--------- should be good. Joe, >> all right. I called the excuse me, I called the special counsel at 5:00 to or I'm sorry, at 6 o'clock to order. Um, first item is uh B on the agenda,
organizational structure clerk, uh, finance department. Um, we've talked about this in the past. Um, we have our charts over there. Jesse, do you have anything that you want to add to it?
>> I don't have any uh additional suggestions from what was discussed at the strategic planning session. uh without our mayor here, which I believe she's coming shortly. Um I think we are she
requested that we wait to vote on this matter. So possibly even wait to discuss this matter perhaps until she's here. Is that what her was that what her wish was for whoever talked to her? >> I think she's five minutes out. >> Okay.
Okay. One thing I was wondering is are we waiting or do you want to discuss? >> Well, let's discuss. We got nothing else to do. >> I was just wondering, do we need a finance director when we don't have a finance department? >> That's a I think that's a good question. Um
I think what might be warranted as a discussion for uh our current finance specialist once we assuming of course we find a replacement city administrator clerk
bind that deputy clerk/admin assistant as it's posted now. Uh perhaps we can consider a promotion of the sorts with a senior title added to the financial specialist position. Doesn't have to be a director
of finance position. Uh I think the reason why I said director of finance at the strategic plan session is because that's what we have at my business and it's just something that we have our uh accounting and finance structure set as up for discussion.
>> Good. Well, I was I was looking into that when I saw that on there and there and what I can see is municipalities usually don't have a finance director until they have a 50 $60 million budget and more people
because they're taking on more people. But I can see where you're wanting to. I understand what you're saying now. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Miss Beggy stuck with us through it all so far, I should say. Um, and I think
the experience probably going to warrant this type of discussion at some point anyway. So perhaps we're being proactive and showing appreciation >> in regards to uh a more senior title in that role. Director finance doesn't have
to be applicable here. No, in my opinion, >> it's like a senior finance specialist or however that whatever it is. Okay. >> Yeah. Actually, even the title finance specialist has always intrigued me. Where did that title even come from? Is
that a just a municipal position? >> Yeah, there's a few cities like Baxter has a finance specialist. Breezy has a finance specialist. I think sometimes they go handinhand with finance director. Um, but Baxter does have a
finance director. They have a little bit more people in staff. >> Yeah, because they've got a few of the finance people underneath them, too. Yeah. One that we're looking at. Um, so are we looking at keeping a city
administrator, administrator clerk through the structure? >> Well, I've made it clear, I think, enough by now. That's what I'm in favor of. >> City Minister. Yep. Okay. And I think that there's some good discussion. I mean, really the takeaway that that I had and I hope you all had
to I know you weren't able to attend. Um, but the takeaway that I hope that we had from the strategic planning session was to I think I thought we all stacked hands on this type of city structure. Now I'm losing my voice like Joe too. We
stacked hands on this city structure. We stacked hands on uh taking our quote homework of reviewing the personnel policies, the job duties and descriptions for the really the main three uh positions of city administrator/clerk, deputy clerk with
some administrative assistant duties accompanied to it. And then what does that finance position maybe look like beyond where it's at today? Right. So, how we got to this discussion now of having a clerk is due to Mayor Carnean,
she's coming in now, so I'm sure she'll have an opinion on the matter. But, um, I hope that we can all collectively stack hands and be confident in the path that we're moving forward in simply due to the notion that we've applied for a grant to search for the city
administrator/clerk. We've uh not yet initiated them because we're trying to get this job duty and description finalized. So So do we want to clarify as as a city administrator, administrator, clerk?
We'll discuss that and go um what's the big difference between a administrator and administrator clerk? >> What was that? What is the distinction between a city administrator and an administrator clerk?
Besides pay is lower on a administrator clerk. Well, they would be doing clerk duties. So like if you want to go to a administrator, you're going to need a clerk. Cities have to have a clerk and finance. And so
if you want to do the administrator/clerk, then they will do clerk duties on top of administrative duties. They go hand in hand. >> That's what I figured. Okay. Thank you. >> Correct me if I'm wrong, Maggie, but we have had that city administrator/clerk
structure. However, we've employed a city clerk. Is that right? When we first I'll say this goround for the administrator seven years ago, it was a administrator clerk treasurer
because at that point in time I was the deputy city clerk. So we did not have anybody in that finance role. So they did every they were like in charge of everything clerk finance and administration even. So, I just assisted all of those activities at that point in
time. And then the administrator at the time wanted to get rid of some of her the day-to-day duties and hired a city clerk. So, they took the clerk out of that job title. So, she was administrator treasurer and then
hired the city clerk and then I was I received a promotion to finance specialist. Sorry, I'm a little bit late. So, you guys are still on the first agenda item and just in discussion. Was there? No. >> Yeah, just kind of talking about
>> talking about the retreat and the information out of that. Jesse, just kind of recap that. I just questioned if we really needed a finance director and it kind of at this point, no, we don't. Um, just taking our finance specialist,
uh, with a promotion. Um, and then, uh, talking, do we want city administrator or administrator, clerk? Um, I'm all for city administrator. That's where I'm at. >> Did everybody else indicate where they're at yet? >> No, we were kind of waiting for you.
Okay. Sorry, pull in. >> Um, do you guys know where you're at or do you need more discussion? >> I know where I'm at. >> Okay. Um, Bruce, do you know where you're at? >> You know, at this point, um, I don't know,
maybe a administrator type thing, but maybe a financial director with a clerk and a deputy clerk. >> Okay. Just see, do you know where you're at? >> Yes. >> Okay. city >> and Joe.
>> Yeah, I I don't disagree. I think though that we do want to combine some of the positions. So, I you know, back to, you know, what Maggie just said, I don't know that we need four separate people and separate titles, you know, that we can combined
up some of these roles and duties. Do >> do you want to look do we want to look at administrator treasurer? >> Well, right now the the current structure of the city right now is an administrator treasurer. Right. And then a clerk and then finance specialist.
>> Right. >> Right. But the council has approved a de a deputy clerk. Right. Um so that position is approved. So >> and I apologize. I don't know what the discussion was before I got here, but
>> very religious. >> It just started right before you came. >> I drove like I've never driven that fast in my life. Um, >> does anyone have a motion they'd like to make as it relates to
the main position, which we have been discussing for some time now? Well, what I'd like to do is put a motion forward to that we proceed with the city administrator. >> A city administrator only or an administrator treasurer.
>> I would say administrator treasurer. That's how I'd look at it. Somebody else may say, so just hear me through. City administrator, treasure as we have it right now. And when they come in, have them we we've already decided we want a deputy clerk and that's fine. um and go
that route. If somebody else wants it different, just let me know. >> Okay. So, your motion is >> I didn't make a motion. I said if I were, that's what I would do is keep it. >> That's not a motion. >> I just want to hear what Jesse has to say. >> Okay. Well, I'll make a motion. I'll make a motion that we establish that the city organization structure is as
follows. City administrator SLC clerk with a finance specialist treasurer and with a deputy clerk/administrative assistant.
Can I ask one clarifying question to that motion? is the structure that admin clerk finance specialist treasurer deputy clerk admin into the administrator. >> Yes. >> Okay. Um so council member Zan has made
a motion admin clerk under the council and then finance specialist treasurer and deputy clerkadmin. Do we have a second? Will those positions be right underneath the um administrator clerk?
>> He said, "Okay." >> Yes. >> Yeah. It'd be nice if we had a whiteboard on here, right? Wouldn't it? >> I'll second. >> I'll second. >> Do we want to use No, >> Freley. Second. >> If we're all on the same page of what the hierarchy looks like. Yes.
>> Is there any additional discussion to this motion? Council member London >> when council member Freley >> just when can we have a contract signed so that we can get them looking for someone searching for the >> we should do this motion first and then come to that second um additional
discussion input questions feedback council member hall >> it just >> it goes like this seconded that >> marked that is how >> it's a Joe it's the Same as this, >> right? Same.
>> Just the title's changed. This title is different. That's it. >> Okay. No additional discussion, comments, question, input. Um I'd like to move to a roll call vote then. Um Council Member Freley, we'll start with you. All All those in favor
signify by saying I and we'll do a roll call. or oppose, say nay. >> Mark Freley, yes. >> Bruce London, yes. >> I vote yes. >> Yes. Yes. >> Okay. Motion carries.
>> Okay. The next item on our continuation is ordinance slashpolicies slashpersonnel policy discussion. Um, what I would say here is I know we had all kind of tasked ourselves with going through the
personnel policies manual and doing a deep dive into that and coming here with feedback, but I feel like until we identified the structure, it's hard to make proposed recommendations as to changes to the personnel policy manual
in particular um and policies because we needed to get this set. So unless um other members of the council are clear on direction they'd like to make, I would actually ask that we continue this portion to give us more time now that
we've set this clear. >> The only piece that I would add there is if we want to seriously start to get this search underway, could we consider taking >> Right.
>> Yep. just to get the search out there to initiate the search firm. Could we stack hands on the job description that we have currently adopted within the city to be able to proceed? >> Yes. >> Do you think that will suffice?
>> Well, that actually technically falls back under B, not C, right? Because C is around ordinance changes around the position, the policies around it, and the personnel policy. So the job description would fall under the organization structure of it, right? To approve the job description to your
point and council member Freley, to your point, so that we can have consensus as a council on that job description. So then yes, the contract can get signed, >> job descriptions in hand, we can start the search so we don't lose more time on that. >> Yep. Perfect. Yeah, because I don't want to lose time on this.
>> Yep. I don't know if the rest of council because we didn't know where we'd go tonight with the motion. If the rest of council has actually had a chance to go through all the job descriptions, be thoughtful about it, have input to
changes, additions, um how things would look or not. It appears that you perhaps have. I've looked at it a little bit too. >> I have, but even in this infinite stack of papers, I don't have my actual notes. They're still in my office. Um
perhaps you all could continue this topic to the November regular council meeting or prior to. >> Do we want to wait another month to continue a job description approval or do we want to continue this maybe to next week if there's a time when we're
all available. It doesn't necessarily have to be in the evening. It could be in the morning. We could come together for an hour. We each have our homework. We take all these job descriptions. we know the structure and then we come together and come to consensus on that so that we can get the search started versus pushing it off for another 30
days. >> I'm ready right now. >> Oh, you're ready? >> I am, but >> I think I got a top of head, too. >> Okay, >> why not? >> If you guys are, >> we got another >> Go for it. >> 43 minutes. Yeah, >> I would say discuss it now because you got time. All right.
