and forth. And I think
that's why some of this stuff really should start initiate through the EDA rather than come directly to the council because we can dig into these things from an EDA standpoint and make a recommendation up. And again, you know,
we as a council and because we've done it, we can say, you know, thank you for your input. We're going to go another direction. And that's I'm I'm okay with that, too, because we've done it to other advisory boards. But at least we kind of have that starting point where
this isn't looking good. We can get a feel for it and to go back then, you know, maybe we're heading off some of that wasting of people's time. I guess that's just my thoughts on this. Um main main point I want to make is yeah I'm absolutely open to incentives.
Which incentive depends on the project. >> All right, Curry. >> I agree with Scott and Brian about the incentives. I am in favor of incentives, but it does depend on case by case basis. Um, I agree about getting the EDA involved because that's kind of their
forte is digging into these things and bringing the recommendations to us. Plus, it gives us more community feedback on these projects and things like that. So, um, I guess I'd like to start things with the EDA as well.
>> I'm going to say this um, before I pass it on. We are EDA and council. We are economic development. Um EDA only meets once a month. We can meet. We talk about things every council
meeting. Um if you worked on any of these deals or had any of these conversations, it's that quick. >> And I don't I'm the elected official. Um
I got to make decisions. It's got to pencil out. And I I don't know why we always got to make pitches to go to EDA when we're focused on EDA doing business retention, expansion, um, and recruitment. They got a lot
going on. But my thing is this, at the end of the day, we're economic development. >> So, are you wanting us right now? My thing is is that if if we are getting a business in that business park,
I don't want to go through the EDA because it was all the economic developments happening through Joel and I. >> It's never brought to the EDA. >> We've been super >> They're not being brought to the EDA. >> Well, that's why you're doing a feasibility study for commercial retail
and office space. And look how long that's been taken, Brian. So, I'll just say it. It is on the agenda for the January meeting. I just need to finish my staff report just to include the discussion that's happening tonight. So, yeah, you're going to basically
>> you can skip that uh agenda item reading next. You already read it. It's here's what was presented to the to the city council. Yeah. To that point, the EDA will will be discussing it. But the the other thing is is that if you guys do not plan on doing the hotel, then don't
spend the extra taxpayer money to fund the extra part of the feasibility study. >> We haven't voted on that. Nobody's voted on that. >> No, I don't. But I'm What I'm stating though is if you have zero intentions of doing a hotel, then don't spend the extra money to do
that feasibility study to see what the hotel would yield to. That's that's what I'm stating here is I mean we can go around circles all day long but we're talking about people's time and their their money. And
I I'll tell you this much that business in the business park you know Brian Bugerman they had everything lined up ready to go. I mean, it it was so responsive and you rely on your city staff to carry
out a lot, but at the end of the day, we got to make votes. And if we aren't giving clear, decisive answers to our city staff, then it's difficult. Um Joel will come up and say, "Hey, I got
a, you know, interested party that wants to do this, that, the other." Um, but I couldn't tell what incentives to do. I mean, we just keep going around and around and around in circles and it's not answering city staff's questions. >> So, do you want us to come up with
basically templates that you pull off of like, okay, for this proposal, these are the tools, this proposal, those are the tools, or what kind of >> mo most of it. Okay. So, it depends on so many variables, but what I'm getting at is this.
Nobody said anything about the abatement for the apartment. We had it in front of us and nobody said anything to let us work on solutions. Um you know we get the conversation of well we want more. We want more. We want more for the
community. Well that's when you would end up enticing tiff but then people said no tiff. So then it was how can we make this project feasible and make it happen to state that nothing comes with it. There was a lot that came with it. Um
but the thing about it is is we need to let city staff know what we are thinking ahead of time so they understand. I mean we're robbing time of our city staff. Um
and that that's not a comfortable thing that I like seeing. So again, what I'm stating is if if you are against something from the beginning, say you're against it with reason or without reason. So then that way we don't keep
repeating this stuff because people actually put their hard-earned money into these decisions because we're not hearing anything from council about anything. So when we go through this commercial office retail space,
it's we all know about it. So let's talk where do we want it at? What are what are we willing to do? I mean if a developer comes in and states, hey, you know what? You guys do the feasibility
study, you know, uh the feasibility study or the market analysis that puts your bumpers in, right? Then he goes and takes it to his bank, creates a proforma, and says, "This is what it's going to yield to. What's going to be the price on land?"
Okay. Well, are we looking at making money off of the land price? And if so, then your incentive is going to go from discounted land price to um tax abatement. Well, in that aspect,
do we want more out of it? And if we want more out of it, then do we have the discussion of tiff? But we got to know what you guys are comfortable with doing. Um I do know that when we sat down with developers, it was right away what's the
the price on land because that's when they put it in their proforma after they get the feasibility. >> Well, the answer to that question is simple. It depends on where you're going because if it's our land, then we can have a conversation about what's the price on land. If it's not our land, we can't
So, I mean, again, I I I guess I don't >> you only got 6.1 acres and 1.8 acres that isn't city property, and that's between the bank by Wetsies and then that's also 8th Avenue. >> Okay. So, my my thing is this
>> the point I'm trying to make is I said I I thought it was pretty clear. I am open to every one of these tools in our toolbox depending on the project. It it feels like we're we're kind of going in this circle where it's like you're hearing
I'm saying no to any incentives, but I'm not. I'm saying let's talk about incentives all day long depending on what the project is. Because if a developer comes to us, depending on what let's say generic developer, generic project, we're not even saying
commercial residential. They come to us and they say, "What are you going to give me?" My first question back to them would be, "Well, what are you offering?" It it's a it's it's a conversation. And I mean, I think that's kind of where the
EDA, I think, can really get involved in this and be helpful because it's a collective group of voices. It's it's I mean, we have what, eight, nine, seven. >> Well, you could talk about it all day, but I'm not going to wait on decisions for EDA when it's something that being
the city administrator we're working on. Nobody else knew about it. >> What the apartment >> when they I mean they come here and then it comes to everybody else when when you feel ready to present it to the rest of us. That's just it with the EDA at least then we have some >> We went through a market analysis study.
