Are we recording? All right. All right. I'm going to call the meeting to order. And this is the uh work session for the city of Minatrista of March 2nd, 2026. I'm going to start out by doing introductions um this evening. With us at the work session, we have our chief of police, Craig Squires. We have city
administrator Jasper Krugal. I'm Lisa Whan. I'm the mayor. And then we have council members present, Kathleen Ruffkin, Peter Vicky, Claudia Lacy, Brian Govern, and then also um other staff present is um Allison Fowski. She's our city engineer, and then uh
Gary Peters who is our director of public works. Do we have anybody joining us um electronically or via Zoom? >> Yeah, we have uh Sarah Saul is uh in here and then also our clerk uh and Mehoff. >> And Meerhoff. Thank you. So, welcome an
and Sarah. Uh with that, we have a number of um items on our agenda. Property uh complaints. We have the property issue and then we have the uh we have to figure out a date for the holiday tree lighting event. And then hopefully um Representative Meyers will
be here by the time we get down to the state uh fraud discussion, but I also want to add housing bill, which I think is more imminent and um it they're be going to be doing that tomorrow or there's a committee meeting tomorrow on the housing bill. So, we need to discuss
that and then Allison is here for the swamp update. So, with that, um I'm going to hand it over to um Jasper for the Y. >> Um Madame Mayor, members of city council, uh this stems from a discussion we had late in 2025 about a couple of
properties we received complaints on that are kind of running in parallel as far as um some some criminal uh things related to vehicles. Um if if you have questions about that, uh Craig is here to to talk about that. Uh for the most part though, we're talking about kind of
a checkin on what what's been done or what's happening with the property. So, um there's a couple out there. There's one off of West Hill Drive and I'll start off on that one first. And I was planning to pull up just some aerial imagery so you guys can see what's going
on there. um currently. So, uh this has been there's been stuff out here for quite some time, but we we've made contact with them obviously. Um just to kind of piggy back off of our last update, there hasn't been any um additional correspondence with with
them. They haven't communicated uh with us. As far as the PD, I'm not aware of any real correspondence either. Uh probably since December. >> Yeah. Uh, Madame Mayor, members of council, that's correct. He he actually has counsel now. So, he has
representation. So, um, for our end, uh, it's going through, uh, court and they have a pre-trial, I think, on March 17th. So, that'll be the next, uh, legal hearing for the criminal side. >> What are the criminal issues?
So, it's uh several counts of I don't have uh the criminal complaint in front of me, but uh several counts for our nuisance violations um anything from unlicensed vehicle to um just piles of junk that could cause uh you know issues
where with animals or refuge issues. So, um but it's all ordinance violations. Um, so and I I want to say there's around 20, but I don't quote me on that at this point to start with. Um, cuz some of the ordinances are a little bit
difficult to say, okay, that pile is definitely an ordinance and that one isn't. So, they're combining different what they would say several different sort of violations into one count. Um, so that's where we came up with it. As you can see from the overhead, um it's
it's >> pretty expansive. >> If they are found uh guilty of that, are the fines high enough to essentially motivate them to clean up? >> Probably not. >> It it entirely depends on a judge and in
Henipin County, it could be questionable about how much the fine could be. Um it so it's it's hard to say. I mean, it it'd be I think substantial, but is it substantial enough to clean everything up? That I'm not sure about cuz to clean
that up obviously is going to be pretty expensive. And um they're misdemeanor, so you know, it goes up to $1,000 per account. So, um it it would hurt, but I'm not sure it would be enough to have them remedy this just based on the
fines. Um, so what you can see up there, uh, sorry for the slight technical difficulty, but up here is what, uh, is a 2025 aerial image. And then I have, um, one night nice thing that Henipin County has is the ability to do like a little slider. And this is from 2002. So
you can see it substantially has grown since 2002. I mean, it still wasn't like >> it's got bigger. >> Yeah, it it wasn't >> much bigger. >> Wasn't good in 2002, but it it's, you know, quite a bit more. Basma Bosma Robert. >> Uh yeah. Yeah. So this is the one off of
West Hill. So there's a couple. We'll look at the other one here shortly. So um >> so what what's the next steps? >> Um you can bring it forward. Just hand it to somebody. >> Yeah, I can grab it. So I can So as far as the city's approach goes, um what
we're what we're trending to and what we're going to have to do is have a conversation probably in um in in the summer. I think May is when when um May is when we kind of decided we're going to have to, you know, figure out that was kind of the deadline that
has been given uh to me and these property owners to do substantial uh cleanup. Uh but at that time we're going to have to evaluate uh the property and determine if the city council wants to uh declare it a public nuisance. If it declares it a public nuisance, there's a
process to to go through following our city code uh to abate that public nuisance. Generally, you give some period of time for the property owner to you know remedy the nuisance, but if it if they don't in that window of time, then we abate it and then we go and get
a search warrant. Um these are technicalities things. We have to get a search warrant to access the property and then somebody would then clean that property up and and get it to meet our code. Um the cost to do all of these things would be incurred by the city, but the city can then um attempt to get
that from the property owner. In all likelihood in these situations, not just this one, you know, in general, a lot of times those are end end up being an assessment to the property. In this case, um, we have a a actual business in
Minatrista. They were stopping by city hall. Um, Junk Masters is the name of the company, and they do this. And I said, "Hey, come in here. Look at this property. What do you think, you know, something like this would cost to to abate and to remove all the stuff?" And, um, they actually did a property in Maple Plane that was quite larger than
this. Uh but uh long story short, he said for budgetary purposes, probably somewhere between $50 to $100,000 to remove all of this stuff, which is a lot. And that's just the aesthetic piece. And that that'll get it up to code. Uh and then let's say that they
don't pay that assessment. Um then it would potentially push that property into tax forfeite. Um but from the time that we assess to the time that the tax forfeite could occur, there could be an additional accumulation of junk. Um so it's this kind of cyclical piece that we
don't have a lot of control over, but uh we do have a little bit of say uh in it. >> Can I ask you a question? Sure. May I? >> Um Junk Masters isn't like a sell, you know, when they come and they pick it up
for uh what do you call it with a metal um Scrap >> scrap metal. >> I mean, certainly that's a lot of scrap metal. >> Yeah. >> And couldn't they couldn't couldn't they why wouldn't they call a scrap metal
place to try to >> sell it? >> Sell it or you know that would be the first thing I'd do is do you know the answer to that? >> Oh, can I ask? >> Oh, yeah. Well, I can tell you they that's what they do. So they'll look at the site and they'll try to determine what kind of value the materials have
and then they will build that into their price. There's still a lot of I mean this if you can imagine is a lot of vehicle hauling back and forth but there is some value probably in the scrap. Um >> am I allowed to ask these gentlemen a question? >> Sure. Um Mr. Vander Lindy why don't you come to the microphone state your name
and address for the record and then um >> Hi everybody. >> My name is Ken Vanderindy. >> I live at 9450 Westfield Road. I live right alongside of and right behind this mess. >> Is so Mr. Vander Lindy, is this you then? >> That's me. Yeah. >> Okay. All right.