>> So, what do you have, Mark? I I I didn't see any changes that I wanted to change. Um the um are you are you referencing the job description document right now? Not the personnel policy manual. Can we just get
clarity on that for everybody? >> I didn't see any changes that I wanted to make. >> Okay. So you have no changes to the current job description as it stands for the city for the administrator treasurer position. >> Correct. >> Okay. Council member Zan, do you have
changes to that job descript? >> I do with the job title. Uh we will have to remove treasurer and place clerk. Um few moments. I know I had one one change in the essential functions that's
not coming to top of head right now. >> I think it's it might be this one Jesse like that might slightly amend because the treasurer >> Yes, >> this one. >> I don't think that was the one I was thinking but but yes uh so coordinates
the city budget process and capital improvement planning recommends budget and fiscal policy to the council. I think we will want to consider adjusting that appropriately for the treasurer I should say the financial specialist slashtreasurer
right um but not to the fullest extent so when we're talking about capital y portion so I would well the word coordinating is >> because you still want the admin clerk you know if they're in this core
position reporting to the council and the department heads are reporting into that position, that position, you would still want them to have some financial management leadership. Absolutely. Right. >> So, it's there's a way to words smmith
this where a portion of this goes to the finance specialist treasurer, but they're working in coordination and conjunction with the admin clerk. >> I like that. >> Right. >> Yes. notes. Now what?
>> Okay, so that's bullet point number one, two, three, four, five. >> So maybe it just it it just words smmiths to say coordinates the city city's budget process in conjunction with the finance specialist slashtreasurer
and capital. So you add it there and then and then you continue on and capital improvement planning recommends budget and fiscal policy to the city council >> like it. >> Okay. See third from the bottom should be
should be number 10 works with financial consultant bond council tiff funds and auditors. Is that a city administrative function or is that a treasurer function or mix of both? Both. You know what?
I don't know if I can say in the utmost confidence right now that I am >> comfortable to be able to just go through this and and go and and stack hands. Um hate to schedule another meeting just to schedule another meeting. However, uh
taking the three that we have right now, the three positions I would like to take some time, I guess. >> Okay. Yeah, we've meeting five times, so why not six? >> So, we can table this until we say early next week.
>> Can we find a date where we could all agree on early next week to continue um the job descriptions and then if we want to also continue C ordinances will fall into obviously the new structure. um
>> if we take and then everybody does really need to take their time and diligence to look through this, come prepared with your notes, your feedback, right? So we can have robust discussion about it and come to alignment and agreement on it. Um maybe I can make a recommendation
last time and or the first time you know city administrator was brought into the city um forgive me that group that >> DDA >> DDA did that whole comprehensive study on our city or town how it should be set
up and structured. I have read through that whole report on how this should be set up and structured. Uh, I mean, we paid that consultant to do that and I think that's a good starting point to look at to go forward with some of this stuff. It was all laid
out in that report. Pretty nice. If everyone could get a copy of that and that be our starting point, I think that's a good point just because since that was done, there's been so many changes since. >> Are Joe and I the only ones that have
looked at that? >> No, I've flipped through it. >> Okay, good. Yep. I'm sure Jesse has too and Bruce because it was in our Yeah, >> it was a part of our packet for the council retreat. So, everybody should have it. And if they don't, I'm sure we can get it out again.
>> Do we have a date next week? >> I I'm not available on the 29th or 30th next week. So, it have to be Monday, Tuesday, or Friday. >> How does Tuesday look potentially for folks? >> I'm up on Tuesday.
Well, does AM work for you? >> AM work for you? >> How does it Maggie? Would a 9:00 a.m. be appropriate for you? >> Okay. >> Tuesday at 9
>> potentially. >> Fine. >> See what Maggie has. >> Okay. So, we should make a motion to continue. >> I'll handle that. >> I have a hard stop at 1:30. Just saying. >> Maggie's funny today.
Okay. I'd like to make a motion to uh continue this meeting continue the meeting from September 18th, 23rd, 30th, and October 8th, 2025. uh and today to
Tuesday, October 28th at 9:00 a.m. to discuss both items B and C. >> Do we have a second? >> I'll second. >> Any additional discussion? >> Um >> Joe, >> yes. You know, we didn't talk about any
of the personnel policies. We were just talking about the um the job description right now. But um >> Jesse said to continue that, >> right? But if we could get the current copies of those also too for this.
>> So copies of job descriptions for city administrator clerk deputy clerk administrative assistant. >> You approve that job description as a deputy clerk. >> Finance specialist, treasurer would be the next one. >> Just saying you that's how I published
that job description. Yep. So, if you want to change the title of that, we're going to have to do that. >> I don't think it'll be a title change. It's just content. >> Okay. Just making sure. Yep. >> Okay. So, >> are you looking to me to make these
suggested changes or just send out the >> send it to if you can just uh gather the content for us and email it out to us when you can tomorrow or next day. >> And I think all of you have that. So I will forward the email from the original one that has all that. >> Perfect.
>> Do you have the red line one also? >> Go ahead. >> Yes, I think that was in the email as well. >> Okay. Any additional discussion? All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> I. Okay. Motion carries. Um. All right.
A motion to adjurnn would be in order. >> I so move. >> Second. >> All those in favor of adjournment signify by saying I. >> I. >> Okay. The continuation council meeting is adjourned. Part: 2
Oh, they covered my death cancer story. Are we ready? >> We're ready when you are, Jennifer. >> Great. I would like to officially call the city of Nisa uh regular council meeting on this Tuesday, October 21st, 2025 at 7:01
p.m. to order. Um if we could all uh stand and start with 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 of Okay, perfect. Um, our next item is to approve the agenda. Um, and before we go to approve the agenda, I have uh three additions that I would like to make to the agenda under
letter G, old business. So, right now, the agenda has one item under there, which is number one, review special event and street use permits. I'd like to add as an so move this to the bottom and add as a number one a discussion
around the temporary assignment of the duties and responsibilities of the city administrator role on an interim basis. Um and this is per the memo that came from our labor attorney today to council uh in a privileged format and Brandon
our labor attorney said he was joining the meeting uh so he would be able to speak to that. So, I would like to add that as item number one under old business. And then for item number two under old business, add the hiring process for the deputy clerk position.
And then for item number three under old business, just to circle back with council on the employee appreciation event and then move the review of the special event and street use permits to item four under old business.
I'll make a motion to approve the amended agenda as presented. >> Second. >> Is there any discussion? All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Okay. Our agenda is amended. Um, next up
and Maggie, sorry. Do we know if if we have anyone joining on Zoom or >> Brandon's here? >> Oh, okay. >> Yeah. >> Um, next up is a consent calendar. Again, notice to the public. All matters listed are considered routine by council and will all be enacted by one motion.
There will be no separate discussion of these items unless good cause is shown prior to the tri time the council votes on the motion. >> I'd like to make a motion to approve the consent calendar as presented. >> I'll second. >> Any additional discussion from council on the consent calendar?
>> All right. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Motion carries. Okay. Next up on our agenda is an open forum um public comment. So if there are any members of the public that would like to address the council um you would have two minutes to do so. You could just come to
the microphone, state your name and your address um and take your two minutes. Okay. Going once, going twice. All right. Uh we will move on from the open forum public comment. Next up on the agenda are our reports
and we will start with our city attorney Tom. >> Excuse me. Good evening everybody. Um here I just want to um point out to you um that it's necessary to make a small amendment to your data practices policy
to specifically on page four um where we've got currently um dated references to uh people not on staff here anymore at the responsible authority position at the data practices compliance official
uh section and also under the design. So, um I recommend changes as reflected on page four there to replace those former um identified persons with the people that are identified there now. >> Do we have any questions for Tom?
>> Okay. Do we have a motion to accept Tom's uh proposed changes for our data practice contacts? >> I'll make a motion to accept the data practice policy changes as presented by our city attorney. >> I'll second. >> Second. Any additional discussion? All
those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Motion carries. Tom, did you have anything else? >> Nothing else. Thank you. >> Okay. Wonderful. Uh, next we will go to our city engineer report. Um, Dave, we'll turn it to you. >> Okay. Thank you. Um, just a brief report
or update on progress on 2026 street improvements. We did provide street plans to um, public works Tom Bl. So, he has those in his possession uh ready for review with public works at their next
meeting. Um then we also have been making progress on the G Lake Trail. Um some good progress in the past few weeks and did a punch list with that uh at their progress meeting on Monday. So, I think we're uh getting closer to the
finish line on that. >> Good. Do we have any questions for Dave? Nothing. Okay. Anything further from your end? >> No, that's it. >> All right. Thank you. Um, next up we have two items under the public hearing tonight. So, the first one is an
ordinance amendment chapter 2 regular city council meeting start time. And uh, Maggie, I will turn that to you. >> I will just need a motion to open the public hearing and then we'll make a motion to close it after these two items are done. I'd like to make a motion to open the
public hearing or on the ordinance amendment for chapter 2. >> Second. >> Any discussion? All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Okay, we are open. Okay, these are just some ordinance amendments that we have been talking about. One of them was
regarding our start time for our meetings is the first one. um changing it from 7 pm to 6 pm. So if you guys are still in favor of that, I would need a motion to approve the change and then I just need an
approval to post publish the summary in the paper. >> We're doing these on an individual basis. Correct. >> Yes. Assuming everybody's still good with showing up an hour earlier and getting out of here an hour earlier, I'd like to
make a motion to adopt ordinance amendment chapter 2 regarding uh the amendment to this regular start time of the regular city council meetings within the city of Niswah. >> Second. >> Do we have any additional discussion to the change in the start time?
>> Can I just add one thing? Do you I know do you want to start this in November. The only issue I have is the truth and taxation meeting for December is already scheduled and published with the county. So, we could not change that meeting and that starts at 6:00. Not that we can't
start the regular meeting after 6, just being mindful that that has to be at 6. >> If I can amend my motion for that to initiate in January of 26. >> Do you pull back and amend your second? >> Okay. Okay. Second.
>> Okay. Any additional discussion? All those in favor of changing the start time to 6 p.m. to start in Jan January of 26 signify by saying I. >> I. >> Okay. Motion carries. Next. Uh or we need to close the public hearing on that one before we go to the
next one. >> Nope. I will need a motion to publish now the summary of this change. >> Right. All right, Jesse, >> like to make a motion to publish the summary of the ordinance amendment to chapter 2. Second. >> Any additional discussion?
>> All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Okay. Motion carries. >> And no, you don't have to close the public hearing until we're done with the second one. Yep. >> Okay. Now, we'll move on to the second ordinance amendment, which is chapter 28
regarding mandatory sewer connections. This was talked about oh at public works and I believe at the last council meeting to adjust the connection distance for commercial structures.
>> I can jump in. >> Thank you. I just don't have the I don't know where my paperwork went. >> Uh we discussed this at the last public works meeting. Uh the distance for commercial is 1,00 the residential is 500.
We were kind of grappling at the logic and justification for the difference between the two truly. So uh it was proposed and voted on at the public works meeting to reduce it from 1,00 to 500, make it conform with the residential hookup distance.
>> Do we know how many businesses this might affect? >> It won't be. Well, keep in mind that this will be for future applications. >> Okay. >> Coming through. Uh it will not affect anything that's already >> in place. Yeah.
>> So, a question is let's say let's say well if the commercials on septic and now they're within the 500 ft once the septic goes they should have to cook up. Correct. If they are going to be
constructing a new commercial a new structure within within that 500 ft >> then it is okay. They would >> correct. >> I was just looking for clarification on that one. Thank you. >> I have nothing else.