>> Well, right. I know. But how long were you working on before that? Say I don't know. >> I mean you send an email. I mean it's been in front of us for months. That whole apartment was in front of us for months. And >> so, right, when it when it comes to the council, yes, I mean, you say, "Okay,
we're working on this. We're we're working on that. We've been working on on these things. We're talking to the this developer, that developer, this, you know, that's that's great." And I mean, that's awesome. I mean, I'm glad we've got people we're talking to, but >> at some point,
we don't know what we don't know, right? >> So, if you're talking to somebody, I don't always necessarily know you're talking to somebody. So my question is we have these preliminary discussions. This is how it works with everything.
You have preliminary discussions and then they ask you, you know, give me an idea what's land costs. Give me an idea what kind of incentives. Well, I don't know what council wants. I'm only one vote. Then I see what council does.
And then from there, it's well, I'm not I'm out. Mom, I can't make it happen. I can't make it pencil out. So, they don't they don't want to spend the money on a concept plan. They don't want to spend any money on that. They won't come into council. They have to come to council
>> because it's council's decision on if they want to move forward with a concept plan. It it's in our fee schedule um for concept plans. You know, you got city staff time involved. And then on top of that, there's purchase agreements that go through. Um,
that was a willing sell and a willing buyer. And he would not have looked at closing on that land if we weren't 50 votes the whole entire time. Sounds to me like we're we're framing
this entire discussion about incentives looking forward at future projects based on one singular project that's been brought before the council. That's what I'm hearing. >> Okay. >> And I don't think that's >> I mean that was just the last
conversation. >> Well, I mean we got to have the conversation because here's the deal. So, you still have a you still have a preliminary and a final plat application that's sitting out there. >> Yep. >> And you got a developer and waiting. And if you're un if you're stating you're
willing to give incentives and then you're not willing to give incentives >> depending on >> you got a well you got a developer in waiting that needs to understand and city staff needs to understand what is.
So you still have this on hold. It's It's out there and council has to make two decisions tonight. Whether it's do we move forward with the hotel project,
do we do we want to do it? Do we want to waste their time or not? And then do we do we want to move forward with this hotel or this apartment? And if that's the case, then just vote it down tonight. You got people waiting. So I guess the question is are we
talking about incentives for generic projects to come to us for the future or are we talking specific project? >> We're talking about everything everything >> because the the some I I I don't
disagree that the EDA needs to be more active, play a larger role. I I agree 100%. Um, I did review the the um proposal that was submitted for the market feasibility study and
from what I got out of it, it wouldn't work for um the the hotel because that's going to be looking for specifics as far as like room size or not room size, but you know, number of rooms, you know, things like that, what you could charge for rents. Um so it would be it would be
a separate um study but but it's not even residential or I'm sorry um business or you know whether it's commercial or or industrial you know we're going to have to you know we're meeting on the big speed property um and
just just through development the city um I'm anticipating will incur costs for um oversizing water main for example you know we may you know an 8 in water mane may be sufficient for their development, but we're going to want to size it to a
12 so we can go north. Um, obviously we collect fees which can offset that. Um, there's no secret there's a huge drainage problem on that north side that that has to be corrected with this development. It has to be. >> Mhm. Um so what what that's going to
require is you know probably the city um contributing to um pay the developer to oversize retention ponds potentially pipe size to to to carry that that flow. Um, so it's
not just not just the apartment, >> right? >> Everything >> because I but we were asked on on was it was it yesterday, Wednesday, Tuesday, >> will the city pay for that? >> And my my response was uh it makes sense. That would be my
recommendation. >> I'm going to let you go, Jamie. I skipped over you. Well, first off, I'm know a lot of people that have developed in town. I'm related to several of them. They feel like it's jumping through hoops half the time because they're going to meeting after meeting after
meeting. We need to streamline this. If you don't feel like doing something, don't waste their time on the feasibility study. That's wasting our money as taxpayers and that's wasting their time. Second off, the abatement discount on land. You're out that money
up front. We had 10 years to re disperse $300 some thousand dollar. That's $40,000 a year versus taking a lump sum of that much right up front. We had that was a dispersement method, not we're out of it. It's fictitious money at this
point in time to begin with because if it doesn't get built that doesn't exist. That's what you need to take into account. And I know a lot of people that developed and they felt like it was jumping through hoops. We do have all these options, but if you're not interested right off the bat, don't
waste anybody's time. It makes us look like a bunch of, you know what, we w push Brian around for 6 months already. That's a waste of his time. And he's not living in Londale. He's coming all the
way from Anandale. You got to take that into effect. I remember some conversations early on that Tom had brought up that he's not asking for a lot of abatements or anything like that. >> When did the story change? That was
>> it was Curry. It was okay. >> I went through this that last meeting and I'll go through it again. It was 25% initially for school, county, city. I asked not to go in the school
district because I was looking out for the taxpayers that live east of 8th Avenue that was just going through a referendum and I knew that the city would be okay. But then you got to understand too is the county is its own
identity and if they've never done tax abatement for a market rate apartment, they're not going to start with Lawndale. However, they would sign up on tiff. So if you wanted an amenity, I was okay with tiff. I was okay with whatever you guys wanted. I just wanted to make
sure that that was clear, but at the end of the day, I was told TIFF is a no vote. And that was showcased pretty loud and clear last council meeting. >> I don't recall saying I was against Tiff. >> I did. >> So, the thing about it is is that if if
we're going to do that, if we're going to say no off the bat, okay, then understand that there's got to be some type. It's got to balance. It's got to pencil out. That's why I had the proforma printed out. And people can go through
this and it shows with abatement and without abatement. And when you go through these deals, you'll see on the lower left cash on cash and then the debt service ratio and then the return on investment. They have to meet the bank's covenants. Okay? So, when we say
that, oh, well, we're not getting enough out of it. Well, we we were getting quite a bit a substantial amount out of it. And at the end of the day, in 10 years, you would feel the full entire property taxes generated out of that, but you'd also have the property taxes
out of the houses. It was a deal where the city could take it and they could manage to go through the 2027 budget, 2028, 2029 because if you looked at our debt service and how it dropped off, you'd be able to pay off the debt
service. So then that way we're going to be okay. I mean, every bit of this that I mean, we went into such depth with this and and I'm not just stating the apartment. I'm using it as an example because it's a recent example and it's a
really good example. And so my thing is is if if we wanted more out of it then we had the incentive to get more out of it. Um and we had that time. I mean we had
Shannon Sweeney here twice to go through it and they went through it in EDA as well. Um, you know, we have the resources to talk to all of you and is this a good deal?