>> You see it, Mr. Vanderindy from your home? >> Every day. >> Every day. So, okay. I just, you know, >> you don't know. I've lived here for a lot of years and it's been I've tolerated it. Tried to be neighborly. Try to get along with Bob and I
understand he's a business, but enough is enough. I've had enough. It it's horrible. And your answer to your scrap back I would say maybe 12 15 years ago that wasn't that bad. I have a big
trailer and I haul equipment around and a dump truck and excavating equipment. And scrap was at $310 a ton for unprepared steel. Highest it's ever been back then. You have never seen that price. And he had a lot of steel on that property. And he
hired me. I came unloaded and I loaded. We hauled out loads. Um um he profited with pay me for was maybe $2,500 to I mean these loads for to $4,500 a load. We hauled two three we started on a
third load and he just stopped enough. I don't know why it was that he didn't want to haul it out. To me after you see all this it's a hoarding issue. >> I see >> an absolute hoarding issue. >> Yeah. He needs to have junk and it's getting worse and worse and worse. His
sons moved home. He's had three children and his son moved home last fall. And like I said, that whole side of my driveway, that whole side when he was supposed to be hauling stuff out where he's telling everybody he's hauling stuff out, that whole side, if you could take a picture today, is on on my
driveway going in is pumpful. I woke up the other night to a a a noise at the end of my driveway and I'm wondering what happened here and I could see lights flashing and everything else and this is what happened. They'd move at night. >> They bring they bring stuff in
>> everything at night. >> Okay. >> I they were parked in my driveway and the guy was tucked around. He had a whole two trailers full of junk. >> Oh god. >> I mean and it's not just scrap. They get paid to haul out these like what these these things you say? >> Junk masters. >> Junk masters. They get to cleaning out
this up and it's just complete junk. And instead of hauling it to the junkyard where it costs money to take the junkyard, they haul it over here and pile it up >> and it's it's an imminent health. Um I mean I I've been there when he's crushed cars >> and and the oil nothing was
contaminated. My well isn't that far behind his house. Can I >> all his waterershed runs off to my property >> and um I've had enough and and I I think he's gone along and I've been dealing for the last few years. I didn't want to start a wreck because I didn't want
start an argument with the boys. I know them. I know I try to justice and work with them and stuff like that, but you know, I get the runaround to Yep. Yep. We're working on getting this out. We're working on getting that. He said, "Yep. The scrap the shredder downtown broke down, so he couldn't haul nothing." There's 30 There's 30 scrap yards in in
Minneapolis that take scrap. Not everyone. They all pay pretty much the same. Not just one shredder breaks down. He's got an excuse for everything. >> Mr. Vanderindy, I mean, >> I'm sorry. >> That's okay. Okay. So, crazy. >> We understand. And that's what we're trying to figure out. So, I think what
we're trying to figure out tonight, we don't disagree and we we understand. I'm I'm not I'm not I'm I think we're with you here. But right now tonight, we're trying to find out what the next steps would be, how it would work, and so on. And I think Sarah um Sarah, do you want
to weigh in at all? Is there any or >> She is. And I I want to add one more thing. Just, you know, we wouldn't just use junk masters. We would get we would get quotes and we would go out for a quote package to multiple different people. There we go. So, we got two we got two people probably at least. So,
um, but that that's so so if somebody can do it cheaper and they, you know, that's who we'd go with. >> And since you have that up, what's the, uh, assessed value of that property? >> Just curious, what percent like >> what the Henipin County assessment? >> What percent? $100,000 be. Okay. So,
it's like a third of the value of the property that clean. >> Yeah. >> That brings up a good point because that devalues my property >> very much. So I'm to my point where I don't want to leave this to my children and this when they talk about their
livelihood. This is my livelihood too, >> right? No, we understand. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> So it's there's civil proceedings or criminal proceedings going on for the nuisances. So >> not for the nuisances, just for um >> just for things that are like expired
tabs. Um I don't know if Craig Craig can run through kind of the list of things that are criminal related. So, can we declare it a nuisance while that's going on? That's my question. Okay. So, we can't. Okay. >> Yeah. Yeah. So, if you remember back from our discussion, I think it was November. Um, we kind of said, let's
give them like 6 months and then see where it goes cuz um the other property they they have been working on getting some stuff out. I think it's kind of slowed down in the last 3 months or so. But, um, we kind of said we'll give them 6 months, see what happens. And then after that, I think we're going to have to have a a conversation about if we're
going to declare it a nuisance. fully aware that the money that we have to put in to do it we may or may not see back. Um a lot of times and I don't know Sarah if you can weigh in on this after I kind of give a description is you you'll assess it to the property and then it'll go tax forfeite and then the county will
say well can you wave those assessments um from the sale because it won't won't sell and a lot of times in order to do for it to sell and maybe get redeveloped and have somebody build on it then the city waves those fees and then we never get them back. Well, >> that's maybe. >> That's a maybe. Um, but that happens
quite regularly in municipal governments. That's kind of the cycle that that you see. Um, sometimes it works out and we get some money back, but um, a lot of times we don't. >> 200,000 and it cost 100,000 to clean it up. We wouldn't get 100,000 to go. >> It depends on how the county markets it
when they when they auction it off. So, we've we've seen this already on a couple things where they come and ask us for for money to or an assessment to take it off and we've we've said no. been like street street assessments um things like that but it'd be up to the council and if we say no then um it
might not sell and it might just sit in tax forfeite and we're not getting tax revenues then >> logically that property be worth more money if we clean it up >> right >> right >> oh yeah yeah well >> interested in that >> but I know it would take work because I know there's soil contamination in
there's there's a lot of work that needs to be done there would be >> that would be profitable which is also garbage. >> What happens with the uh It looks like there are a lot of cars and if they don't have a title or maybe
>> they're all leaking. >> Um >> they're I'm sorry. >> Leaking. >> They're all leaking. >> Leaking. Yeah. Okay. >> Um Craig, what what happens or how does that work? >> Yeah. Uh, Madame Mayor, member of councel, so each vehicle if it's not
operable and if it doesn't have current licensing on it, then that's a separate charge, misdemeanor charge through our ordinance. >> So if there's 25 cars, then we could do 25 cars. >> Well, there's probably a hundred cars like that, you know. So, >> Correct. >> Yeah.
>> But so somebody can't say, "Well, wait a minute. That's my car that he's >> Yeah. Right. Right. Um, >> and usually what happens is you give them time to get their stuff off that they actually want." Um, that's kind of reasonable. >> Well, we've kind of done that. >> Yeah, we've done that part. >> Yeah. No, I agree. I agree.
>> I'm saying, okay, now what is the next step? Do we threaten them with with I mean I mean, I guess that's why I was asking Sarah, what is the next step? >> They they know they know that this is happening and and that, you know, come May, we're going to make a decision on this one way or another. So,
>> if we if we start that process, we'll we'll start the process. Um, it requires a public hearing. it, you know, then people will get noticed that. >> Okay. >> You know, we'll likely see these two individuals again, right? >> Yeah. So, it um if we want to deviate from the May discussion, we can do that.
We can expedite it or start it earlier >> if you want to. Um >> this is if they're actively adding more junk instead of >> say >> eliminating >> eliminating or saying it's winter or we're, you know, we're going to wait till spring.
>> Yeah. takes two loads out five. >> Yeah. So, I have a relationship with the Suns. Can't you speak some sense to them? >> They're probably even worse. >> Yeah, they could be working on this. It's it's a hoarding issue. They just they just got to have it.
>> And the boys are also >> Boys are just >> Yep. And they they do. It's sideways. They didn't have to do this. Anybody that does that and the sideways threats are that's when I've had enough. You're not going to threaten me sideways saying
that. I I'm not wishing you threaten me in any which way. >> So, let's um >> your property is the one next to your son's. >> That's not his father. >> We're getting older. We're going to downsize one of these days and uh >> it's going to knock a h 100red grand off
our the price of our our house >> any day and and that's not just pie in the sky. My wife was a uh vice president at eer really she knows real estate and that's what's going to happen in Right.