>> Any other questions from council? >> No. Okay. Do we have a motion? I'll make a motion to amend ordinance chapter 28 in regards to the mandatory sewer connection uh hookup for commercial properties within the city of
Niswah as presented. >> Second >> I think Bruce seconded first Maggie if you didn't catch that. Okay. Any additional discussion? >> All right. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Okay. Motion carries. >> I also make a motion to publish. Yep.
>> Second. >> Any additional discussion? All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Okay. Motion carries. And now we need a motion to close public hearing. Maggie. Okay. >> So moved. Second. >> Any additional discussion? All those in
favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Okay. Public hearing is closed. >> We're gonna be down at five minutes at this. >> At this rate. Okay. Next up is old business. So, um, if we have Brandon on this
amended item, we added temporary assignment of duties and responsibilities of the administrator. >> I am on, mayor. >> Oh, we just can't see. >> Can you see me? Okay. My video shows on my end. Okay,
>> now we can see you. >> Great. Thank you for joining us. Um, so council has received the privileged and confidential memo from uh your firm regarding this with the memo um again from May 16th that was reforwarded. And
so I wanted to turn it to you because we don't know what we can or can't say here right as it relates to the temporary assignment of duties and responsibilities which uh Miss Maggie as finance finance specialist is currently managing for the city.
>> Yep. Uh so mayor, you'd like me to give the summary of the issue? >> Okay. So yeah, thank you uh mayor and council members. So you did receive a memo from us. Uh we get it was today, but we'd had consultation with the mayor
uh recently. And what's the core of the issue is at your October 8th meeting, you approved a motion as follows. assign Maggie some of the duties of the city administrator role on an interimm basis effective September 4th. Um the issue
that was raised uh with that motion and it seems like legally and practically may have caused some issues. It obviously is not clear on which duties uh of the city administrator that finance specialist Maggie uh would
perform or even if it the word sum is there, how do we determine which duty she would perform? Um, so the issue for the council like you've had over the past few months and 42 membs insert a little bit of sarcasm there is
here's what you need to think about is obviously you as the city council supervise anyone performing city administrator duties. Um, so therefore if we just if you just left the motion as is. It seems because the city council supervises, they'd have to clarify what
quote some of those duties meant. Um, so the mayor did bring to us because of this lack of clarity and uh, you know, the expectation that this maybe should be clear for not only the city council but for uh, the finance specialist
Maggie uh, that it may be appropriate to do two things. One, again, this is up to the council. one potentially resin your prior motion because of some of the lack of clarity and two approve another motion that provides clarity. So what
did we provide to you again in consultation with the mayor is a potential motion that if you want to specify the specific duties and responsibilities that finance specialist Maggie would perform on an interimm basis uh we did give that to you. Now,
obviously, it's up to the city council to decide which of the duties in the city administrator job description that we attached you desire her to perform. Uh, but again, we had the mayor provide some recommendations of where she may
want to go on which specific duties. So, I can either verbally summarize those or if individuals want to review our memo, they can do that. So, full circle, you can do nothing, but maybe we're left with a lack of clarity for both sides. Two, you can do something and the
something generally would be to specify the specific duties you wish the finance specialist uh to perform on an intern basis. >> Do we have any questions from council for Brandon? >> So the memo from May is that one that we
would just reenact or not reenact >> um reinstate because that was defined in May. >> Yeah. So obviously councelor how you've had quite the lineage of what's gone on. You've had different iterations of
motion. So full circle I I think you know we gave you two memos. One that I just summarized had a new motion that specifies duties but you're right we did provide you as background for two reasons. One is uh interimm duties how
to define a motion in a different way and two a potential hiring process you're going to undertake. So full circle, councelor, how I'd focus on the more specific motion at issue, but you can go backwards and look at a motion like you had in May. The gist council of the one in May, I'm just trying to
summarize because we rebombarded you with information. Basically said that, you know, you had two individuals performing interimm duties and those duties would be defined as specified by the two council design at that time
personnel leaison mayor Carnean and councelor Hall. So that is another alternative, but we did give you the more updated alternative today that basically specifies with a copy and paste of the job description defining those duties. So is it go back to where
you were in May, have the you know one or two of you less in a quorum decide what those are on a case- by case basis or two is it should we specify the exact duties in the motion? Do you have any further questions, council member Hall?
>> Well, yeah. So then basically the difference between the two is full counsel or personnel committee when you sum it all up, right? >> Or three councelor Hall, the new one is just to specify right now through the council the exact duties from the job
description the finance specialist would perform. So is it council decides case by case? Is it design decide case by case? Or three is it right now you just itemize the one two three four five duties you desire her to perform.
>> Sure. Then I'd say let's just fire off the duties. >> Do you have any questions for Brandon? >> No questions for Brandon. >> Do you have any questions for Brandon, Mark? >> Okay. >> Yeah. So then I'd just say let's go
through the list. >> I have another suggestion. Go ahead, council member Zan. >> Assigning the entire job duties of city administrator that's on the back of this memo
to Maggie while she's in this interim duty. And if we were to do that, would we need to be then rescending the original motion to then update this one or >> Brandon? >> Can we ban it? >> Yeah. So what councelor is on your last
motion said some of the duties. So just to simplify it one we'd still recommend rescending that prior motion and just um yeah I can give you exact language here. Uh be >> I think I can hit it. >> Go ahead.
>> But correct me if I'm wrong. We can't do that because of the union negotiation and talks. So that for sure would have to be >> Yeah. >> So we So we couldn't do the whole thing because of the the different unions. >> So we'd have to strike that one for
sure. >> Where's that at here? >> Yeah. Can I >> I don't know. It's going to be in there somewhere, but go ahead. >> Yeah, councelor Hall. So, you know, we got two things going on. Is >> Oh, okay. >> You know, I wanted Yeah, weighing in the wheats here. Oh, sorry. Counselor's on.
No, I'm just indicating I found where it was at within the within the essential functions for the city administrator in the job description. So, >> go ahead, Brandon. >> Yeah. So, councelor Hall, I just want to clarify. You are thinking, let's say we take councelor Z's approach, which is,
you know, assign all the duties. You're you're just going to say add to that motion something to the effect of not engage in the collective bargaining process, right? something like that with the exception of >> right >> this >> and then also too I would guess maybe uh
would we want to have a motion in there for the hiring and firing process right now of current employees that that would stay at the council level too that would be the only one that I would pull out >> I don't know where it's in there but those would be the only two things that
would come to my mind that I'd pull out of that if you find that in there somewhere Okay. >> Well, I think of as right now, yeah, this the the council is the hire and fire. So, yeah. >> Okay. Do you have a motion?
I'd like to make a motion to rescend the motion made on October 8th, 2025 regarding the duties assigned to financial specialist Maggie Wentler. >> Second.
>> Does that cover it, Brandon? Just for clarification before we vote. >> Yeah, that that covers one part of it. You'd have to take a second part to define what those duties are in the second motion. >> Correct. >> Okay. Any additional discussion from councel? >> No. >> All right. All those in favor signify by
saying I. >> I. >> Okay. Motion carries. I would like to make a motion to assign the interim city administrator duties to financial specialist Maggie Wentler as
presented with the currently adopted city administrator/treasurer positions position with the duties with the exception as follows uh representing the city and labor negotiations as well as hiring and firing
>> of city staff Any additional discussion, >> Brandon, is that good? >> Yes, >> council member Freley. >> Should there be a What is the compensation we're looking at right now?
And Brandon, should that be >> not talking about the comp just job duties right now? Yeah. >> Okay. >> Unless you want to talk about it. >> It's not a part of the motion. >> That's right. So any discussion related to this specific motion? >> No.
>> Okay. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Okay. Motion carries. >> Is there anything else we need to discuss with um the assignment? I think Brandon, we did everything properly now, so we should be good to move forward. >> Correct.
>> Okay. Thank you. Um then the second item we had under here was the deputy clerk hiring process, but I think that was kind of just covered in this motion. Did I miss anything there, Brandon? We at a past council meeting, the
council did motion to approve a job description for a deputy clerk and that position is posted. And so there was some clarity wanted around that hiring process. How does that look? How does that work? >> Yeah. Um, so mayor, uh, just to clarify
that. So let me start at the framework again. I know we rebombarded you with memos we gave in the past. So I first start with policy and then you can have a practical discussion on this is that when it comes to the hiring process, it sounds like you did post it. It simply
says city councilors or its design will manage the hiring process for positions within the city. While the hiring process may be coordinated by staff, the city council is responsible for the final hiring decision and must approve all hires. All hires will be made according to merit and fitness related
to the position being filled. So what does council need to decide now is what's what is normal is you know you would have the city administrator even take in the applications. We decide who's going to score the applications,
who doesn't meet the minimums, filter out uh individuals, then determine who gets interviewed. Then council does interview and make final hiring. So what's the core applications will be coming in. They need to be reviewed
potentially scored and or go right to determine who's going to be interviewed. So you all should decide well who who's going to manage that which could be you know based on the motion the entire council one could get all applications the entire council individually could
try to review them to determine all right this candidate's good bad should be interviewed. Uh, and then however, based on the open meeting law, you'd all have to come back and have a discussion. You know, let's say you got 10 candidates, you'd all have to write your notes. You can't communicate with each
other outside of open meeting and just have a discussion. And we probably want to call them candidate A through H. And then you'd have to have a discussion on candidates A through H of all right, who's going to be interviewed? Then at a subsequent council meeting, once you've all agreed on that, then bring it at the
candidates to be interviewed. Or do you want to assign some staff to do some level of compiling the applications, reviewing them, filtering them, scoring them, or do you want council to do the whole process? >> Do the person does the personnel play a role in this at all? The personnel
liaison. >> Yeah. So, you know, as we've talked about before, that's not well defined the precise role of personnel leaison, but that is fair for the council to have a discussion. Well, we have personal liaison. Let them do some of the I'll
I'll call it the filtering work. Then come to the council with for example, by the way, here are candidates for y'all to consider and let's decide who should be interviewed. So, is it council collectively staff administer and our
personnel leazison do some filtering? I'll go to you council member Freley first if you have any thoughts. about a direction or any questions for Brandon as it relates to this. >> So the filtering would be if we go with the personnel leaison would be with the
mayor and Joe Hall. Correct. >> Yes. But it can also be all council or it could be >> I I think personally if we take all council I think it's going to take way too long with the open meeting laws and everything like that. I would be fine
with uh personnel looking over the applications and bringing if there's 10, you know, them to the council for us to do the interviews at that time. I'm open to that. >> Bruce, what are your thoughts? >> No questions. I think we should, you
know, all look at it and review it. >> Okay. Um, I have a caveat to what you said, but I'll go to Jesse first. Um, if it's a personnel leaison, I think because Maggie's in the interim roal, she should
be a part of that, too. >> Uh, well, echo Brandon's point in regards to the filter. I mean, one, these applications or resumes are going to be coming in to a single source. Yeah. >> Right. So, identifying what is that source. um
personnel liaison then are going to identify the top handful of candidates assumingly then >> I'm saying with Maggie >> and Maggie >> she would be the one that's seeing all of them >> and then we will then schedule interviews. >> Yep. >> Okay. I'm I'm good with that. >> Joe,
>> yeah, I'm good with that. >> Okay. So, would you like to make a motion? >> Okay. So it would be the personnel as mayor Joe Hall and Maggie filtering through and bringing those to
us. That's basically what we want to go with. >> Okay. >> So >> do we have a second? >> Well, that wasn't really a motion, was it? >> Kind of. I'll make a motion that the personnel leaison, Mayor Carneahan
and council member Hall along with Maggie will do the filtering of the applications and bring forth the best applicants to the full council for interviews. >> Only question is will the entire council be able to have access to see all
applicants at their request? >> I think that would be something I' I'd like to put in there. >> Okay. Okay, we'll add that to it. >> Yeah, >> 100%. >> Can Yeah, I'll second that. >> Okay. Any additional discussion? >> Yeah. Would you like to see the top two,
the top three, the top five? Should we put a number to it? >> Three. >> Top three. >> Yeah. Three. >> Okay. >> It's plenty good. Hopefully. >> Any additional discussion? >> Can you make sense of that motion? >> Yep. >> All those in favor signify by saying I. I.