You know, I think that that's what a lot of people were wondering. Is this a good deal? And city staff went through the work. We uh sat down even with the county and we tried to understand. I tried as hard as I could to get the county to do it and
the county just wouldn't do it because we didn't max out our capacity. They don't benefit one bit off of whacken sack or any it's just property taxes. Um they don't get any of that. Um
and so it the city got everything up front and it was substantial. So, I understand people's concerns about tax abatement, understanding about tiff, but
when you have staff that goes through it in such a high level and in such indepth, you know, we need to make sure that we're supporting them because at the end of the day, we're making the votes. We're the ones that are
making things happen. So, I I just I don't know why you guys voted it down. I I don't I don't >> part of it was it was a very contentious project to begin with. You know, that was a big thing. And for for me, uh those that were opposed, I obviously knew they were opposed to abatement, but
the number of people that told me that they were in favor of the resoning to allow it, but then when it came up for abatement, those people that were in favor of the moving forward with the project were opposed to abatement. So, those were those were other people that
we had to look at. you know, I was taking input from people that were in favor but weren't in favor of abatement. >> Sure. >> So, it wasn't just my personal opinion. It was feedback from those that were that really wanted the project. >> And I had those phone calls, too, uh especially from the newspaper. And I
tried to hit it early cuz again, we we know the grief that we went through for this whole thing, but um I had stated, well, this was already old news before the ink dried. Um,
I think we could have had a better conversation on it. Um, that's just it. And >> I know people are opposed to abatement. And when you read the paper, it was a lot. It was a lot of money on the table.
>> Uh, it did not look good. It didn't. >> But then when I was talking to people, I >> I knew what the incentive was and I said, "It's only city. It's not county, it's not school, and then this is how much money that we're going to make up front with all these associated costs.
And you only get the cost if the project is viable. Well, how does the project become viable? It was clear that 75% for 10 years. Now, however, the other thing is we got to come up with solutions. So
if we say no to 75% for 10 years, then what is it that we're willing to go back to? So I guess that's the other question is I know Brian had went back and he discussed
uh discounting wack fees and I don't have the email up front. I don't know if you got it, Joel. Uh, I would have to track it down, but yeah. >> 300 some thousand off of Wack fees. I >> think he was trying to determine what the the present value
>> who got this email. I didn't >> Well, that's why we wanted to have this discussion. Um, >> well, we don't know. >> You keep talking about transparency, but there isn't any transparency. the the EDA you can't you be you begin this by saying that the EDA is an integral part and we need to be doing all this uh
marketing to uh bring businesses and all this and you're telling us the EDA doesn't matter because the council makes the decisions. I have no idea who the hell's in charge here. We have no idea what's going on. >> No, I I think the world of EDA my thing is is you are in
a time frame with EDA where it's actually turn around and doing EDA stuff. But my thing is is if we are talking to developers and we are talking to people that want to invest, it's important that we focus on how do we pass this vote? How do we make sure it
happens in their solutions? One meeting a month with EDA doesn't sell me on that. Um especially if I'm putting all this time into it. As far as the comment for uh you guys, I can understand your concern. This is something that I know
that Brian and Joel were talking about and discussing. Um, I ended up just being on the email, but my thing is is I don't know what we want to do. I don't know if people just didn't want to do the project anymore or what. And so my
thing is I took my time. I took a break between the last council meeting to now. I enjoyed my time away from being mayor. So, I mean, this came back probably how many days after that meeting? >> It was a couple days.
>> Yeah. >> Early the following week, probably week of Christmas. >> So, I mean, I I get your guys's frustration, but understand it's we don't know. We don't We don't know. We have no idea. Nobody's bringing up anything over this whole project.