>> So let me ask councel >> um yeah >> hold on Mr. Vanderente, hold on. I know. Um, so council, you want to move this up. So again, I'm just going to ref ask staff Sarah Craig, what are the
steps in order to move this up and what do we need to do? >> Yeah. What is Sarah? >> I was I was Oh, I think Sarah unmuted herself so she can talk. >> Okay, Sarah. >> U Madame Mayor, members of the council, I think if they're not, I don't know if they're letting the city on the
property. I think they were at one point, but they probably haven't been doing so. I guess I would ask Craig what what his experience with that has been. But if they haven't been letting the city on the property, we need to get on there so that we can draft up a nuisance
abatement order that basically tells them specifically what they need to do in order to clean up the property and um also make sure there aren't any hazardous buildings or anything like that on the property. Um, so we need to get what's called an administrative
search warrant, which basically would allow us to get on the property, inspect it, and then we can write up the nuisance abatement order. That would be the first step. And that just needs to go before >> before a judge in Henipin County. And that process is pretty informal. So, we
just draft up an application, bring it to a judge any day, and then they can sign it. And then once we have that, we can go on the property. that can be done fairly quickly. And then once we know exactly what we need to tell them they need to do, then we can draft up the the
nuisance abatement order and send it to them and say, "You have, you know, I don't know how many days to to get this stuff done. If you don't, then, you know, we're going to come in and do it ourselves and we're going to charge you for that." And I guess where the question comes then is what happens if
they don't? And which is probably what's going to happen here. And you know, at that point, arguably we could go on the property and um start removing things, but I would probably want a court order saying that was okay before we actually
did it since this is such a large property and there's a large amount of stuff. Um, and then the other thing is too, I mean, I don't think we want to just take this stuff and throw it all away because then the property owner is going to claim, oh, that was my collector's item, whatever that cost
$200,000 and you threw it away. So, we might need to store this stuff somewhere, which is an additional cost. So, that's something else you should probably factor in. There might be a way around that with the way we time this, but you know, that is something we might
need to do to be on the safe side. And then once we remove everything, then we have to have a hearing and we can assess the costs against the property. And um you know, at that point, we assess the costs and you know, they might not be
able to pay the assessment. They only have I think it's a one-year time to pay the huge assessment. And then at that point it's, you know, it could go into tax forfeite. And then, you know, then the county will ask us if we want to keep the assessment on the property or
if we want to take the assessment off so that they can sell it. I had that happen in another city. We ended up taking this, >> but Sarah, they can sell the property with the assessment on it and the new buyer would just have to pay the assessment. Correct. >> Correct. Yeah. Okay. It's just the
matter of the I don't know. So, so here's the thing. The first step is to get the um administrative warrant. And um my question would be because there's snow cover on the ground, we might not see everything right now. I mean, well,
there's is it all gone? I mean, okay. I mean, I would just say as long as we can see everything because we wouldn't want to go on and then realize, oh, well, we didn't see this or we didn't see that. But um so council, do you what what does staff
need or what would you need in order to proceed with administrative pursuing an administrative warrant? Do you need a resolution to that effect? >> I don't madame mayor, members of council, I don't think we need that. I just need confirmation from the chief that these people have not allowed the
city on their property. So I don't want to get in there and have them say, "Oh, well, they could come on anytime they want." So, we need something that, you know, he says, "We tried and they wouldn't let us on the property." I'm assuming that's happening. >> That's correct. Yes. Um, we were on it
and even when we were on it, there was some areas that they didn't want us to go to. So, we just kind of looked at it from a distance um and took pictures. But, um I can confirm I'll I'll still confirm that there hasn't been somebody who went out since our CSO, but uh I
know the last time we were out there um that was it. That's >> be good to send like the CSO this week. And >> well, I would send a police officer and the CSO. I don't know that I would one person. >> We We had several. >> Okay. maybe two or three officers. Um
anyhow, I think we should take those steps um as soon as possible then. >> Yeah. >> Um if you can do that, I don't know if we need to send them a letter or um but >> show up and ask to see the property. >> We can reach out to them and see if we
can access it. If they say no, then we can we'll pursue that administrative search warrant to to get access to the site. I think >> tell them that that's what we're going to do. >> Yeah. And then um we'll work with with Sarah's group to see if we once we do get that if we need to get that administrative search warrant, what
information, pictures, stuff like that we should collect in order to um develop that nuisance abatement order. And then that would at some point get to city council um >> for consideration. >> Right. All right. And and we could also then Sarah, I'm not sure what your
thoughts on this are, but we could also reach out to our U prosecutor to see if they would reach out to defense council. Might be an easier way to do this if defense can maybe talk to their client. Um and work something out that way. I I
don't know what your thoughts on that, Sarah, are we could try doing that tomorrow. Um like I said, they have a pre-trial on the 17th coming up, too. >> Okay. Yeah. >> So, it seems like there's some staff level things that we can do now that it
seems like that we want to accelerate this a little bit. Um, so we'll get those things rolling. Um, if if we can't access the site and we need to get the administrative search warrant, we'll get that rolling. Uh, and then we'll we'll access the site. Um, but then
>> take lots and lots of pictures. >> Yes, >> lots of pictures. Mr. Randall Lindy, when was the first time you complained to the city about this? >> Get involved knowing that I was I was city because I was afraid of what you
know and being neighborly. I lived up right next to him and I did that relations. I I've over the years I've done things with them. try to open tried to like I said I called him even right after before before the meeting I'll try to I probably would probably get through to him more than anybody he's just going
to resist everything that soon as police he's going to resist at all he'd rather spend his time in jail that they're buying everything else I try to be nice like you said I know there I grew up I know they're they're boys and be nice
>> the complaints I guess the yeah the the question is When when have and and he has Yeah. Yeah. So >> we're going to do that and all of a sudden >> kind of falls and >> Yeah. >> it's got
>> No, I'm talking about us. The city of Manitista, right? Fred has >> Fred has come. Yeah. >> That no one have work put up with us >> many times. So I think we're good. I think we're good to go. I think we know
um where we're gonna what the next steps are and then it'll come back and and I know staff will keep you um posted then. Okay. All right. Um do we need to >> Yeah. Um do we need to talk about the other one?
>> Uh well I think so. Um I'll pull that one up too and then we can look at it and then if the same direction if it's the same direction then we can get these ready. I know we talked about it at a work session before and we had told him he had until June um he had until June to kind of clean start cleaning things
up. Was that wasn't that the case? >> Yeah, it was. And and they've been sending me pictures. Um the last correspondence that I've had with them is uh December 3rd though. >> So it's been a little bit w a little while. Um >> and you know, we drive by it almost daily. you can kind of see what what
goes on there and and there isn't really much noticeable uh change. >> Um but so I'll do the same thing with this. This is a 2000. This is this one's more dramatic. >> Um just so you guys can kind of see what it looked like before. >> Um >> so it's and you know I'll just mention
Kevin Win, you know, he's our um assessor. He works with the assessor group. He said that this used to be like one of the most p picturesque like farm sites in Minatrista and it's just he's really he's upset about what it's >> this is 2002 so you know 24 years ago but you can kind of see how it's really
grown into you know a lot of different things. Um so they've been somewhat working with us. I I haven't been able to get a hold of them or email. You know, I know that they've had health issues. Um so I'm not sure where they're at with those, but um you know, these
are running in parallel. If you if you want to >> a similar way >> thing on this one, >> I would say give them notice again, reminding them that they have to start cleaning this up by June. that's I or whatever the date is that we gave them before and tell them that if if it's not
then this is the process that we're going to go through and it might cost them a whole lot more. You know, kind of let them know what's um that then we'll have to get an administrative warrant, we'll have to do this, we'll have to do that. Um but give them some warning cuz I think we said they had to have it cleaned up by May or June.