>> Okay. Motion carries. Thank you, Brandon. >> Yes. Thank you, mayor and councel. Good night. >> Thanks. >> Good night. Um, okay. The last item that we added under old business is the employee appreciation event. So, I just
wanted to revisit this with council. Um, an email went out last week from Maggie. So, at the last meeting, council motioned for Joe and I as personnel leaison to go out and look for uh venues and whatnot to do our annual employee
appreciation event, which is very important to build camaraderie, collaboration, a positive work environment, and we we have identified the the two winners of that. Um, so as we've gone out and done that, the thing that popped up to me because I wasn't a part of the council last year when the
budget was approved is I I didn't understand that there were $5,000 of taxpayer dollars allocated to host an employee appreciation party. And for me, that just makes me uncomfortable to use taxpayer money to throw a party. And so
the when I was speaking with Maggie, what I had asked her to send out to all of council is is there some other option? Like I'd be willing to donate money personally to help fund this party because I do think it's important and we should do it to recognize the employees. I just didn't don't feel comfortable using other people's money to do that.
Um but I'm not clear if anyone had responded. So what I would like to share with you all is the three places that we did get um information back from. So, NatureLink, uh, Catalyst at Naturelink, which is the newer resort on Clark Lake,
they are coming in at about $45 a person to 50 depending on tax and gratuitities. And then also a $500 venue rental fee. Um, Grand View is coming in at around $32 a person and I think that is inclusive of the tax and gratuitities
and there wasn't a venue rental fee there. And then the other option Joe had recommended we explore is the Legion, which is the least expensive. They will not charge a venue rental fee and it's their highest tier uh package meal per
person is about $22. So when I took like NatureLink, which was the most expensive with the venue rental fee, I think it was around 1,700 to 2,000 give or take. And I had said in the email I would be willing to cover the venue rental fee. I didn't know if other folks might be interested
in donating or contributing so we didn't have to use taxpayer money to do this event. Um I didn't hear any feedback from anyone. So I just wanted to bring it up tonight and get a perspective. >> I gave feedback to Maggie on it. Um I created this event last year uh in the
same exact spirit that you already alluded to. Um I also funded the entire event last year to be able to get it off the ground so we could have it budgeted for this year. completely cognizant about the taxpayer dollar spend. You know, you look at what Donald Trump's doing, building a nice ballroom right now on the east wing of
the White House, right? Government entities, even munis, we host things for these people so they can celebrate and and kind of build that build that uh um single night event like one night out of 365 days where they can celebrate each
other. Employee of the year, public ser uh um uh employee of the year. Um, I I guess as a taxpayer of Niswah, I don't know if I would have or if I would find too many people that would be too
concerned about spending something to that degree, I think. And really even the 5,000 that was allocated last year when we were discussing it when uh uh the prior city administrator Jenny Max was here that was just to cover any anything egregious because we were I
think right around that 1750 to 2000 last year with it being in the community center. So um >> so your perspective is to use the money budgeted. >> Use the money budgeted but not to exhaust the budget. >> Okay. Um, Joe, do you have a
perspective? >> I guess I don't really have a perspective on it. Yeah, I see both sides of it. We're trying to cut the budget, you know. I'm just excited. I'm on the party planning committee. >> But yeah, I can go either way if we want to money.
>> Council member Freley, >> okay, >> nothing to say. I think you should just keep it real simple and I don't think you should spend any taxpayer dollars to fund a party like this. >> Okay. So, I'm just hearing split things. Um,
it is already approved, like I said, in the budget from last year, which council did approve. As I said, I just for me it just I'm uncomfortable spending other people's money to have a party. I don't disagree that we should do the party and that's why I was saying I'd be happy to
contribute a third to it. Um if other folks might be willing to step up too, but if that's not the case and council wants to use taxpayer dollars since it was already approved in the budget, we can certainly go that way. I just wanted to bring it up for discussion. >> Yeah, I would say let's just let people
donate to it and then whatever the extra is we'd use out of the budget. So, >> okay, >> fine. We I don't think we technically need a motion on that, Maggie, Tom, do we? Because it was already in the in the budget.
Okay. Okay. Good. Well, we had the discussion. Well, thanks. Let's see how far we can get with donations. Um Okay. The last item under old business is review the special event and street use permits. Um there's a number of staff
that were included on this memo. So, Miss Maggie, I don't know if we should if you want to start or because I I see Tom here. Um Todd here. Stephen or Todd was here? Oh, no. Todd's still here. Steven's not here.
>> No, I can speak. I think my memo says a lot of it. >> I just want to find my memo. And oh, I just want to really quick before I go to you. This came up this summer. Um it was around the July time
frame when there were a number of partners in the community that were met with roadblocks. So for example, the Nisa Lions wanted to do their pork on a stick booth in town for crazy days and
they were told they couldn't. So they relocated and Andy was nice enough to have them at Schaers. Um and so there was that conversation, right? Um, there were some other businesses in town, I think Big Axe was one of them that were
facing some consternation with some of our uh, special event permit processes. And so we did call a special meeting in July. And as council, we did motion and give direction to staff to go back and revisit these permits and come back to
council with some recommendations. And so that's what this is, just for everybody in the room. and Maggie. >> Okay. So, as my memo stated, Tom, Todd, Stephen, and I met to discuss these two
permits. One is the special event and one is the street use permit. And just our kind of recommendation was maybe we could combine these to one application. So, no matter what you're doing, you just fill out one because there could be a special event that is actually using
the street. And so, um, just to kind of streamline that process, um, we talked about a fee of $50. We have a lot of staff that has to review this to make sure it all fits within the parameters of ordinances and safety and things like that. And that we figured um, that would
cover all of our staff time itself to do that. And then if the council is looking to approve these, um, our recommendation is that these applications must be completed and submitted uh, 60 days prior to the event, which would allow
time for us to include it in a council packet, have staff review it, give their recommendations if they have any concerns for um, so it would be included in the next month's council meeting. Um before I turn it to council for
questions, I just have a couple notes on my end is I think unless I'm incorrect, the isn't the one of the application fees only $25 or are they all 50 right now? One is $25.
There is a firework permit that is on here that is $50. And then outside of fireworks, the special event, there is no charge. >> Okay. >> However, we still spend staff time on there. So, just to try and make it
consistent and easy across the board to account for some of our time that goes into reviewing these. I personally feel that we want to create an environment in NYSA where we are removing red tape, taking away
bureaucracy and adding time to folks. So I wouldn't be in favor of seeing this go to 60 days. I know that the the thing that happened with the Lions this summer that was 10 business days and I think that's even too long. I think we want to be less restrictive and work in good
faith with all of our partners in the community. Um, just even looking to like Emma does a ton to fund raise for the NISA Fire Department with A&W and we're we're I don't know if we're making her pay a fee and fill out this application, right? But it's to do things to benefit the city. Um, so I don't know that count
from my lens, I don't know that council needs to approve all this. So I don't know that we need to add the 60 days. I think we just need to find a way to make if we're going to keep these permit applications in place to make them easier uh less time constraints and for
my lens. Do we need to charge a fee? I don't know. But I'll turn it over to council for their input, questions, and discussion. And we'll start with you, Council Member Hall. >> Um yeah, I agree. I don't I mean
originally when this came about it was about 15 years ago and and the purpose of this was came about to keep a taco food truck out of town. That's where this originated for the history of the people. Some of the people in the room know about that but that's where
this all started from and where it has evolved but like I say I don't know is approximately 15 years ago and so same thing. I don't know. I mean, I I understand the public safety aspect
of it and everything and with that, you know, I would like to see the city, you know, work on a plan, you know, with new chief and everybody um for a more comprehensive um emergency management plan. any event throughout town. I think
that probably means um some attention within the city, but a 60-day lead time to have um a little event. Uh last week I witnessed a little event with a couple area businesses out in front downtown on
like a Tuesday night or some random night. Looked like a fun little event. I recognized most of the people there. But stuff like that, I'm sure just kind of pops up. And having a 60-day timeline, I just don't think is feasible. Also, too,
with the fees with this too, I look back on some of these that I received actually for my own business. And um I have a email from a prior planning and zoning person that also said it was
for the lifetime of my business in the email. >> Yeah. >> Not a yearly thing. And so I don't know. >> I >> You're lucky, huh? >> Right. So I guess >> I guess >> this has been something that hasn't been
watched closely and has been interpreted loosely. And so I would say I'm not sure all of the issues that we were trying to solve with this. I know where originally a lot of this had originated from on some of it, but I do uh see the public
safety aspect of it. You know, also too, an event like this versus a chamber event is different to like the um Friday the lighting of the lights, stuff like that where it really involves Tom and everyone closing down the roads versus
like I say the fire department selling pancakes at the A&W. So I don't know if maybe we want to rec kind of define this a little bit differently too and kind of the whole intent and look at it
a little bit more. >> But yeah, I guess I would be I'm more in line with Jennifer on just a couple days and no fees to these businesses to do a small little thing on their sidewalk or crazy days or anything like that. I don't I don't see a long timeline, but
yeah, if we're going to close down the streets and we put up a tent and do something like that, I'd say, you know, we need to maybe define this more on where those tripping points are, you know, if that makes sense. >> Yep. Council member Zan, >> I agree with you on those points, Joe. U
mainly though, it's just on the notion of I think we all are probably relatively aligned and trying to make it more feasible for the folks. Um, but are we prepared tonight to be able to bless a document to be able to make it? I would say no. >> Um,
one question I just have is in regards to the certificate of insurance. Um, so if somebody wants to sell pies on the side of the street, they got to get a million dollar umbrella. >> If you look in the consent calendar, right, for all these that we approved
enacted earlier in the meeting, you can see their certificate of insurance. I see it. Yep. Yeah. For all. I mean, Emma, for example, operates business in town. She's going to have a COI for incidentals, but um >> I might go bake 10 pies this weekend and sell them on the street. I got to go get
one in the two million writer. It's I think it's >> I >> It's interesting. >> Council member London, >> Council Member Freley, >> I think we're all in favor here because we have businesses that do something every year. So why are we saying, "Hey,
come 60 days before it." We know there's pork on a stick. We know Emma's got quite a few that come every year. There's different businesses. So I think, yeah, we need to change this. Look at it. Um, but if we have need to close down the streets for Fourth of July or anything like that, it needs to
be 60 days. >> Absolutely. >> So do we want a question? So when when um who pays the the the permit fee when when you guys do pancakes >> when >> Yeah. who pays it when they do the pancakes for the firemen at the A&W?