>> Well, I'll be honest with you. This is my 16th year being on the council. Last year was the first year in my entire, you know, the previous 15 years I felt uh included and informed. Last year I felt like I was standing out in the
lobby the whole time. I had no just completely uh ex excluded. Whether it's intentional, not intentional, I don't know. But I've never felt more excluded uh in my entire time here. and how can I
draw a conclusion and and all that? I I don't know what I'm need to ask for because I have no idea what's going on. I I you know, I reached out to you and you know, we ended up having a meeting months uh you know, a month afterwards. You got me up to speed on what you had an issue with uh a uh with uh a
developer's property, but I have no idea what we're looking at moving forward with. >> Yeah. No, I I hear you, Scott, and you know just as well as I do, things take time. Um I'm not getting told a whole lot on land that we don't own. Um as far as that business park, I got to look at
Rice County Beacon. Um and I I mean this is a conversation we need to have. I mean I I get your guys's emotion over it and I I can understand it. I can take accountability. Um and you know, Scott, I sat down and I talked with you because things were actually
happening, right? So I've tried to get business going. I've tried to get development going. I I try to do everything and I I do spend time trying to get something past the goal line.
Sometimes it doesn't work out. And so, am I going to go over a potential business going in say on our acreage and then all of a sudden in 3 months be like, "Ah, sorry, dude. I it's not going to happen." No, it's because I
value everybody's time. Um, I don't want to fill people up with false hope that things aren't going to happen. I hope you can appreciate at least what I have to say about that. And I I don't treat it as in dark or treating you guys in putting you in the dark. Um, my
phone's always been on. I I know that I can go through my text messages and and I could show that I initiated a lot of conversations. So, I mean, at the end of the day, I don't know what you guys want. I don't.
And this year, 2026, we need to figure it out. But I just don't like wasting people's time. I don't um I know I've heard others say that
they don't want a hotel. Okay. I just say you don't want it. If you don't want the apartment or if you want to work with some type of incentive, then let us know. Um because I don't know anymore.
>> My impression was after the apartment abatement was voted down, everything just shut down. Then there was no discussion, no back and forth. Well, then could we try this or could we offer this or could we discuss this? There was nothing. It's like briefcase,
computer's done, we're done. We're not even talking. So, that was my impression. Okay, fine. So, since the abatement didn't pass, we're just going to sit here and and what? Wait for him to see if he can figure out financing without the abatement. I have no idea. I don't know where my boundary is when it
comes to that. C do I email him and ask him? No, I don't think that's my place. That's not my role. So then I wait to hear from city staff and to see what direction and then see it on the agenda so that I can and look through the packet and do my research and I feel in
the dark too. A lot of times I have no idea until I get the packet. And I know we talk and stuff, but I'm like still there's I know you guys are working on stuff and I don't know what's going on and I feel bad because I want to be informed and when people are talking to
me I I just I don't know. I have to wait until the council meeting. >> So, >> well, I don't want you guys to ever be afraid to call me or text me or feeling like you bother me. Um, >> so it's our responsibility to to ask you, so what's going on? You say, "Well, I don't feel like I can share this with
you yet." I' I've never been afraid to say what >> Well, you just said that. You said you you're you're you're cherryick. >> If you reach out to me, Scott, I'll pick up the phone and tell you what I'm working. >> You're cherrypicking on what what you want to share with us. >> No,
as far as a council meeting goes, but you know that you can call me at any time and I could I have no problem sharing I have never had a problem sharing what I'm working with. Fact is is that if you're not calling me
or texting me I unless it's come coming up to council. I mean I don't know. I mean the thing is is we have two developers that want to build commercial buildings in town. We've been waiting on
a feasibility study and we're trying to figure out discounted land and incentive whatever else but that comes after the feasibility or market study analysis. That is how the standard operating procedure works on that.
I talk to business owners all day long. I can't get anybody to build. I can't. So, should I be emailing you? Oh, I talked to X company and I think I got them wanting to build every time because
that would be a a weekly text message. >> What do you want me to do? >> I I'll call you every day. >> Me, but every one of us. >> We're supposed to We're supposed to be operating somewhat as a team here. And it it seems like that there there's no team mentality. It's we don't want to say anything because we don't don't want
something sabotaged or don't you I I don't know. That's that's how it's felt. >> Can I say something? We do have to realize we have to follow state law. We can't be having this meeting behind the scenes violating open meeting law. And you all know that. You all took the
training. That is why he's not doing it. He can't. And you should >> bring it to EDA. >> He can bring it to the EDA. But has EDA met since we voted down the abatement? No. EDA meets once a month? He can't do it. >> You got to take that into account, too.
You all took the training. You all know that we can't be doing it. We're not supposed to be talking about anything unrelated or related to council behind the scenes. >> I'm not saying that. >> So, quit whining about it and just we got to get together now.
>> Being thrown out here tonight a lot. >> No, all I'm saying is a lot of things. >> If you guys if you guys want to see something >> in further detail of changing this or is there you got to talk to city staff. You have to. Mhm. >> You have to figure out can we reduce
whacket sack? Can we whatever it is, you got to take it up with city staff. >> He brought this abatement to us, >> right? Okay. >> He came to us and said, "I want to build an apartment in Lawndale." We had a developer come to us and say, "I want to
build an apartment in Lawndale." My understanding was the conversation went, "Well, we've got this parcel of land available, this parcel land, this parcel of land." and he picked one and then from there started putting all
his pieces together and then comes with a baitment. He proposes the abatement to us. If there was a meeting in which he would have said what is the city willing to to give me to do this project that I'm
coming to you with that I want to develop in your city. It should have been EDA. >> He did go to EDA. >> Well, we had Shannon Sweeney go to EDA with the abatement. >> That's the only time he came to EDA. He
didn't come to EDA prior to the abatement that he said, I want 75% for 10 years. He didn't come to EDA one time before that and say, "What would you be willing to give me as an incentive to build this project in Lawndale?"
And there's a lot of yelling and there's a lot of accusations being thrown out. I'm trying to get right down to the process and the way that we can all be in the loop as to what's going on before a council meeting.