>> And we we did that for the Bosma property as well. like that was kind of the direction that was given to me and they they haven't they haven't done anything and you know arguably I don't know really if if it's been measurable what has been done at the Hunter property either. Um but they were here
at the last meeting. So if you want it to be a little bit of a different timeline for the Hunter property compared to the Bosma. I mean we can do that and I can I can let them know the process and hey, you know, you have until June, I'll reiterate that um and let them know if you don't have it done by June. That's kind of a that's the
hard deadline. And if you know from there then we're going to evaluate a nuisance declaration. >> Why are you waiting 4 months? >> Well, we said giving them an opportunity to clean it up is do that like almost a year ago.
>> No, no, this was this is right here. >> Yeah. Yeah. Um we've been working with them for I mean probably a year or pretty close to a year. Yeah. I mean when we initially sent a letter to them. So months I've been working with them for a year. >> Months
April and May. Three months. >> I mean I'll I've got their email. I don't I don't have direct communication with Bosma. That generally goes through the police. Um but the um hunters I I they email so I can email >> and let them know the process. But um
I'm >> Can anyone see like other than when you drive by like do the neighbors behind them and to the side of them actually see property? >> You can see it from the trail. So sometimes I'm I walk on the trail, you can see back there and it's, you know, it's >> quite a bit worse from there than from
the road. The road looks, you know, how it looks, but um most of the stuff is kind of hidden behind the road, so you can't see it. >> Now, are there any criminal charges associated with this lot? There are some, but because they've been working with us and removing things, we haven't
filed those. Um, because they've been cooperative where I'd say the Bosmas really haven't been um so because they've been working with us, we haven't done the criminal side on them, but they they have similar similar things, I would say. >> Okay.
So, are we in agreement? Then we'll send them a reminder that things need to start moving a little bit faster and >> faster. and uh their deadline is come approaching and this is what's going to happen if if we don't see significant progress.
>> Okay, >> I will convey that message. >> All right. All right. Um I'm going to So our next thing is the holiday tree lighting. What we're going to do maybe is just go to the house uh to the um C since Representative Andrews Andrew is
here Andrew Representative Myers is here. I'm sorry. Um, so we'll have the fraud discussion, but um, I would like to add the housing bill discussion, too, if you don't mind. I think that's um, more imminent. That's I know that there's a committee meeting tomorrow, I believe.
>> Yep. >> Is it tomorrow? Um, and I think it's important that the entire council understands the bill and that we can give you some clear direction and we can have a discussion about that. Maybe we can start there because it, like I said,
it's tomorrow. I want to make sure that that gets covered. So, but thank you for coming. >> Yeah. No, thank you. >> Appreciate it. >> Thanks for having me. Um, happy to kind of share what's been going on down there. Um, as you're aware, the um, bill came out on Friday and I hope everybody
got the email I sent out and then um, Jasper was great to take some time this weekend cuz I did give him a call to get some feedback and a few other um, city administrators that I work with uh, cuz we kind of have a deadline for when we need to submit amendments. And so I was
working on that this weekend as well because I know what the impact's going to be for um a lot of the communities, especially the ones that I represent. So um you know, I don't expect that everybody's gone over the entire bill, but we've come a long ways from, you
know, my three years what I've seen as far as um this housing bill with um kind of removing some of the local control. and it's it's much smaller than what it was, but it's probably still not very palatable for most of my cities. Um,
right now a lot of the stuff that's going to take place will be for u metro cities 2500 or greater. >> 2500 >> 2500 >> uh rural communities it's going to be 5,000 and you know
>> when they say rural communities what do you mean by that? Um, I'd have to go back in and check the definition, but for for my sake, it's going to be we're considered suburban areas. >> Okay. >> So, anything that's going to be 2500 or under. So, you know, two of the
amendments I have is um one related to cities of the fourth class or 10,000 or less. Um, I'm going to be very honest, I don't think that probably has a chance of passing out of the committee. So, in housing, um, you know, I expect it to
pass out housing the the bill as it stands, unless they, you know, take one of my amendments. So, one of them is the 10,000 or less. The other one is 5,000 or less. I've got to try uh if I don't >> 20. >> I know. >> And then you can come down to 15. You
can compromise. >> You know what what I can say is, you know, the the chairs of this both of this committee have worked had a lot of meetings. Um, you know, I've I've spoken to League. The Metro Cities pulled me out today from the House floor, which I
just got done, so that's why I'm dressed up. I usually don't like to dress up this much, but you have to do it when you're down there. Um, and they just said that, you know, that there's quite a few problems for them in that bill. And I I told them, you know, I've got the four amendments, the only four amendments on the bill. So, I'm trying
to do something to keep it going because there's going to be continued committee stops. Uh some of the other ones uh other amendments I have is right now they would allow density of 1/8 of an acre per density. So I look at you know
again I called Jasper and I'm like you know you're building a lot of houses out there. What sizes are you seeing on the lots cuz it helps me. Same with you know communities like Orno that have you know 2acre lots. I mean there's a lot of big lots out there. And so, um, my amendment
is trying to go from, you know, 1/8 to a quarter. I I've got to try to make some movement in that committee. Uh, again, I know for some of you that that's probably not enough, but I'm still trying to move it in the right uh direction. And then the final one that
I'm doing is also a delay until 2029. You know, a lot of my cities don't have a lot of staff. They're smaller. Comp plans are expensive. What I don't want to have you do is have to do a comp plan, you know, in 2028 if it passes and then you got to do another one in 2029.
So, I'm trying to to push that out. I'm one vote. Um I I believe my counterpart on this side of the district is also not uh supportive of this bill. There are some of us. I think this bill still has a a ways to go. If it's going
to pass, it's going to have to come to the floor and it's going to have to have bipartisan support. This bill has bipartisan support for and against. It's just what the numbers >> the breakdown on numbers. >> I don't I don't know. We haven't we haven't, you know, we haven't whipped this one. Um for >> how much are they giving to so the
housing um housing first, how much are they providing uh representative and senators for their campaigns this year? That's what I would like to know because I think that's that that's going to be a huge issue. >> Yeah. So, I I can I mean, I I'll be honest for myself. Um, how I do business
down there is I call the people that are for or against a bill. I called the bill author and said, "I'm bringing these amendments." I want people to know, um, I've called those organizations. I said, you know, you know, where I've been on this bill. I'm I'm here representing my cities. Um, you know, if if you know, I
just I have to give you a heads up. Like, that's what I want to do to people because I want to be transparent. I do that when I'm working with I'm working on a bill right now with one of my DFL colleagues and again um a lot of that work takes place outside the committees
um because there's a lot of personalities down there. >> Sure. Don't you think? >> And I'm a I'm a firm believer if you really want to get stuff done a lot of times it's not trying to bring you know catching people off guard and not letting them know hey I'm going to bring like last minute you're going to bring
an amendment. I just don't think that does anybody good. >> No, I know. >> If I've got a question for, you know, my city administrator when I sat on the council, I would call them days before, give them a heads up because I just don't want to catch people in aha moments because then it just doesn't feel right. It's not the right thing to do.