>> Well, that that would be the question. Yeah, that doesn't >> Well, Emma pays it. I think she fills out the application. >> Yeah, I was just wondering. No, I think that needs >> I I think it's a good discussion to have, you know, but also too I on a
bigger picture maybe just needs addressed and more discussion about kind of defining it a little bit. >> I like the lifetime thing that you uh that that works for me too. >> Yeah, because in the past, like I say, I actually pulled up some past emails in
that and then I have a I have a lifetime permit on a couple of these because of past. >> My biggest question is is when Emma has her back to school day that's not out on the streets. That's in her business, but you know, now we're going to want
permits for all this. Your pancake breakfast, you know, I mean that Yeah, we just need to delve into it a little bit more. I appreciate all the work from the staff though. I like that. >> Um I do appreciate it. I understand the safety concerns. I think that we should put the 60-day for we're closing down
streets if it's a big thing. >> Perhaps it'd be wise for this council to table this for the for the next month, two months, maybe getting back into January to be able to uh work with the staff to be able to share what
any or all collective thoughts are from this group up here and to get some feedback from the general public as well. Maybe we can put this because we'll likely do a another staff or a council strategic session in February, early February like we did last year, so
we still get ahead of the high season. >> We can have more of a discussion with staff, get feedback from, >> you know, our partners in the community and try to have something new in place by perhaps March, right? Because things aren't really going to ratchet up again
until next spring for the most part. >> Brainer JC's the ice fishing. >> Yeah, you're right. >> Just one, but a large one. >> Yeah, I think I think that's fine. And >> or we can find a different date if we
want. We don't want to wait that long. >> We could do a little workshop talk about for an hour ahead of time. >> Is council good with that tableabling this and we'll come back, but we'll make it a priority to not let it too much time pass. Okay, perfect. All right, we are gonna move on to new business. The
first item under new business is a coalition of greater Minnesota cities presentation by Elizabeth. It's up to you if you want to sit and speak there or if you want to stand and speak there. Whatever you're more comfortable with. >> Okay, sounds good. Thank you for being
here. >> That says Bush. >> Yes, thank you. Um and I will I know you have a a lot more on your agenda, so I'll try to keep this short. My name's Elizabeth Welful. I think I met a number of you last time I was here. And with Flarity and Hood, but unlike Brandon, I
don't do labor stuff. I'm a lobbyist and I do environment, energy, and uh land use issues. And is there a clicker? >> Probably not going to go that far. >> Okay. Um but um for those of you who
don't know, and more for the audience, the CGMC is an organization of more than 100 cities throughout the state. We are very focused on the issues that really affect greater Minnesota. I'm working on property tax relief, environment and energy, which is really about wastewater, storm water, drinking water, economic development, annexation and
land use, um, and labor and employment work. Um, and we go and visit our cities every summer to recap the legislative session. And I'll talk a little bit about just sort of the the three big issues that probably impacted you most. Um, just as a reminder, it was an even
more unusual session than normal. Um, we, you know, didn't have a fully functioning, uh, actually, I'll call it mostly functioning legislature until March, um, due to unfortunate, um, you know, whether it be deaths, uh, legislators who didn't live in their own districts and other special elections.
So, we didn't get going till March. We're also facing a situation where the um the state is not we're not in a deficit this legis this bianium but if you look forward two years at least the projections um given you know revenues and expenses are that we anticipate a
budget deficit and that really impacted everything. So between having this sort of unusual negotiating position where it was a four-way negotiation instead of a three-way negotiation and that looming deficit it made things um challenging. So, next slide. Um, sort of our biggest
two, you know, the biggest task that the the legislature faced was trying to get a two-year budget done, which they had to do, and passing a bonding bill. Um, and our agenda, just a number of different things. Um, working on the bonding bill, passing LGA, um, dealing with the housing mandates and, um, EMS
funding. And this is just again an overview of what the state budget looks like. This is something um right now again not in a budget deficit but because of um just sort of sort of problems sort of baked into the system if things don't change
we will be facing a budget in the future. So what that meant will be facing excuse me a deficit in the future. Um what that meant is that really um folks were not willing to spend new money and there was a lot of efforts to try and the cut programs now so that projected deficit would not be that large when the legislature comes
back in 2027. Um, and that really did set the um the uh the tone for the budget discussion. So, I'll just move through these slides a couple a little more quickly. Um, the targets um the House and Senate both
looked at um some reductions and it again it affected everything that was going on at the legislature um and some of the things that folks really tried to push on this year. We did not see a lot of new spending. Um and then bonding. Um so bonding um again
for those in the audience who may not be familiar with it, this is when the state um sort of leverages its power to try and uh you know take money out to do capital investment programs. And normally we see these every year uh excuse me every other year in an odd year. It did not happen in 2024. But
what that means for a lot of our cities is that those are who are have to redo their drinking water facilities, their wastewater facilities, roads, bridges, those bigger projects that they can't afford on their own are hard to do without a bonding bill. And so that was why there was a really big push this year. A lot of our cities really face
particularly like on the drinking water um road bridges pieces, you know, the need for some assistance from the state because it's just not something you can do on your own. So we spent a lot of time focused on that. The governor's proposal um was also uh focused more on
programs rather than individual projects this year as well. So um this is us um this was a top priority for us. Um again almost you know if if you're not facing a you know an upgrade to your wastewater drinking water facility this you're probably going to be facing one in the future. Spent a lot
of time you know everything from le you know meeting individually with the legislators and and uh the governor and press conferences. We even did radio ads to try and get a bonding bill done. Lots of engagement. It did get done at the very end and um uh was very happy at
least for us to see several things that benefit our cities. I think it's on the next slide. Um and that included money for the public facilities authority again for that drinking water and wastewater and a new emerging contaminants program because we're seeing a lot of cities facing things
like PAS and manganesees in their water that they need to take care of. um as well as money for local bro roads, bridges, and economic development. So, it was a pretty small bill, not a lot of local projects, but it was really focused on things that do help our local governments.
Housing and zoning. Um, this is an issue. I talked about it last year, I'm talking about it this year, I'll be talking about it next year. It is something I encourage if you care about it, please do talk to your legislators. But basically, there's been several packages, different flavors every year, but bills where the legislature saying
to cities like you, hey, we think you should zone in this way, not that way. We think you need to be putting more houses here and not putting any parking requirements. I mean, I'm oversimplifying it, but basically these bills are um and it's an effort to try and increase housing, but it's being
done at a state level rather than at a local government level. Um there's, you know, bans on if you have aesthetic design requirements in your cities, you wouldn't have been allowed to do it anymore. Um, a lot of different things. And, you know, there's I will say that this is an area I actually spent in
inordinate amount of time personally working on. And it is one of those things where I'm seeing a lot of our cities are making these changes, but they are making those choices themselves rather than having it dictated from St. Paul. Um, and as you'll see on the next slide, we were able to um stop at a lot
of committee hearings. I would have to say we had really engaged city members from across the state who really helped us do this work. Um we did try and do compromise because we know that you know sometimes you know everybody needs to give a little bit. We came up with a compromise package. We were told you
know too little too late. Um so nothing happened. Um this issue will continue to be up at the legislature. We are trying to work with legislators so that it is something that you know we can you know get to a place where our cities can
accept but it's an issue I would say if your city cares about this let your legislators know and if you want to get more engaged let me know um because we will be continuing to work on this next this coming legislative session. Um just a number other things local sales tax moratorum ended. If that's something
your city's been interested in um you can start bringing those forward. We were able to minimize cuts to the corridors of commerce. Modified language on the greenhouse gas impacts um in the roads. That's a whole transportation issue that we are continuing to be concerned about. Helped create a funding
program for um EMS services in greater Minnesota. Um I've been getting more engaged on the um some of the natural gas line extension um issues. Uh I'd say if you're interested in that u we we have done some deep dives in our our weekly inbrief newsletter. And then
another thing that um I will be continuing to work on is advocacy around um the wild rice sulfate issue which is impacting industry and municipalities. So um looking ahead legislature starts um you know it's it's going to be a different season. I don't need to
recount the tragic events of earlier this summer but it means we have different leadership. Um, we do have a special election. I keep forgetting about that, but there's two Senate seats up in November. I'll be honest, I don't think either of them are going to flip, but if it does, it does. It could change the balance of power. Um, obviously
decisions at the federal level could affect the state budget. Um, I don't think we'll have to reopen things in the spring, but it's possible. But session starts February 17th. Um, and away we go then. Um, I do want to just highlight if if you are interested in getting engaged
on any more of these issues, our fall conference is coming up in a couple weeks in Grand Rapids. Biggest event of the year is usually our legislative action day. And next summer, we're going to Newm, which I know this was lovely. I know you would never want to leave this during the summer, but if you did, Newm is a great place to be. Um, again, want
to thank you for your membership in the CGMC. We are always looking to have more people get engaged, especially our elected officials. There's a staff list in those packets. Please contact any of us there's an issue you want to talk about or get more engaged on. So, thank you. >> Thank you, Elizabeth. Any council have
any questions for Elizabeth? >> Well, thank you for driving up and being a part of this and presenting. We appreciate it. >> Yep. >> Okay. Next under new business is um related to the fire relief benefit increase. Um Sean was not available
tonight. Andy, would you like to come and speak to that? Um, in your packets, I had a letter and little spreadsheet showing that uh we're looking for an increase to
6,900 per year served and that still puts us over the 110% vested as we had discussed in previous years. Do we have any questions for Andy? >> Okay. Do we have a motion to increase the fire relief benefit as presented?
>> I'll make a motion. Do it. >> Okay. To to increase the fire relief benefit as presented. Okay. So, Bruce is making a motion. Do we have a second? >> I'll second. >> All right. Any additional discussion? All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. I.
>> I. Uh. Council member Freley. Loft away. >> Motion carries. >> Majority. >> Okay. Next is approving the hire of firefighter Matthew Krueger. >> Yes. >> Are you going to speak to that or Joe or? >> Doesn't matter.
>> Doesn't matter. >> Go ahead. Or do you have the stuff? >> No. Oh yeah. >> So we interviewed um well all three of these applicants. The review process was uh four members plus the interview and
uh all three of them were approved or I guess what's the right word? Um recommended. There you go. Recommended for hire. So >> okay perfect. Any questions for Andy or Joe? >> Nothing.