And that way is EDA. The developer can come to EDA and he can say this is what I want to do. What are you willing to give me? And EDA can have that conversation with him. then we don't have to worry about I don't know
what's going on till it comes to a council meeting because I can't call you and I can't text you and I can't email you directly because of open meeting laws. I'm very well aware of how the open meeting laws work.
I'm very well aware of the statute on it. So to insinuate that that's something that I'm not aware of I think is disingenuous and misleading.
So I'm offering a solution here. If we have a developer come to us with a project that they want to do and their question is what incentives are you willing to offer me? Let's have the conversation in EDA. And if we don't
think that's the place for it, then why do we have an EDA? So again, I'm going to just reaffirm my earlier statement. I believe in all these tools in the right situation depending on the project. Is that what city staff is looking for is direction
on would we be willing to any of these things from my standpoint personally? Brian Worm excursion. Yes. For the record, I am also on board with these in the toolbox.
>> Okay. My question is this. city staff, can you send an email out to all the council members and can you provide them with other solutions for incentives that Brian
Buggerman had asked for? So then that way they they know and we don't have to keep Brian and waiting. I know that uh it's either closed on the land or not closed on the land or you can present them tonight and we
could come up with a decision. >> Um I I guess I could track that email down but I think basically it was um waving whack and sack fees I believe to the tune of $500,000.
>> All of them. You wanted all of them waved. uh >> that would be all but $20,000. >> Yeah, it was more than $500,000 because he was equating the the present value of of the cash.
>> I'll load it up here, Brian. >> So, we've >> Well, I'm just looking at this. >> I think what I heard was increased communication involved the >> and the council is willing >> Well, I'm looking at this. Okay. So my decision-making on if we're going to rehash the apartment project because
that sounds like what this entire thing has been. >> No, it's not. >> No, it it absolutely has become that because every time we talk about generalities, it all circles back to the apartment and everybody is getting really fired up about >> what we left on the table when we voted
down the abatement on this apartment. Okay, so I'm looking at this which was given to me tonight. Apartment project with abatement, apartment project without abatement. The main line I'm seeing here with the
differences cash flow after debt. Okay. I'm seeing all positive numbers either way. Now, if that doesn't get him to where he needs to be with his financing, that sounds like a financing problem.
He's asking us as a city to abate to help him with his financing. I'm looking at these numbers, you know, they're, yeah, they're different, but they're not significantly to the point where he's running in the
red any of the years 1 through 10 on this deal. >> Not one. >> Right. If we're going to if we're going to be talking about the apartment, it's I think it's lines 48 and 49. Um, >> I don't have line numbers on here. >> It's the ones that are highlighted in pink.
>> Yeah. Cash flow after debt. So, yeah. And then >> cash on cash. >> Yeah. So, the cash on cash is so the rate of return. >> Yeah. So, his rate of return is is smaller than he wants it to be. Still positive,
>> right? >> I mean, 6.9 3.9 3.8 4.4 3.6.8 7.5 8.2 8.9 9.7 consecutive years 1 through. Those are positive numbers.
Those are those and >> I think the issue is is that are those numbers large enough to attract investment and then you have your um what is it um debt service to cash ratio uh to even
you know unless you have a proven track record uh believe you want that at like 1.25%. Well, I mean, just looking at this, I mean, is is positive here, too? Sure. I mean, I get it. He wants a bigger rate of return. He wants better cash flow. We
all do. >> My point I I'm looking bigger picture, man. I'm not >> No, I understand. No, I I totally understand. But I mean, this >> it's not selling because, you know, it's like the the the argument before was we
get the sack and whack fees. Well, guess what? If he builds this project with or without abatement, we get the sack and wag fees. Unless we say, "Nope, we don't want them." Park dedication. If he builds this project with or without abatement, we get the park dedication.
That money is required for the project to proceed. So, what this abatement ask is that I'm seeing is I need help with my financing. City, will you do it? I'm not ready to be an investor on an
apartment building. That was my answer when I voted no on the abatement. That's why. Am I opposed to having an apartment building in town? No. And I've stated that before.
But I'm not ready to do a bait on it. And frankly, $500,000 in sack and whack fees >> these numbers. >> Hold on. If he if he's asking for >> 50% abatement, 130,000 fee reduction
or uh 35% abatement for 250,000 fee reduction. >> Again, now all we're doing here is he he's asking us to to help him with his financing. >> Everybody's going to ask for help with financing. >> Everybody does.
>> I mean, the air filtration there. >> I mean, we can look at the at the county if we want to look at a guide. The county came and said we don't abate on market rate apartments >> if that's what you guys want. >> If that's how you want to do it, >> I don't think we've ever abated on any residential, have we?
>> No. >> As a city? >> Well, again, but we don't have a single market rate apartment in town. >> Any residential, period. >> Well, you got Landmark Square. That's >> Did we abate on that? >> USDA. >> We never abaded on it. >> Well, I don't think anybody was around 50 years ago when they were doing it,
but I'm sure they went with uh low-inccome. So, you know, but if it's private land and a private, you buy the land, you're building the project, >> we can't really do anything to guard if
it's if it's within the ordinances, if it's within the zoning, build all day long. There's nothing we can do to stop it. We can't say, "No, you can't have low income there because we don't want it." Well, if I'm a developer, I'm like, it's
my land. It's my project. It's it's zoned for this. I'm gonna do it whether you like it or not. Now, when we get involved with these incentives, then we have control over things, right?