>> So, Andrew, have you ever asked or has anybody ever asked what are they trying to accomplish? >> What's their end goal? I I think at the end of the day, they've they've tried to look at red, they always say red states, blue states, you know, trying to get
more housing. Um, depends who you talk to, what they're trying to accomplish. >> Who I talk to is usually not so much down in St. Paul. It's usually, I always say, it's not in the dome, it's back home. That's why I made sure. >> But the developers and the and Twin City
and in the um housing alliance, what what is their end goal? What are what do they want? Why are they doing this? I think if we could understand that maybe there could be a conversation between s because we've talked with you, we've
talked with our um senator and and I know other cities have been talking to their representatives on both sides of the aisle, but what we've never had is we've never sat down and nobody's ever come directly to the cities from from the housing alliance to say, "Okay, how
can we work together?" And that's all they want and they're >> I I think they believe that um changing these requirements are allow them to
build more houses to address a housing crisis that they believe Minnesota is having. >> So the housing crisis is what? Um, I think they they they cite facts that we're 100,000 units short of what we need. Um, >> in affordable housing or in
>> in all in all forms of housing. I I can tell you for this community, we know what happens. I mean, you guys are putting houses up and they're selling. Uh, people want to move out here. You're addressing it. Other cities are addressing it. I just don't like the the thumb on the scale that they're trying to change because every community is
different. And that's why I'm like, what are they trying to do? Just put more money in their pockets because that's really what it looks like. >> Yeah. And again, I I hate to push motives off people. Uh my >> I'm not trying to put you on the spot. I'm sorry.
>> That's okay. That's That's >> I'm telling you, but so you can send this message to them since they don't want to be here talking to us. >> Yeah. And it's frustrating. I mean, I know they've they've met with cities. I know they've met with Minnetonka, but you know, for some reason I feel like
my district of Penipin County gets left out of a lot of stuff to be honest. Um, for how much, you know, funding we provide to the pay the bills, we don't mean and that's that's, you know, my my our commissioners hear that from me. Um, you know, we we have lack of transportation options. Um, you know,
even just sometimes snow plowing, some of those things. So, you know, what I'm going to continue to do, I'll I'll carry those amendments. We'll see what gets put on there. This has a couple stops to go. I think they're going to continue to, you know, hear some feedback. Is
there going to be some changes? Hopefully, at the end of the day, I mean, for right now, how the bill stands, I mean, I'm I'm not going to support the bill. My communities don't support this bill. >> Is Sorry. Um, is there any talk about decreasing the requirements on home builders and maybe that would prompt
more building if it wasn't so expensive to build in Minnesota? cuz I know like my home builder Madam left the state because it was ridiculous the restrictions they put on them. So is there talk about that instead of forcing things down the local community's throats for lack of better words? >> Yeah. So so I do sit on the housing
committee and today I just dropped a bill. My level of frustration is if we have a housing crisis I always say let's get back to the basics of building houses. Um I also you know believe we need to take care of our environment. I think that's important. You have a big beautiful lake. We've got parks and
trails. We have lots that used to look amazing back to when I was on a issue. So, um you know, that's a tough thing to go through, but um so, you know, I dropped a bill that would kind of remove some of the
mandates from the energy code. I mean, the these mandates that we're putting on, you know, Minnesota has this and then every other state has a, you know, a much lower code. So, we've got this much in there. You know, I've heard numbers 20 to $40,000 for some of these energy code improvements that it's going
to put on a house over the next 6 to 8 years. Well, that's not making houses more affordable. If we got back to the basics, if if you have the finances and you want to do those things your house, awesome. I think you should go for that. But if our our true goal is to try to fix it, then we shouldn't be adding some
of these what I'll say ancillary things onto it. Even some of the building code stuff as well. I'd like to to get it so there's more options. We want safe houses. We want houses that are going to stand up to the weather here, but I feel like we just every time just pass something new. It's another three grand on a house and another three grand and
it makes it more expensive. Um >> but then if we're looking at and this is so um at the regional council mayor's meeting there were some people from housing first or uh housing alliance Twin Cities Housing Alliance and all
they talked about was um affordable rental units and they want a bigger slice of the pie. They want to be able to build them and have a bigger margin. Okay, so here's the thing. If that's their goal and that's what they need and
that's what they want, then let's address that ra because if it's affordable rental units, that's not going to work out here. So, let's address that issue versus statewide mandates that aren't going to work in
90% of the cities. So, that's what I'm saying is what is their goal? They really just want to put in affordable rental units and basically Well, I won't say it. No. And and I think we've had some cities like anything um you know
we've had some bad actors but you don't throw the baby out with bathwater. Some of these communities are doing the right thing. They are you know bringing in developers to do things. prime example here. Um, you know, some of my other cities and I think some of the people
down at the capital really want to pass policies like this, right? >> And that's just that's never been me because you pass something like this, a lot can go wrong in between here. >> You know, if you want to do something, these small things can really add up. >> You know, at the end of the day, I I
think it's going to be very close. Um, you know, I as elected leaders, I think reaching out to people, um, you know, I'm happy to have a conversation with you guys, but I think other suburban members, Republican or Democrat, are are having some, uh, heartburn over this
bill. I think from my perspective, some rural members, don't know what it's like to have a Met Council. >> Aren't they lucky? >> Well, and that's that's the other issue. We have these comp plans and they're just going to go out the window. >> Yeah. I mean, and it's the uh >> Yeah, I mean, and some of the
administrative there's there's a lot of pieces to it. Um, you know, I I'm trying to do what I can to get some stuff done with the time I had as far as putting amendments forward. Doesn't mean that we're not going to have other committees moving forward that we can do other amendments on. >> Oh, go ahead. Go ahead,
>> Andrew. How high can they go? Isn't there some kind of, you know, you can go 90 feet high with some of these? I >> your neighbor building 90, you know, eight stories. know if there's a height restriction is >> I think in the bill there was there it was I think shocking is there wasn't
there a height removing a height restriction wasn't there something >> in the current one that was just sent >> um I'd have to look back >> we'd have to look back I'm sorry all this Steven's apartments you know in uptown I heard they're all empty like people are afraid to live there >> yeah I mean it's
>> so is it they want to get out of Minneapolis and move to Minatrista because Lisa knows how to run the city I I don't I don't give it. >> I mean to me I you know I was on a planning commission. I was a planning chair. I mean we everybody takes pride if it doesn't matter if you live in
Maple Grove or here other communities. I mean every community kind of has a I always say a touch taste and a field that everybody loves and they want to maintain that and they want to you know expand that and grow that as they see fit. That's why you guys are elected as local leaders. Um I always go back to you know three years down there
something very consistent. I I see a lot of state-run schoolboard ideas, state-run zoning codes, state-run benefit packages with a lot of consequences that we're now seeing that, you know, we're we're passing something that we've seen quadruple the amount of people apply for. Is the money going to be there?
It's not helping our workforce. You know, I think if we if we really want to address it, spending the time and effort with our local cities is really important and then taking chunk by chunk would be a better approach. I just think people are sick of these extreme shifts over here to over here.
And again, that's what we're seeing. >> Sorry. Okay. Um, so a quick question. One, are you going to be taking testim testimonies at any of these committee meetings? >> Yes. So testimony we will have tomorrow
for committee hearings. They'll give notice. I think there is public testimony availability. So, um, how does that work? Do they because I've never testified. No, I have any at one time, but then we had advanced notice. So,
who's testifying tomorrow? >> We when the the bill author and then usually a lot of the advocacy groups are then down there saying, "Oh, I want to testify in favor of this or against that." They do have public comment that you can come in. Um, sometimes you get
very limited time that way. there's future so I can find out the next stop that it has to see if if somebody is interested in coming down and testifying. >> Okay, that would be great. Um and then also um who is really influential and
has let's say a strong voice on the committee that we that's maybe for it that that we should maybe be talking to. you know, I mean, you know, there's always a few people, you know, >> there's definitely some members down there that love their bills. They love
their language. The only way, as I said, I can get some of that language changed is kind of behind the scenes, so I won't bring stuff forward. Um, you know, I think the two people presenting are um Representative Spencer Igo and Representative Larry Craft.