>> Okay. Do we have a motion to approve the hire of firefighter Matthew Krueger? >> Make a motion to approve to hire firefighter Matthew Krueger. >> Do we have a second? >> Second. >> All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I.
>> I. Oppose. None. Okay. Motion carries. Um, next. >> Congratulations. >> Congrats. Um, next is to approve the hire of firefighter Taylor Morris. I make a motion to approve to hire
firefighter Taylor Morris. >> Second. >> Any additional discussion? >> I'll just say uh Taylor and Tyler, both of those are uh both sons of firemen on the department. So, that's kind of neat. And that's through our explorer program
for those of you that don't know about that. >> Oh, so there's a lot of biased preferential treatment I hear. Huh. >> Neither parent interview process. Ah, >> great. >> You guys got a special uniform for the Chiefskit, right? >> Yes. Yep. >> Good. >> Very flashy. So, we can find them.
>> No, but it's kind of a neat program. And >> yes, they were both explorers prior. So, they've been part of the department to the extent they can as an explorer. >> Was this So, would these be the first hires in that program >> or through that program? >> No. Cody Carlson for sure. And I don't
know if there was any >> Richard I know um Nate and stuff was years past I think wasn't he? >> He was an explorer but I don't think he was hired on. >> Okay. >> It's kind of a neat program this has. >> Nice work. >> Okay. So we have a motion in a second.
Anything else? Otherwise I'll call the question. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> I. Okay. Motion carries. And lastly to approve the hire of firefighter Tyler Bailey. Make a motion to approve to hire firefighter Tyler Bailey.
>> Second. >> Any discussion? All those in favor signify by saying I. I. >> I. Okay. Motion carries. >> We should have added some additional verbiage to that one for Mr. Tyler Bailey that he had to wear a special uniform for >> those calls.
You guys will take care of it. We can just do it. >> It's always funner when it comes from the top down. >> Yeah. >> Congratulations all. >> Good work. We appreciate it. Okay, next under new business is the Gull Lake Trail fencing. Amber,
awesome. Thank you. Um, so we are nearing the home stretch of the Gullic Trail here as Dave mentioned earlier. Um, tonight with the fencing, we do want to receive some direction from council on how to proceed. Um, in your packet,
it kind of outlines two options as well as some photographs. Kind of hard to discern, but um, we have the option of grading out um, the land adjacent to it or continuing on with the fencing. The whole reason this has come forth um
there's a shortage in material and um through discussions with the contractor the the cost of the material has significantly increased. So we looked through some different options. I'll let Dave or Bill explain some more. Um but
ultimately we are looking for council direction as um how they'd like to proceed. There is the potential that the additional fencing would be outside our spending authority and that is why it is coming to you. >> Dave, do you have
>> Sure. So, this is um a question about do you want the fence or not want the fence? It it can be either way uh and meet trail standards. If you don't put the fence, it's about 140 lineal feet of fence that's in the plans. Um
um if you don't want the fence, we can still meet trail standards with the grading. It's essentially graded to meet that standard right now. So um you'd save about $5,700 on fence if you decide not to go with
it. Um if you would like it put in, it would have to go in probably next spring when we can get the materials. >> So correct me if I'm wrong. So, for those that don't know, um Joe and I actually met out at this specific
section of the trail with Amber. Um Bill also came and Lonnie from Grand View was there and we w we were there for probably over an hour walking up and down. Um, I haven't been as plugged into this, but it was my understanding from that kind of site visit walkthrough we
did that day is that it was in the plans to extend that fence beyond where it currently stopped. And that was the expectation I thought as a part of the plan. So when we were walking that whole length um, Bill, you were there, right? Correct me if I'm wrong because that was
my understanding. Joe. >> Yeah, correct. So I guess from my point of view is in the drawing is in the plan you know as a fixed price contract to have this done. Correct. >> Correct. >> So I don't know why we're discussing it
right here right now. Price of materials went up. That's on the contractor. That's not for us to discuss. >> I concur. And I guess my question would be is as a contractor >> if you're buying some of the material why not buy all of it, right? especially
for that specific fence. The question I would have for Lander. >> Okay. So, the directions to put the fence in. Okay. We'll >> handle it with uh land. >> Tom, do we need a formal motion on that?
>> No. >> Okay. >> I assume, but >> Okay. And and Mark, you weren't here, but we were just talking about the fence because it was agreed in the plan to Okay. So >> fixed price contract to come back now and just say, "Hey, the materials went
up. We want more money." That's >> But sorry, that's not our issue. >> I I'd get ran off a job. >> Do you have any disagreement with that with us? Okay. Because you had just walked in. Bruce, do you have any Okay, I think we're all on the same page then. >> Okay, thank you. Okay, good. Thanks,
Amber. >> Um, and then pay application number five for the Gull Lake Trail. So, the pay application before you, sorry, jump in. >> Okay. >> Pay application before you tonight is in
the amount of 20,2869 for progress made on on the trail. That's what we're recommending for payment. This is a partial payment. So my only question with this pay application after looking at the ex at
the existing partial fence that is installed, my re my recommendation would be to hold back at least all that price just because the the current fence and the quality
and condition of the installation of the fence that's already been put in isn't up to par as seen on site. So I I don't know. I I don't have all those numbers. I don't >> Can I speak to that? >> Yeah. Can you? >> So we we're holding retainage on the
contractor for those types of items. And we just went through a punch list with them. That's pretty comprehensive. And before we'd recommend payment and release of that retainage, they'd have to complete all those items. And that includes, you know, rectifying any of
the fence issues. So we have enough retaining shel to cover that fence. Okay, that'd be my only question with it. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> If we have the retaining held back to cover then >> it's fine. >> I think it's fine. So do we have a motion to approve pay application number
five for the G Lake Trail? >> Make a motion to approve pay application number five for the G Lake Trail in the amount of >> Boy, I lost it. 20,2169 >> 20 >> $20,2869
>> second. >> All right. Any discussion? >> Okay. All those in favor for approving the pay application signify by saying I. >> I. >> Motion carries. Um item number eight under new business is change order
number six for the Gull Lake Trail. >> Okay. This one is a time extension change order. There's no dollar amount being changed. It's just the time for substantial completion from October 15
to November 15th uh to get to substantial completion. And this is the reason for this is that they were uh not able they would have not been able to get to substantial completion at October 15th. They just had um some issues there
that had to be go beyond that time. So that's what we're recommending. Let it go to November 15th and they're not subject to liquidated damages from that standpoint. >> So you do put LDS in in these contracts. WSM is putting liquidated damages in
these. >> Yes. >> What does it typically amount to? 5 10%. >> Uh it's it's uh usually on a per day basis. >> Not to exceed a 5 to 10%. It's uh a little bit different than
that, but um you know, if you like I can go through that word. >> No, that's fine. Detail. >> I guess my only question would be is were any of these delays due to the city of Niswah? And if not, then why would we
offer them a a extension to the completion date? I don't think there were any issues caused by the city in this one on this. So, it's it's u progress. Sometimes uh
time extensions are given for a number of different reasons. Could be the weather, could be, you know, just progress made. Um sometimes, uh you know, there's varying reasons for it. >> Yeah, absolutely. And in my world, we
run into that too. However, I don't have a city council to be able to go to to try to get a extension and I'm held to that contract. And I think it's fair to the taxpayers of the city when we pay our tax dollars for a specific asset like that piece of the
trail. We should get it when we're expecting it to be completed. Um, without trying to make an example out of this specific one, I just believe it's bottom line principle. Um, >> do you know what the reason? I know you
mentioned there could be different reasons for a delay, but do you know specifically? >> Yeah, there were some um issues out there with uh getting um some curb replaced that was too flat. They did that. That's essentially what you
approve payment for. Um and then uh there was some u base issue density issues that had to be resolved and then uh the paving scheduled and some concrete flat work to be installed out there. Um the concrete uh work needs to
happen sometimes delayed due to the weather and so you know that's how that goes especially this time of the year. So >> a little bit of flexibility with that, you know, is helpful when we run into up
against that this time of the year. And so substantial completion is essentially for this project defined as being usable. Okay? It's not going to be usable uh without the fence issues being
addressed. And that's going to take until November 15th. Are there any other issues related to this um substantial completion date pushing back for um adjacent property owners
um to do what they want to do, you know? >> No. Um none have been raised. All of the accesses are free and clear for people. Um, you know, signage is going to be going
back in shortly. Um, mailboxes, that sort of thing. So >> the only thing I would say is from that day that we were out there with Amber and Bill and Lonnie and everyone right this it was a learning for me in a lot of ways too because contracting is not
my world. So, I think Amber even said I probably learned a lot that day is that there seemed to be so many road bumps or challenges with this Yeah. nuances with this specific project that >> you know and this is probably just a
part of it that compounds on top of it, right? Um but with this specific contractor. So, does anyone in council have a motion they would like to make related to this
change order to extend the time? >> I have no motion I'd make on this and in fact, I'd rather see us uh have good understanding to be able to if there was significant right if there was significant weather that's not in the
category of force measure on this project. I mean, anybody that drives past that that portion of 77 knows that that project's at idally vacant for 30, 45, 60 days. Um,
and typically when a contract extension is being requested by a change order or even just a negotiations, it's typically not coming at the 11th hour, right? So I
for one am not in in favor of this and would be willing to at least in my position on this council discuss rectifying it after the fact to be able to understand that if there was significant exposure to that project that caused it to go beyond its uh acceptance date to
turn over to the city for usable use. I mean it's not like this fence situation just came up last minute either. Um, I I would not see this being a viable path forward for me to be able to make a motion. No. >> How does the rest of council feel?
>> Council member Freley, >> I agree with council member. >> Council member London, council member Hall, >> same thing. >> Yeah. Okay. I don't think we have a motion, Dave. >> Okay. All right. We'll see how we deal with that with lander then.