So, what I'm I'm looking at here is sack and whack fees. They're required with the project with or without abatement. Park dedication, they're required for the project with or without abatement. There was a point
where there was a discussion about maybe building some pickle ball courts and keeping them available to the general population because we trust me, first year of my time on this council was eaten up by pickle ball courts. I can talk to you about that all day long. >> Yep.
there was a way that we could have our pickle ball courts without spending a dime of our own money to do it. If we had pickle ball carts in this project, maybe we'd be having a different conversation about this abatement. You don't have to have tiff
to get amenities. And to say that the only way to get amenities is to have the project be tiff is not correct. Well, I think that's the point for the um park dedication, right? You would agree.
>> What's the point of the >> park dedication for an amenity? >> Like a park or >> that's why it's there. >> The park dedication comes either way. What we choose to do with that park dedication is on us. I'm I'm not asking for it to be explained, but I mean, you
just said, >> Okay, so getting a park dedication for me, and I'm telling you straight up. I mean, we're going to rehash this. I mean, let's rehash it. I'm not willing to say the park dedication alone is enough
for me to approve the abatement. You give me the park dedication and you say, "Sure, let's talk about pickle ball courts that is going to be open to the community. We're having a different conversation potentially. That's what I'm saying. You come to me
and say, "What are you going to give me?" I'm going to say, "All right, right back at you." >> Okay. >> What do we get for what we give? That's the question. And to you, what he was offering may have been enough. To me, it was not. And
that's the way it works when we each have our own individual vote. And I respect that. That's what what you uh felt. But I don't feel I should be attacked because I felt differently. >> I I'm being yelled at over here.
>> I haven't yelled at you. >> So what I'm saying is I respect the fact that we disagree on this particular topic. >> If he wants to offer more, we can discuss more. >> Okay. But that was a conversation for
that last council meeting and I hear what you're saying. >> I said it. >> I know. I And I hear you. But we also The accusation was made that we did not have that conversation at the last council meeting. I said it at the last council meeting.
>> So don't say we didn't. >> So So what's the solution, Brian? What do What is it that you want? Because here's here's what I'm getting at. This is the whole point. You have a developer that's sitting out there that's waiting. He doesn't know what to do. Do I close
on the land? Do I sell the land? Do I find somebody else to buy land? The end of the day, what do we want to do? You have a preliminary and final plan application sitting out there. And so, if we want to do more incentives, then we need to talk to city staff and tell them what we're willing to do. What
is it that we want? And I don't think city staff has seen that. Well, frankly, when this project first came to me, I wasn't even thinking inside of us because he came to us. >> Well, right away he was talking TIFF and >> never talked to me about TIFF.
>> I asked you about it. >> Yeah. And I told you absolutely not. >> Right. So I mean >> you asked me about >> so then you tried to look at a small amount of incentive as possible and to Kar's point I I acknowledged it
again today numbers always change with projects and at that time I had stated I'm not willing to talk about what the incentive is until I get the final numbers and we didn't know what the
county was going to And so when the county when it was mentioned that the county had backed out, it was just I think the big worry was this uh residents were really honest and upfront
and they said no section 8, no low income, >> right? >> And we all agree. >> But that's a big that's a big concern because now the countyy's going to ask for something, right? Mhm. >> Whenever whenever you're going to go and pitch this, they're going to ask for something. >> And we didn't want to go that route.
>> So, it's okay for the county to ask for something, but not us. >> Well, we asked for a lot of things. >> Mhm. >> Sack and whack and and park. >> Oh, you got a whole entire trail over there. You opened up the throat of the whole entire entrance. I mean,
>> right. Uh the reason the county didn't want to participate was because there wasn't an affordability component that that that's >> which and that's yeah that's >> and we want to avoid I was always told to avoid that. So the only viable way to avoid that was that 75% for 10 years now
>> to make it work for him >> for both parties for it to pencil out for both parties. Well, if he can't afford to build it, he can't afford to build it. If he can't afford to build it without us giving 75% of the
taxes away for 10 years, then it sounds to me like >> we shouldn't have them. >> No, it sounds to me like he either needs to find other investors or he doesn't have a way to pitch his project to the investors he needs. I mean, he's essentially asking us to become an
investor on this project. >> Well, so are other businesses. >> Mhm. Other businesses bring things like jobs >> and this one brings housing. >> Well, it brings housing. Sure. >> One one half of a FTE job.
>> We've got the Bixby pro property going up. >> Okay. >> So, housing is still happening in Lawndale. Yes, we have a need for housing. And I'm not saying that. I mean, we're literally going from single family to apartment without I
mean, there was a a brief conversation with him about that in between. And I think, you know, you hear from a lot of people there's what about the in between? You know, we're looking at the extremes of of the spectrum when we're talking about housing.
It's either a single family or apartment. There's there's not this because I mean he could still buy that land and develop it a different way. That's a possibility. Now, I'm not saying don't build an apartment. I'm
just saying I'm not going to give you the tax abatement based on what you're given what you've presented to me because now it's just okay. Well, you're not going to you're not going to for you know basically pay back my 75% of my taxes. How about you
you wave this fee and then do a smaller obeyment. It's it's like we're just shuffling the shells around is all we're doing. It's the same I need more money from you to make my nut. >> I guess from staff's perspective, we
respect the council's decision. It was it was it was denied. I mean, you know, some of the comments that um Shannon Sweeney had made um in his staff report and and at the EDA or andor council was that he's not
aware of any multifamily housing in greater Minnesota that hasn't received some type of incentives or financial assistance from from the government, whether it's the
city or a tiff. Um, typically it's tiff for 15 years, 90% of the taxes and in this case it was um 75% for 10 years. So Shannon felt that it was a a good
deal for the city. Um, I think at least from my perspective, I got what I needed. And if and and if we do want to have a if if the council does want to have a further discussion on this, um we
certainly could could do so and and and provide those options for for consideration or or or discussion. >> I'd like to see all these other asks that just out of curiosity. Oh, that's fine. So, your staff can send
that to you. >> I didn't know he had other asks. >> I >> I think we wanted to >> I think the direction was to have some just a general discussion on this. >> It was, >> you know, and and I guess not to muddy the waters more, you know, you start
waving whack and sack fees. Well, like I said during the the public hearing, that becomes an extremely slippery slope. Mhm. >> You know, the apartment was going to have 58 units if we start waving whack and sack fees. Well, why would the developer of the Bixby property who's
doing 104 say, "I'm providing twice as much. >> What about me?" >> Mhm. >> And you know, >> so I think that that's why when you look at a a tiff or or or a tax abatement, there's certain criteria that that has
to be met. And I don't think that the apartment project Well, we were told point blank I have enough investors. It's just it's just the cash flow through through the project.