>> Craft is the one that is part of that bill, isn't he? >> Yeah. And and I go is as well. So there, >> but what's his Nigel? >> Uh, I go IGO. So he's up north um from the Iron Range. So those are the those are the two that are doing it. So on
that housing committee, I was you know, Representative Norris is from Blaine. Um you know, chair or co-chair Howard is from Richfield. I mean, I would probably start with
I go >> Howard has been um pro this from the very beginning. Yeah. >> Um you know, Rich, I mean, if if anybody's been to St. Louis Park, that's where Larry Craft is. I mean, I remember when I first moved here, I looked at houses and it was ding ding. No. And
it's fine, but now I have four kids. That would not work out well. So, you know, we we want a little bit more space. But I would say those two and then um the probably representative Dodsth, Jeff Doddth is another person. Um you know,
Representative Jim Nash is on there. >> Nash is north too is up north, right? >> Nash is Wakonia. >> Oh, okay. Yeah. And is >> he is just north of the cities like past Zimmer Moose Lake maybe? Moose Lake is
>> Okay. Okay. north of Okay. >> All right. I just think it's might I don't know if we can talk to some of them in a nice way and try and >> No, I mean try I mean again I had the
conversation with several members today cuz we had a huddle and I said these are the amendments I'm bringing. Here's why I'm bringing them. Some of these you've seen before, other ones you haven't. They said oh these you know don't seem too unreasonable. It's not delete all like you know somebody will just come in and say I want to delete the whole bill.
Um I mean at that time I mean you're not being serious if somebody's bringing this forward. And again let's let's remember if just cuz you're having a hearing doesn't mean a bill is going to pass. But I think we've been um >> against this for three years. Yeah.
>> Yes. >> Well we're hoping because it's an election year maybe it won't pass this year. >> Yeah. I mean, you know, I have heard statements saying, you know, there's there's a level of concern depending, you know, and I'm being very honest, what happens in the future that it could come in and be way worse. >> Yeah.
>> And Yeah. Yeah. Okay. What were you going to say? Sorry. >> I was just going to ask Andrew what the odds of your bill that decreases requirements on housing moving forward is. Um, I mean, and what I heard back
was, hey, this was in the discussions. I wasn't in those negotiations, but now my time as a member, you know, I I get to vote bringing this forward may bring it back up. Um, you know, the hope is that there's other members that can
bring it up too in the committee. But moving on as well, you know, I haven't pulled the members on the committee. I mean, I know there's at least probably one other person voting no, but I'm guessing since they're bringing it to committee, they there's the votes are there to move it on. >> That's why they're bringing it. Yeah. They think they have the votes.
>> And they I mean they they had it previously, too. Again, I voted no on the bill, but you know, that's I mean, how it works. >> Yeah. >> No, I meant your bill to decrease the code requirements. >> Oh, that one. Um, so to be honest, that would
that would repeal the stuff Larry Craft did two years ago and it's probably not going to pass to be invested. >> I know they've talked about it. I know um, Representative Robinson mentioned that too, but um, I don't know how much it's going to decrease the cost of of
housing. Yeah. you know, I mean, and then the question is, yeah, is it only going to affect a affordable housing and then those so those people that can't afford it get less, you know, insulation
or whatever. You know what I'm saying? >> Yeah. And and it's again, you know, do you not you don't have to go with the require the highest rated windows? Windows are expensive. >> Yeah. Tell me about it. you know, if if you order something. >> Again, it's within the realm of what people can afford, and you hate to put
these standards on that make it so expensive when you can still build a really nice house, >> right? Yeah. No, I I I see what you're saying. Um, what can we do? Again, if you can think of anything besides talking to these
people or maybe writing something to them or I mean, what what else can we do to help fix this because this is horrible for cities? I mean, it's just horrible. >> Yeah. To again, I don't know what the Senate makeup looks like. You know,
there's a one vote majority in the Senate. I'm going to guess that not every Democrat senator is supportive of this and not every Republican is. >> If I had to guess, I think it's got a tougher route in the Senate than it does in the House.
>> Okay. Wow. Okay. >> Um, you know, does that mean, you know, I'll probably get in trouble if somebody watches this back because I'm naming people for you guys to, you know, you know, get a hold of. I mean, no, that's fine. >> Cut it out. >> I mean, Julia Coleman's over here. Um,
you know, Warren Limer's kind of got the Maple Grove Champlain area. >> He has kind of the Northwest area. >> Yeah. Yeah. Um, you know, our own senator, um, >> just don't work a lot with this. So in
other words, basically um maybe even trying to come up with some other language or some other ideas that might plate a little bit but not result in a loss of our entire ability to have local control over local issues.
>> Yeah. I mean I think a lot of people would like to see an incentive based model. >> Um >> but that's not the the route that they've gone right now, >> right? >> Yeah. I mean, it's the end of the day, if I can, you know, I know it doesn't help you guys, and I apologize, but even if I can get it to
5,000, that has an impact for some of my cities, you know, four or five of my cities over here. 5,000 buys you, in Jasper's terms, three years, maybe. That's what he told me. Maybe. >> Well, it buys us something. I mean, you know, that's
>> it buys us something. Yeah, because I talked to M city administrator and uh Excelsier city administrator after I sent you guys the emails as well, just because they're the ones a lot of time that are having to do all the applications and >> Yeah.
>> So, um All right. Any other questions on this? Because I'm I'm going to give Andrew about five or 10 minutes. We So, the real reason we had you come here so some of the people No, we don't want to talk about fraud. What we want to talk about is a couple things. Um, okay. So,
I think, um, let me just make something clear. I think we can all agree whether you're Republican or Democrat, we can all agree that our representatives and senators, regardless of what side of the aisle you were on, did not commit the fraud. Okay, that is hope they did.