Okay. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Um Okay. Next up, we're still on parks, but the local option sales tax next steps, Amber. >> Yes. Thank you. Um so for people in the audience here and listening at home, um
local option sales tax, um the moratorum expired at the end of May. Uh so cities can now um submit requests to the legislation during the 2026 session. Um so since the initiation of the parks and recck master plan this has been a
funding mechanism that we've been discussing and so now that the moratorum is up we are bringing it to light again to determine um if this is a path we want to go forward with. So no decisions have been made um we had discussions um at the September 18th workshop. Um we
did bring it to the town hall on September 30th and I am here today to provide um an update for everyone. Um so in my packet uh you have a little bit of a tenative timeline here here in October. We've been working diligently to try and obtain some information from
PFM. Maggie Vale >> received that. Okay. Um so that should be um I got that email the other day. So you guys have that in front of you. Um PFM is our financial manager. uh they went through some bonding scenarios, what that might look like, how that
would layer into everything else that we have going on. So that is a critical piece of information as we um navigate this process and the feasibility of it. Um, so with that, now that we have that information, um, looking for feedback
from council tonight, questions from council that we can go get answers on, um, with the hope of drafting a resolution for council to review, um, coming up hopefully November, December
would be the absolute latest. Um and so you have a tentative timeline there. For everyone listening, the process um to go forward with requesting this is the city would have to adopt a resolution. We would present um a bill to legislation
in January. If they would accept it, the city has to adopt a second resolution afterwards and then it can go to a vote of the residents. So it's kind of a four-step process. Um in my packet there's a really good article from the League of Minnesota cities that outlines
that process what it can be used for. Um so biggest thing is regionally significant uh capital projects. So we are looking at Nisa City Park with that one. So for council tonight um you have that
email from PFM with some different bonding scenarios, what the capacities are, what the um payments would be. um the total debt service and then I did hear back from the University of Minnesota. They're the um they did the
initial analysis using mobile data. Uh that was 2022 data that they used. Um and at that time it showed that revenue generated would be about $655,000 annually >> and that was about 80% from
>> non-resident 65% from non-residents. Um and so we used that known data, gave that to PFM for their analysis. Um in contacting the U of M if we wanted to update that report
um they said they could do it by the year end and it was most likely going to be 2023 data. So not a significant um update in terms of a year. Um but they we do have the option that they could
get slightly newer information if we wanted to pursue that. Um and then just a reminder for what we need in that resolution, we have to identify um the the project cost
um what that half percent sales tax would generate. So what we know is about 655,000 and then over x amount of years. And so in the scenarios, it was about a 15-year bond. Um, and so looking for questions
from council, feedback from council, what other information do we need? Just general thoughts and sentiment. And then the other thing is um that we have not discussed is if we do decide to go forth with this um if we need to seek
professional services. So anything for lobbying material um development of the legis development of legislation or coordinating any meetings or hearings or things like that. Um so I bring this up now in case
that is something that we need to think about or get quotes on if we determine that we want to move forward. >> I So my position hasn't changed and you know what it is. Um, I am against a local option sales tax for a number of
reasons. I think adding an additional tax burden to our families and the people in our community is the last place we should go. I am in full support of the parks. I see the value of the parks and I do understand the needs that we do need to invest in those parks, but I think there are just other areas that
we other avenues we can consider first, which we have talked about, right? Um, looking at fundraising opportunities. We've got money in our coffers. um through different funds and whatnot. It is it not something that the city can put our foot forward with money we've already collected from the taxpayers and
do that first before going to a local option sales tax. That being said, I know I'm one vote out of five and if three council members choose to move the process forward, it will move forward. I think everybody knows where I stand on that. Um, the other thing I will say and I I have shared this with Amber is that
it is it is a lengthy process to go through and we do have to find legislators to carry forward um the legislation and you would do that with your local legislators. Well, our legislators in this area are the Heinesman's. Um, we both know that they
are very conservative and I just don't see them being on board wanting to carry forward uh adding a tax sales tax increase in the area. I could be wrong, but just from my experience and understanding that 2026 is an election year and everyone's back on the ballot,
I could see us maybe hitting a road bump there as well. Um, I am not in favor of hiring or pursuing or getting quotes for a lobbying group because that is then hiring those people to try to advocate and push it through
if it does make the ballot and potentially influence impact voters instead of letting them just digest the information, make up their own minds if they want to impose a half a percent sales tax increase on themselves. And I think one of the things that I have
learned in doing research is that in 2023, the city of Mountains View, um, their voters learned just before their election that a University of Minnesota extension study underestimated the true cost of the proposed local option sales tax increase because it failed to
include things like online purchases, utility bills, um, and other taxable services. So, while the study that the that I've heard you guys site before from the U of M from 2022 here, you've mentioned its mobile data, how statistically significant is that data?
Do they know that those mobile pings are truly from tourists or were they from full-time residents? What were the purchases made on? Right? And so, I always get a little hesitant to make a big decision like this without knowing if the data is truly correct. And I also
think it would be really important for us to hear from the business community as a whole in Nisa and what their feedback as to the local option sales tax. And I know there's a session set up for November 5th and I feel like that would be really important and critical input for every member of this council
to hear before forward action was taken in that regard. Um again, I'm just one person. Those are my thoughts. Um I'll turn it over to start with Council Member Hall for your thoughts next. Um yeah, I guess my thoughts are on, you know, now people out in the community
know this. Um I've been reached out to several times with this, you know, question like what's going on? What are we doing? And I think the um the staff or whoever, you know, Amber, if that's going to be, you know, if
you're going to be the vote voice of it, you know, to I would suggest um you know, having some more information classes or, you know, some community involvement stuff set up in the near
future for people to come Q&A sort of thing. just the feedback that I've got from the community on it because um >> yeah this is the first >> what's it >> this is the first public like YouTube meeting that we've had on it so I% agree
>> today alone three different people from the community talked to me or showed me or contact you know with news travels fast so um to get a Q&A out there I think would be important for the community um just because there's a lot
of misconceptions around this. Um, and so that would be my feedback at this time. I mean, um, you know, putting something like this out there, we got to be ready to answer all the questions. >> Council member,
>> uh, Mayor Carney, what are the other funding options that you're referring to that that we could go outside of straight up fundraising? So we had talked about I think at our workshop or strategic planning session that we do have some money set aside in
different funds right and if if we were looking at I think it's a bit too unrealistic and ambitious to say hey we're going to redo this whole $10 million grand parks master plan all at once but look at it in phases you know hey phase one is the
playground and whatever else is included phase two is I'm just making this up, right? Like the warming hut and the the ice phase 3 is whatnot, right? If you piece it like that and you're able to use some of those funds that we've already raised or set aside or maybe use some transfers from our two revenue
generating sources at the city, which is not forcibly taking money from people, but um by choice with uh the spirits and the pickle, is that something we could use to get things started outside of the fundraising avenue? Yeah, which is why I
proposed moving 500,000 from the liquor fund uh sitting on a balance of 1.189 million. So, um why not leverage our local and non-local uh adults uh that have a certain habit that that provide a
good revenue source for the city. But I would also ask, you know, not to just this council, but perhaps the public, too. Um, 2150ish residents in this town. Um, we have park
infrastructure that's aged obviously. And for clarity from a a resident that misheard you from a from the town hall meeting, we do not have $7 million sitting in cash to be able to construct a new park. Your comment was Amber and
you can clarify me if I'm wrong. It's roughly 7 million in sitting asset that's been invested over that. Is that >> correct? >> Thank you. Um if we have 2,150 residents and say 100 200 some children or young individuals
or adults that are actively locals actively using that park. Um there is got to be a number that is 5 10 20x that that is coming from out of town that are tourists here for a weekend or
longer that are enjoying our our city amenities taxpayer paid amenities. a local option sales tax is essentially a heck of a way in my opinion, Amber, and I agree with you on this, to be able to lever
the serious amount of traffic that this town and this part of uh Croman County gets during our peak season to be able to allocate to one of our most important assets in the city, which is that park, which is at its brink. I think that, you
know, when we discussed leveraging some of the existing cash uh surplus that the city has, which is in various pots, um is to be able to do some band-aid on band-aid projects to be able to get I
believe you suggested perhaps some swing sets for example um to get them moving forward. But why not let this go to the vote to the taxpayers of the city of Niswah? Why not nar create the narrative to them of your this is your infrastructure you're paying for anyway?
How often are you using it versus people that aren't even from here and pay a dollar or a red scent to this town or this community? I don't feel as if this is going to drive business away. We have a neighboring town or two uh just south of here that has the same amount as a
sales tax. I still go to Fleet Farm and I don't even notice that.5% down there. Why? because I need to go to Fleet Farm and I would still be going to say that somebody's still going to want that Main Street beer and cheeseburger or the pickle uh Mc Golden Beer or to go to
Graan View for that matter. Um I would hate to see this opportunity go to the wayside and love to see us be united and trying to give this opportunity to all of us that are really the ones funding
uh a lot us taxpayers funding a lot of the use of the infrastructure from people. We don't really know. >> Thanks, Council Member London. >> Yes, I'm against uh putting out a sales tax to fund the improvement in the park. It's a lot of money. I don't think it's
necessary at this point. I think, you know, replace what needs to be replaced and uh go from there. >> Thank you, Council Member Freley. We don't have $7 million sitting in CIP to use. If we start, we can take, as
council member Zan said, we can take some money from the liquor fund to go towards it. If we start using a lot of the monies that set aside for CIP, where are we going to be in three years down the road? how are we going to establish the uh vehicles that'll be needed for
the police department, public works, and so forth. And I I I can agree with members on that we can take out that 500,000, put it forth, work with the a a the uh parks um
grant. And if we do that, I think basically what we'll see is the the replacement of the playground. Um the rest of the money we would not be able to raise of uh fundraising efforts so far have only
gathered approximately what $39,000. Um and that's been going on for a couple of years. So, if I just take a quick count right now, we have three members that are against a lost and that's fine. I just say
we won't have a park in a few years, but and no and I and I I know I'll get that from the mayor, but it's true. The other thing too is some dur when we had that town hall meeting there was a gentleman that stood up and said it has been proven when a sa a loss comes in local
opinion sales tax comes in the people lose revenue. That is not true. It has not it's not factually true. Um he said he people drive to another state. Okay. So now I'm living in this one. I want to get milk from Schaers but because I'm so
upset over the lost I'm going to drive to where? North Dakota. Iowa. I mean, his argument was pretty unintelligible. I'll put it that way. When I go to the park with my grandson in the summer when he comes to visit,
the majority of the people that are there are tourists. Yes, there are some local families. Our best option is lost. But I think we're we're lost on the lost. So, we'll see what happens in a couple of years. That's all I have to say.