>> Yeah. >> And again hitting that debt service to cash ratio. >> And that's that's the covenants, you know. I I want you guys to understand that it it's to finance the loan. So, I
mean, I get where you guys are coming from. Um, now, normally what I end up doing is I kind of sit on things just a little bit just to see if we have any more options.
Um, I don't hide anything. Um, and so when I was reviewing this, I was like, you know what? Let's let's wait and see if he's got some time. You know, you're messing with a big Excel sheet. Maybe there's something else that that
could work out. And um from my aspect is I look at it and I'm like well you know at the end of the day we talked to Scanner Infiltration and Scanner had stated hey uh we would have never been able to come down here if it
wasn't for the county's abatement. Um it would have never penciled out and I think that's important to hear and listen to. Um, and it's a nice building, right? But one of the other conversations that I had with them was the design standards,
right? How can we reduce the design standards so that way we're focusing on what's on the inside versus what's just on the outside, you know? Um, case by case is important. um
to say like, oh, you know, to bring up your point, Krie, is well, do we want to have a spreadsheet that states what we would be willing to do? I think it really is case by case. Um, and the reason being is because of the policy written for the abatement itself. It it
is you're not going to give him more than he absolutely needs to to get the loan. And so I think we just got to kind of keep our eyes open a little bit. And at the end of the day,
um if we aren't sold on it, then let's just say we're not. Um and you guys did, you know, um you made that known. So I guess moving forward, what is it that we can
have city staff do? um to make it work out a little bit better. Uh but he's still under contract for the land and we kind of need to tell him what we're
looking at, what we want to do, if he should just give the land back or try to sell it to somebody else. You know, that's all that that for that apartment conversation that aspect. So, and then we got the the hotel
conversation. Okay. So, it's really it's in EDA's hands. If EDA wants to Well, Joel kind of mentioned already that um that feasibility study wouldn't be able to be done with the commercial
office retail space. So, if you guys want to do that where you know you want to bring that hotel to EDA, um I don't have a problem with that. But my thing is is I just don't want to see
us go down a road. Um if we're not prepared for it, if we don't want it, that's it. That's all it is. If if we already are feeling a little nervous right now, let's just say it. Um
I don't want to feel or I I don't want council members to sit here and and think I'm just pissed or whatever taking it out on you. I'm just trying to find solutions. I understand where council member Palava is coming from. I'm a first term mayor. I'm trying to figure
it out. I don't have anybody to go off of. I don't have anybody to learn. I just do the best that I possibly can with the city that I got and I work with city staff. I try to inform them if and again I do not want to waste city staff's time chasing something that um
isn't going to make its way to council. So I want you to personally understand that, Scott, because I know exactly what you're thinking. But I want to see wins, you know, I want to see home runs. And as far as I know, this this business
that's going in the business park, it is closed on that is coming. I've been talking about that a lot. Um, as far as everything else, we're just waiting for a feasibility study through EDA to be done and then we can look at that commercial office retail space. You
know, you guys on EDA passed a facade improvement uh grant that a lot of businesses are really happy you guys did. Um, and it's just maintaining what we have, trying to come up with solutions. Um, it's not like the city of Lonzo has a
ton of money to its name, right? I think all of us know 2027 is going to be a hard one, and we all have different ways to to get to that 27 budget. But regardless of the passion that was shown tonight, and
I I'll say it's passion, um, this has been a long a weighted conversation, you know. Um, I want us to be able to move forward from it. Um, come up with
solutions. Um, reach out to city staff. If you got questions, reach out. Don't just wait till a council meeting. Um, reach out to them. Understand it. You know, if there's other solutions you have, bring it up. I know Curry, you just brought up the survey with Corey.
Corey brought it up today. You know, I know that Jamie reaches out for planning and zoning meetings. Um I know that uh you guys on EDA, you're working with city staff on EDA. So, um at the end of this, I just want a
positive step forward and I'll take accountability where I get where I get it. I'll take a slap in the face or beat down behind the barn if I have to. But uh you know I I I apologize if you guys felt in the dark. Trust me. I
I'm trying. I really am. Um trying to get something going with the sense of urgency. And it it's hard. I It's really hard. If anybody tells you being mayor is easy, they're lying. They're not. It's not an easy job. Uh you got again
you got laws around you. But I know that we try to work in in the best best faith forward. Um, city staff, is there anything else you want us to hash out tonight? >> No, I continue to do the best uh
negotiating that we can and >> bring it to the council. So, can you forward that email from 12:30 to uh council? >> Sure.
>> And just look it over, you know. I mean, if there is something more you want, then we we need to have a different conversation. Uh because I don't see abatement being that conversation. Um, I don't as far as a public amenity
on a private property. I got I didn't have the warm fuzzies, Brian. I I I hear what you're coming from. >> Just one thing. I mean, >> no, I I know. I understand. And I heard the houses I heard the houses, too. And
>> but uh that was the hard part about that conversation was do how do we open up somebody's private property to be publicly used? And then can we cuz at first we weren't going to >> We're going to have the same conversation with the hotel if they put in a pool. I guarantee you.