>> They did not commit the fraud. Um I think what happened is that nobody thought this could happen and so um certain things were not in place to prevent it. So if can you tell us and I think I recently read that there's now
some legislation either it was passed or recently passed or in the works to prevent this from happening in the future. That's that's one thing. >> Yeah. So, you know, on the fraud topic, I mean, it's it's on people's minds when you get property tax increases and you
get more visits to the food shelf and um you know, you're you're paying a lot of taxes. What I can say is the conversations I've had with people from the BCA, this isn't a to be honest, this isn't a seven-year issue. This has been going on for 10 years. Uh some of these people tell me
we they've given information to certain departments and the departments haven't act as much as they would have acted on. Now these are law enforcement officers with the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension. Uh so there's some frustration within these departments that they've had this information and
they're not acting on it. The hope is we can get something done that will provide more oversight. M you know I think I talked about it before. So I did drop a bill that allows um you know the governor's making a lot of these decisions. He's the one that hires and fires people. Uh, I've dropped a bill
that gives another layer to the legislature um to be able to fire people for uh theft of um taxpayer dollars because at the end of the day, if you're an upper level administrator or you're a commissioner and some of this stuff to
the point of gross negligence is under your watch, I think there should be some accountability. >> I don't think we disagree. >> Yeah. And and again, we haven't seen that indepth approach. Um, you know, again, political hot potato. I'm going to be very honest. People are trying to
use this, but at the end of the day, you know, if it's 2 million to 9 billion, that's still a lot of money. I' I've I've tried to side on the two billion, but I know it's it's getting more and more. >> Um, you know, even even small I I have a bill that's not dropped yet because it
hasn't been finalized. But even just extending the statute of limitations from 6 years to 10 years because we know how government works especially at a higher level flow. >> Um I want to be able to give us that opportunity to be able and and go back. >> But Andrew isn't um there's some
legislation >> that is either in the works or passed. I I forgive me for not remembering but um that there's going to be more oversight, there's going to be more audits. Um tell do you know anything about that? >> Oh, right. I mean, the the governor's tried to put, you know, is putting
together a task force, but we have what they're calling like the OIG bill, and that was something that passed the Senate, but has not passed the House. Um, so there's a prime example of where it could a bill can be strong somewhere, but not as strong somewhere else. >> Um, I I can speculate what some of the
heartburn is, but at the end of the day, I think we all want to address it, and I don't know why we can't do multiple things. I don't I'm not saying that the OIG is the end all beall because I think there's a there's another bill I have for more spot visits unannounced. I
think especially if you're a a new organization that's receiving taxpayer dollars, there's probably should be some more scrutiny. I know, you know, a local nonprofit I work with, we do a really good job to make sure our numbers uh are accurate and I think they get, you know,
60 grand from the state. So again, smaller numbers. Um but I I I think it it's not just one thing. I think we need to look at multiple things. >> Exactly. I agree. And I think um you mentioned it too before accountability. Um particularly uh when it comes to
department heads. I mean they're there on a daily basis. They should be accountable for their departments because at the state legislature, you guys are up here. They're down in the trenches. that's where they should be
able to see what's happening and why it's happening. >> Yeah, they're the day-to-day operators. Um, and so we what I would like to say is that I've seen in some of our commissioners the the not going to say
the willingness, but they have the ability. Um, I've run into some situations on bills I've carried where I've had those conversations with commissioners and they're going to say, you know, your bill's not that bad. And I said, 'Well, what if I change this way this way? And I'm going to be very honest, those commissioners have told
me, you know who signs my paycheck? And that's very disheartening to hear. And that was something that I heard for the first time last year. Um, I get how members vote for their districts and sometimes you get stuck on the party line stuff, but when some of these commissioners aren't willing to do it, to me, that that's a level of
frustration I haven't felt before. What's the plan to push for people to be held accountable for not doing their jobs? Like the commissioners and the people that had the the fraud brought to their attention and they just ignored it. Like what what is the plan to show?
>> Did they and I mean did they and then yes, what is the plan? >> Both. >> So So there is the bill I have. I I will say that uh Representative Robbins has a more aggressive bill. I'm my philosophy is always to put multiple like I I can
see one that's really soft or one that's really aggressive and I'm like okay I'm going to shoot for the middle because we got to pass something um >> or what no >> for for any type of accountability. So there's one she has a bill that's more aggressive than the one I have that comes with a lot more penalties uh
ability for removal. I think we're throwing some options out there. It's at the end of the day, 201 legislators, you know, one vote, you know, >> right? Have you I guess have you talked to anyone on the other side of the aisle for what are the odds one Democrat in
the House is going to vote for anything to hold anyone accountable? You know, like the OIG bill last year, the Democrats in the House wouldn't take it up. So, it passed the Senate. The Democratic Democrats in the Senate supported it, but they couldn't get anyone in the House to come over. What are the odds that have you heard any
murmurss of any indication that there's a couple of them out there that want someone to be held accountable >> that don't like fraud? >> So, I mean, I mean, a Democrat is carrying the bill in the House. The problem is we we came in and the bill got totally changed. Um, I think at the
end of the day, if we don't get something done, that is on Republicans and Democrats. Um, and it's going to look bad for, you know, all of us that are trying to serve. um because it is one of the biggest things that we're we're dealing with right now
when we have a a you know still have a budget deficit coming up uh or shortfall. Time is going to tell. I mean this is a short session. Um it's an election year and again at the end of the day it's you know we're going to have to be held accountable if we can't get something
done and and our constituents like you and everybody up here want us to get something done >> and and fraud I think is going to be one of the big big issues during the um campaigns and so on. So I I would I would hope that they would put some accountability and also some oversight
um measures in place so that it doesn't happen. And it has to be both sides of the aisle. And I I'm guessing that whether you're Democrat or Republican, I think you're going to want some kind of oversight and accountability. >> Every one of my constituents doesn't like this. And they can be
>> Democrat, Republican, independent. They they're like, "We want something done and it needs to get done. The hope is we can get something done. It may be, >> you know, too much for some, but not enough for others, but we've got to get >> you have to get something. Something is better than nothing." >> Yes. and and and then building on that
because I think again it's been going on for so long that we can't just say we're going to pass the OIG and that's enough. I feel good about it. I think it's something that our job down there is because we have a really big budget. It's it's gone up 20 30 billion. We need to do a better job
overall because there's a lot of inefficiencies. Treat it like a business um and it's impacting people's lives. You mean you just you think about the our neighbors that you know we're willing to pay our taxes for the most vulnerable that have really been impacted.
>> Yep. All right. Thank you. And I'm going to let you go because unless you have four kids have more questions or comments or >> No, it's good. >> Thank you, Andrew. >> Appreciate you coming out. >> The only other thing I would share is um Highway 7, if you guys continue to hear
feedback, I've been getting some emails. I've got a meeting tomorrow. I had one today with Mandot. I'm trying to work on that. I'm working I have another meeting with Mandot and >> I'm glad you brought that up. Yeah. >> Yeah. Uh Sergeant Moore, um we're doing a meeting with them. I'm trying to
figure out again I look at things at multiple different ways. Are are there spot fixes that we can look at doing for a smaller dollar amount? Um I you know I I always think of Eureka and Church Road and Shorewood. um some of these other
areas or are we looking at a much larger grander plan that could have you know some more impact on our communities? I think we've got to figure something out because Mandot is telling me this is within their timetable that we need to get some funding now for that. It's just
what is that going to look like? >> We can get rid of the potholes that will take out my tires just >> Yeah, I did see that nice >> and I was going to post it because there was like I saw there's an app that they have where you can report potholes. Well, I know that they have a mill and
overlay scheduled for 29, but the other thing that I'm concerned about, and we're going to get an update here, I think in April. Um, and we've invited Mindot. I don't know if they'll be able to come or not. I think Ryan or whatever. Um, but here's the thing. We don't want those um get uh center
barricades because we really need to have easy ingress and egress from all of our neighborhoods um current and future. And so I know we've mentioned one intersection already, but we have a couple new developments potentially coming and we need to have them have
access to Highway 72. I don't know how much influence you would have. I mean, may I ask I mean >> Ryan Wilson and I talk a lot. >> Again, he's another good person that will take my calls on the weekend. Okay. >> Um, you know, and the commissioner's
been good as well. You know, even sharing with him, you know, what what's it look like to maybe stop at rolling acres? Um, and then maybe spot fix some of these areas. I I'm I'm trying to share with him everything I'm hearing. Again, no matter what we do, no matter how I vote, there's always somebody mad
at me. >> Um, but continuing to have those conversations. I don't think from my conversations, it's it's done. This is what we're doing. I think if money is an issue then yes there's only so far that we can go but we want to make sure you
know for the future development of this area as well as for safety you know you hate to see an accident on a road and then you can't get around because that you know um center uh piece gets put in >> right yeah we just I mean again we want to emphasize safety and that's you know
a big concern and I know that the police departments along the corridor received um you know a significant amount amount of money. Hopefully, they'll get some more this year. I don't know if that's um in a bill yet or in a grant yet. Do you know where that's >> Yes, I did a um
a another bill for I believe it was a million dollars for it was like safe zones grant that they got because um the commissioner for highway safety came into transportation and used Highway 7 as kind of the test subject of how
>> Oh, okay. how much accidents are down on Highway 7 because of some of the >> Yeah. The the other thing is though, but you're running into some of the the flock cameras and some of those other cameras. So, you you you've got to balance out some of that stuff, right? >> Um so, it leads to another data privacy.