>> Well, if they're going TIFF, they're making an Olympic size inside and outside. >> I I I I'll do my own research, but I'm willing to guess that you're not getting a lot of TIFF hotel projects. >> Well, that's fine. >> I mean, we don't have to right out of
the gate be like, "What can we give you either?" I mean, quick trip. We turned a profit on the land and had zero incentives. >> And that's a major corporation, you know. >> So is uh all these hotel chains
pitching. I mean, you know, I it's just again, it's all >> Yeah. >> base by case by case. >> You know what? This horse is dead. >> I think we've beaten it enough tonight. >> Let's see what happens next week in EDA. Make sure you're you got your seat belt
on. >> Sorry you had to sit through that again. >> Might need might need lunch. >> Breakfast. It's so >> Yeah, you're going to need more coffee. >> Okay. All right. I'm going to go one.
>> Still not the longest meeting yet. >> No, but I think it was the most passionate one. Um, anybody else have anything that they just want to mention briefly before we go to department reports? Okay. All right. Jason Malikica.
>> Yep. Thank you. >> Welcome back to the meeting. Um so yeah, with the with the 2026 million overlay uh being approved tonight, um plans are complete. We just have a few minor items to iron out and kind of put a bow on everything before
we post that. Um and then additionally, we'll begin working on the Bixby lift station design shortly. And then the last thing I had was that the wellhead protection plan part two draft is complete. um essentially final but just needs to
to go through the correct approvals and channels. Um so it's complete and will be submitted for LGU review shortly. >> Thank you. >> All right. Thank you Jason Corey. >> Mr. Mayor and Council, the uh January 12th park board and founder State
Committee packets were sent out today. Uh we are going to discuss the uh mosquito spraying and chemical free park pilot and future amenity survey at that meeting. I appreciate everybody the council getting back to me with their input which I'll share at that meeting
and then I am working with the city admin administrator on the facade grant program and getting that out the door as soon as possible. I'm developing the or worked with Joel in developing the mailing for the up the strategic mailing list.
>> Thank you, Corey. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. >> Joel, >> um few things from public works. The well five insurance claim, the transducer for the the well five has been completed. Um public works installed that automatic systems um supplied the transducer, provided the
programming services. Uh everything's running and reading as it should. Holiday decorations have been taken down. Working on uh snow equipment maintenance. Uh plowing and sanding have been going well. Um shout out and thank you to the public works staff for uh
always being available, bringing a positive attitude um regardless of when when they get called. Uh ice rink uh has been challenging lately with the the rain and the and the warm weather. Um it's temporarily closed
until um obviously it gets colder and we can make ice again. Street sweeper is ready to go for the warm days to clean up uh sand and uh things are going well. Uh I guess I'll keep my stuff brief. Got
department head reviews done. We attended GIS training on Monday I believe or Tuesday earlier this week. Uh liquor committee met uh earlier this week. Big speed development. We've talked about that. Um closing on the
property with Circle City. So that'll be done. Um safety training the 12th. Be doing a mock OSHA walkthrough of the library. Um at our last staff report at city hall made it a priority to get through the filing and organizing get record retention. We've got a number of
boxes that um according to the the record retention policy can be uh eliminated. Uh Cory touched base on the facade program for uh business fronts or or sides FA streets. Um working with
Rice County on the small cities development program grant. Um working with one property owner um received bids and working with another on uh the scope of work to um get that project done as well.
Uh pay a for the snow wizards safety committee meeting the 21st. I'll be working with um the founders day committee on soliciting uh donations. Look at the annual chamber dinner on the 27th.
Be working on 25 and 26 state auditor reporting. Um the city engineer talk touch base on our wellhead protection plan part two and then uh as always just assisting department heads as needed.
>> All right. Thank you Joel. Rank. >> Um, as Joel mentioned, Liquor Store met um HR committee participated in the department head reviews that went very well. It was um glad to be a part of that, see that process work out. Uh
liquor committee, thank you to the staff. Um you know, they work holidays when other at the liquor store when uh other staff have days off like upcoming Martin Luther King holiday. Um, you know, I hear around town all the time
how much people appreciate our staff. They're friendly, they're helpful, they're knowledgeable, and you know, Lynette brought it up at our meeting that there are municipal liquor stores in the cities that are struggling and in some cases closing. So,
>> kudos to our staff and Lynette as the manager there for >> turning a profit, keeping the store profitable, and um just maintaining a great atmosphere. So, uh, thank you for that. Uh, next week 14th, uh, we have a stakeholders meeting
for the library survey, long-term planning survey. So, we'll be going over that. And then, uh, Thursday's EDA has been mentioned multiple times tonight. >> All right, Gary, >> I just echo everything that Joel and Brian said about the liquor committee
meeting. Um, they do a great job. We have parks and founders day Monday, so I don't really have any other updates. Thank you. Jamie >> got a couple public hearings coming up at planning and zoning and then we will be reviewing uses for business parks
still. Hopefully we finish that pretty soon. But it is 48 pages of ordinance that we have been going through. >> Right, Scott? >> Uh as mentioned earlier, the wellhood protection um
uh phase two I'm sorry I'm drawing a blank. Uh but that's uh that came out and then uh yeah EDA and safety committee uh next week and the week following. >> All right. Well,
upcoming meetings are January 29th, February 12th, February 26. Entertain a motion to >> motion. Motion by Miller. >> Second. >> Second by warm description. Any further discussion? All in favor? I
>> have a good night.