So, there's a lot of things highway safety like, oh, we just wanted to be safe. Well, you're using some of this technology. It it helps some people. And the only other thing we need is um again, you know, last time we got uh 250,000 for the TMO for the transportation management organization.
If we could get some more money, that would be great. >> We we have a bill that as well. And then okay, um again, hopeful for um a bonding bill. You know, we saw the >> we want money from the podcast. >> And I I want to bring up the stuff that I know you guys are gonna not bring to
the >> it's but you know, as Kathleen mentioned, we do pay a lot out here in property taxes and in income taxes. >> Um and and so it's you know, I know they always look at us as being one of the more affluent uh communities, but then
you know what? We also give a lot. Um >> we're not giving, they're taking. You're also paying a lot. We're also paying a lot. >> And and I am I from from the state level, from the county level. I I have to do a lot of reminding of that. And you know, we've got, you know,
constituents out here that we need things addressed like the transportation, like the bonding dollars. I mean, we've had a lot of these communities step up. Um you know, it's gotten to the point now where it's just it's so over so much of a burden for a lot of people here. you know, the
hope with the the new um budget forecast, we do have to find some cash. Again, I know Bonnie's going to get political, uh especially probably in the Senate, >> but but the hope is that we can get some money into these communities from, you
know, myself and uh our senator. And I think it's good to have a split district that way. Yeah. Um it is the caucuses can you know she can work her caucus and I can work my caucus and hopefully we can you know get some additional funding for these cities that need it.
>> Okay. prior city prior city needs. >> Is there any talk about you know cutting spending um instead of raising taxes to fund things in this state as our taxes keep going up and up? >> You know, some of the things that we are looking to try to do is some of that tax
conformity that will help lower taxes overall that cost money. Um there's been some what I hear revenue raisers is what they like to call um you know tax increases, but I do think that there's an opportunity for some of these um if
there's going to be tax cuts, it's going to probably have to be through conformity and there's a a a couple different avenues. My guess is not every single piece is going to pass. >> Right. All right. All right. >> Anything else? >> I Well, of course we could keep going.
you guys were just like, "Okay." >> And and I think we've already talked about the fire partnership thing and the issues with the uh relief funds and I think you mentioned we should talk to Danny Nadu. >> Yeah. So I I I followed up um with Susan Lanchesky who's in the department. She's
very aware of the situation. I think I said it before. I'm I'm coming to the realization that >> every fire department and what they offer is so different. And so when you're trying to create a in the simple terms, I'm trying to create, you know, incentivize these communities that want
to consolidate. If we're going to do that and one of the pieces that's restricting that is the pension balances, I just be nice to create a a a grant program or a program to say, "Yep, if you're going to consolidate, this is probably going to save, you know, efficiencies, going to do a lot of things. Let's help fund the difference."
Sounds easy, but it's not. >> I know. I know it's not. But just keep that on your radar screen. I think that's another another issue that we have. So, we're dealing with a number of things out here. So, just so you know. >> Yeah. And anything else, just email me. >> Um, you know, hopefully you guys are getting the emails. Um, text, whatever
you need. Um, even if it's outside your role, go ahead and just say, "Hey, it's a personal thing. This is, you know, I'm I love this. I hate this." Whatever it is, it's helpful for me. Andrew, I would maybe have you remind your your co-workers that after 138
years, Cargill is leaving Minnesota because of taxes. This is our bellweather private largestly private privately held company in the world is leaving Minnesota because of taxes. You're going to Texas.
This is not a good look. And who's going to follow? >> Yeah. And and and that's one thing I think we've gotten away from. My my philosophy is labor doesn't work without industry and industry doesn't work without labor. We've seen it with Target. You know, this summer I went to
General Mills. Um I went to tenant companies. I went to a lot of um companies that take really good care of their employees because their employees are, you know, really taking care of their business. And down at the legislature, a lot of times it's either, you know, all you want to do is make
people richer on the backs of, you know, workers. That's not how business owners are. Um, are there a few bad actors? Yes, in any industry. But we got to get back to doing something to help reignite the business environment here, um, because the more we can do there, especially our small businesses, but a,
you know, the largely, you know, privately owned business, um, that that's not a good thing for Minnesota. All right, I'm gonna Thank you. Call it because we have to have a short break. Thank you so much for coming. Really appreciate it. Thank you for your time. Really appreciate it.
>> Yeah. Thank you. Um, real quick, holiday tree lighting and then we're going to have a break. >> November 18th, Wednesday. Is that good? That's a Wednesday before Thanks. That's the week before Thanksgiving rather than on We can't do it Thursday
because Mount has theirs on Thursday the 19th. Oh, >> okay. Can I say something? >> Of course. >> You just have to agree. I I would like us to reconsider having the tree lighting. >> Well, then we have to reconsider giving money to the Gillespie Center.
>> Okay. We're not going to do that. >> Well, if that's if if you think a tree lining is equal to helping, >> I think it is. >> Okay. Well, then I think we should have this discussion because I mean I really did I have I I have done my homework. I mean it's a wonderful it's fun but is
it really necessary and when it costs our city it doesn't cost >> it does I mean there's inind costs I mean there's staff time and effort and I just I think it is something we should really talk about
>> I have a compromise which will maybe end this discussion quickly. We do it one more time this year. We see how many people show up. We do it earlier. We have Gary and Jasper track staff's time and how much we're spending. >> Jasper Jasper's already tracked it
>> and then we can evaluate it. >> We can evaluate it now. We He has that. >> I like Kathleen's approach. I do. I like it. I think it's I think it's valuable. Every everybody that comes just thinks it's absolutely great. It's a great communication effort. It's a great
outreach to our community and it's something you know people pay their taxes and they don't see what what they get for it and this is one event that they that's not costing us very much money at all. So >> it cost us as much money as we gave it
to the Gillespie Center. I I have >> well I think we have I mean we don't have a city center you know we don't I mean >> we don't have this what you're talking about of there's no kind of touchy feely for the government and this is one thing where you can do that and it's also one
thing bring all their kids there. >> Yeah. >> You know it's it's pretty emotional there. >> Yeah. And I think if we move it earlier and we still have as poor showing as we've had the last two years when it was later and colder, then that will be an indication that people aren't going to
come. So that that would be the best way to do it because it's been really really cold. Obviously I had to go last this past year because of my foot and I suffered through it the year before and my children were freezing. So, um I think if we move it earlier and the weather's not a blizzard and people
still don't come, then that's a good indication that we need to stop it and maybe find a different event that will make it feel better for Minister or make Trista Day better or do something like that. But that's my compromise so we don't spend an hour talking about it.
>> I agree, Brian. >> I concur with that. >> All right. >> So, I'll add just I know you guys want to get a little snack here. >> Yeah. That's really >> the direction at the strategic planning is for me to reach out to West Hank Lions. Do you still want me to do that? >> I think we could. Well, let's see how
this year goes and then if we decide after that event that we're not going to do it next year, then I think it's a mood point. But if we decide, oh, there were a lot of people here, then maybe we can approach the Lions and see if they want to take it over. >> How's that? That's good.
>> So, November 18th. >> Yeah, that's a Wednesday. >> Wednesday. Okay. All right. With that, is there a motion to adjurnn? >> Are we going to have the swamp on the uh business meeting? >> We'll turn it on um put it on the business meeting because there's nothing there. So, all right. >> I have a motion to adjurnn.
>> Thank you. Is there a second? Thank you, Peter. All those in favor signify with I. I. All those opposed. Motion passes. And I will add the swamp. All right. And we might start five minutes late. She told me