There's just no other alternative that's been provided here since HKGM. Is that the group? >> HKGI. >> Thank you. They came here and created that proposal. And granted, they can be scaled down, of course, but to to what extent and where do we start cutting? It
was done by that design was created by the feedback that you garnered from those events hosted at the community center. Right. >> Correct. So, if we have to have community active community fundraisers because the city, thus this council is not able to
spearhead it, that's off. Uh we've raised, I believe it was 38 or 39,000 to date. Um that will grow over time, but in comparison to what is needed or what is a projected even a five-year parks plan to be able to try to allocate
dollars to it, that seems unlikely like we're going to be able to continue get a push there. um to be able to move to make intra city uh account transfers is is an option. But again, $500,000 to a $7 million to
$10 million proposed project budget, we're talking 5%. So, I would make sure that we're all knowing that if this is the route that this council is going to steer that we need to have all other options on the
table. I don't think anybody is exactly for taxing more people, right? It's just trying to find a solution to be able to give her the ammunition to be able to keep spear spearheading her beloved department of this town, which is probably one of the more visible next to
Tom's public works. Right. A park is a staple in a community, especially this one. >> Yeah, I don't think anyone's disputing that the importance of the park and it being a staple in the community. I think we are maybe just looking at things differently and how to get there. And I
still go back to we can say, sure, we have this fund and there's only 39,000 raised, but there hasn't been a true fundraising initiative effort put towards it. In a past position that I held, um, I was charged with raising money to to help our organization
complete some things. I raised 5.9 million in one year or two years, sorry. And I'd never fundraised in my life before. I put together a business plan. Um, I went out and started cold calling and reaching out to people that I thought could be warm leads, soft leads, whatnot. Presented the plan and and the
money started coming in. Right. So, I think that's what's missing and that's why I keep going back to when Mark and Amber and I went over to Cross Lake for that best practice sharing with their mayor, their parks director. Um, the gentleman that founded the 501c3 over in
Cross Lake, I think it's called the Friends of Parks and Library. They have put together a board over there, put together a strategy, a a business plan, a case, went out and presented, started raising money, and that library and that
park has been built solely on contributions. And I think that there is that opportunity here because I think we do have individuals that live directly in this community and some that maybe aren't directly in Nisa but adjacent that again if we had this right strategic approach and did it the right
way. Not someone said at the town hall like oh you're not going to get anywhere with the bake sale. No, I'm not talking about a bake sale for fundraising, right? I'm talking about um how these nonprofits raise a lot of money to build good things that we really haven't taken that step. And I understand we're
limited in terms of what staff and council can do. Um, we can't go out and directly fundraise, but it doesn't mean we can't help bring ideas or help identify people that have those capabilities. And I just think that that's something we can consider. I don't think any of us sitting up here want to say, "Oh, the parks are going to
be completely defunct and non-usable in 2 years. They're going to go away." Nobody wants that. But I think there's just other ways to consider doing it. And I also, and I've said this before, so I probably sound like a broken record. You can't take a a plan and say, "Hey, here's seven million or 10
million. We need to go raise it now and do it." We have to look at things in phases, right? To make it more palatable. And this is this is something that that gentleman over in Cross Lake said, and it's stayed with me is he said you start with like one phase, right? So whatever it is, phase one, phase two,
phase three, phase four, you start with one. You you show the community a win. So, if that is us putting forward some funds to get a to get a new playground equipment and get that going in the next year or two, now we're showing a nice small win. And if we can are able to at
the same time parallel path and find some folks to get together a nonprofit or work more collaboratively with the city to do that and the dollars start coming in and there's momentum building. To me, those are avenues we should consider before we go straight to this
local option sales tax. And I do understand it has to go through a lot of hurdles and ultimately the residents in Nisa, the people that can vote here would vote if they wanted a local option sales tax or not. Um so Amber, I do appreciate all your hard work and I'm sure it is a difficult position to be
in. Um can I recap of in the interest of time here? >> Yeah, go ahead. >> I love that we're talking about this so I don't want to give it up. Um but it's getting late. So to recap, in August, the parks commission recommended
presenting to city council to initiate the process to adopt the sales tax. At the September 18th workshop, we did a simple poll of council members. At that time, we had a majority that directed me to continue looking up looking into this
information. What I'm hearing tonight is that we no longer have a majority. is can we confirm that or how would you like me to go forward with local option sales tax with meetings or would you like me to pivot here today or bring you
more information? >> Can I just add a couple of things real quick? We've put out two times to that uh maybe someone could uh yes I've been involved in fundraising also. We've put out twice in two different meetings if locals would come forth and
uh form a 501c. We haven't had any bites yet. Also, let's look at Cross Lake when we were over there. Those were peanuts. In 15 years, they haven't even raised a million dollars.
So if that were how we do here when they have a lot more influence and I would say money over in Cross Lake in a 100 years we might have the parks funded. Also too I'm doom and gloom. We have a
ice rink that is not working not there. We may not even be able to use it this year. So that's basically gone. Am I incorrect on that one? We are limping it along currently. >> Yeah, it's being limped along. Two, yes, we've already talked a couple years ago
about the phasing of the parks. So, that has been on the table. I know you haven't been here, but that has been on the table. Um, yes, the hope is is that if we get the playground uh redone um that maybe people will have interest
and we'd go. I don't think that will happen. Um, so yes, I am Mr. Doom and Gloom. And my fear is, I'm not saying it it's definite, but my fear is is if we don't do something or have something set that we'll have a playground and that's
about it. Um, and just from what I've heard tonight, I think you're correct. We don't have a majority to continue with this. My my opinion on the piece is why shelter this from the taxpayers and the
electorate of the city of Niswah. Why not why not let them I mean what what an opportunity to be able to bring something we discuss up here directly to them for them to vote on. It alleviates it from from our shoulders at entirely
at that point outside of getting getting it brought to that point to be able to have it be on the ballot. Why not? What a great opportunity. Fred >> taking any outside information or thoughts
one question that I have is University of Minnesota when they did when they gave you that well let me ask in my memory who came up with 6535 numbers is that >> uh the question is talking about uh the
U of M analysis that they did um so that's the extension they did it last year um presented it last November, but it was at U of M that used mobile data to determine um some of >> Yes, correct.
>> So my my question in my head as I'm listening and thinking is did they take into account the uniqueness of this one? And I say that because let's look at what do we pay sales tax on? They don't bread, milk,
food, they don't pay on clothing. I think it's could very well be higher at 65%. I mean, what what things do citizen buy in that are actually passed?
>> That's like that's digging in deeper and we can talk about that, but I'm I'm Yeah, but a lot of things are tax fred, right? Your trash removal is taxed. If you have Netflix, it's taxed. If you order anything on Amazon, it's taxed. Right there. You you go to the holiday gas station, you want to buy a couple whatever you buy up there. Let's say
you're a smoker, you buy cigarettes, it's taxed. Um you want to you you're a charity and you want to hold an event at Grand View, your sales taxes are going to go up there, too, right? Like there's a lot of things that are taxed. The simplest way to explain it is if it's already receiving a sales tax, this
would be added on to it. So if it's not as they're listing off like the essentials, >> what Fred is trying to say is is is when I go to Schaers, almost everything I buy is not. When I come here, I if you go to restaurants,
if you stay in a resort motel, you're paying the tax, you're going gas. Yes. And there is the online tax. Um, >> Fred, you're advocating that essentially it's higher due to based on what's actually being taxed. >> Potentially, it is higher income from
tourists or non-residentes. >> I'll say both the U of M and PFM are going to be conservative. >> Here's what I'll say because I I want to be we have a ton of stuff still on the agenda and we have people here also on the agenda.
So, there was no motion or vote taken tonight, Mark. So you can say you think the majority is not for it and that may be true and it may not. However, >> if I understand correctly >> in November. So I say you want to keep moving forward, move forward because when it comes time for this council to
vote on a resolution, it's either going to pass or not. >> Okay? >> And you never know things could change in 30 days. They could not change, right? So I think in the interest of time um and all that, you have put a lot of work into it. Keep putting work into it and let's see where council lands in November when you present. Right?
because we'll have had a listening session with the Nysa Chamber of Commerce business owners at that point in time. I think we'll have more information out in the public. So, I'm sure all of us as uh council and electeds will hear from different folks in the community, right? Um so, unless
council disagrees, I say let's let Amber keep working. Let's see what she comes back with in November. Um because we still have a lot of other things on the agenda. >> Good. >> That's good. Okay, we'll do um just one thing for the public.
>> There's information FAQs on the website. There's the process. There's what is taxable, not taxable, as well as my contact information. So, as these dialogues continue, please do your own research. Please contact me and let I want to know what questions people have
so I can get answers to them. Thank you. >> Thanks, Amber. Okay, next up, item 10 is pay application number six for city hall remodel. Tom Good evening everybody. Um, this is the final pay application for the remodel of
city hall and it was for work completed through September 3rd. Um, and this would also release the retainage on the building. Um, everything is complete. uh with Seth and myself are review have reviewed the
application. Um we believe everything is substantially complete. Um the pay application is $433,732.3 and I would ask for um approval of that payment. I'll make a motion to approve the final pay application number six for
high-tech Gordian to work complete through 93 20225 in the amount of $33,732.3 that's presented. >> Second. >> Any discussion or questions for Tom? All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I.
>> Okay. Motion carries. Um Tom, you're up next with the street lighting at County Road 18 and Middle Cullen. >> Yes. Um, so we had a citizen that contacted yourself, mayor, um, and requested a street light be installed at the intersection of County Road 18 and Middle Cullen Road. Uh, this light
location is in the crowing power service area. Um, upon notice to install Crowing Power can have that light up in about two weeks. Uh the budget impact for this installation, um the installation is $1,500. And depending on which side of the
street the light is installed, um if it's on the east side of the street near the transformer, it has a monthly lease of $12 per month. If it were to be located on the west side, the lease payment is 26. I obviously
recommend installation on the east. and you had a map showing the location included in your packet. So, I look forward to uh approval to have that street light installed. >> Any questions for Tom? There was a
gentleman that did reach out to me via email. He was going to come tonight um and speak, but then his schedule changed, so he was not able to be here. Um and so, he had communicated to Megie and we said we'd keep it on the agenda anyway. It's not going to impact the snowmobile trail there.
>> I don't believe so. I think it could be positioned so that the trail could come through. If anything, it probably helps the snowmobile trail just to kind of show where it shoots off onto Middle C. >> Any other street corners in this wall that are going to need lights coming up here now?
>> You know, um, every year we have a couple that come up. People ask for it whenever they feel that they have an issue. It's really kind of a little bit of a tough issue just because you have some people who don't want the the light pollution. Um, so we generally wait for
them to request it. >> I'll make a motion to approve uh installing uh the new street light on the east side of the street on Middle C Road as presented. >> I'll second. Any additional discussion? All those in
favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Okay. Motion carries. >> Nay. >> Oh, sorry. I thought you said I. >> Okay. >> You always forget the name. >> Did you catch that, Maggie? >> I said nay. Not no. It's a variation of no.
>> It's a funny Robert rules variation of no. >> Okay. >> I I only caution the council. What streets are next? Street corners. I'd like to let these guys dictate, you know, when the when those come up. We
had a gentleman, a citizen, make a concern about um emergency sirens this past summer. They can't hear them. And I happen to live in that neighborhood and I like, you know, it's right. I only hear the Zorbas one when the wind's blowing and the straight line's coming straight to my house and then it's
already too late. So, just search caution. That's all. Okay, next is approval. Approve the hire of a maintenance technician. >> Uh, excuse me. So, we have recently interviewed for u
backfilling uh of the maintenance department u maintenance technician. Um, we have selected Cole Johnson. Um, we carefully considered everyone that applied. We had actually quite a few
applicants um which has been nice. Um we recommend starting coal at grade nine step two u and that would be 2656 per hour. >> I'd like to make a motion to approve the
hire of Cole Johnson as presented. >> I'll second. >> Any additional discussion? All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Opposed signify by saying nay. Okay. Motion carries.
Um, public works consider state highway noise barrier. >> Yeah. Um, so what this program is is every I think it's every 3 years that the state approaches us for uh they look to install noise barriers along 371. Um,
usually where they want to install them is along the business areas close to downtown is where they usually try to recommend. Um, and there's some funding available for that, but there's also a um, I believe it's a 10% match the city would have to have. We have not budgeted
for that. Um, in the past, I believe this has come up two other times and the city council is usually pretty soundly res um, rejected installing noise barriers mostly because they're not very aesthetically pleasing. This is something you typically see in the Twin
Cities where you're u dealing with I think higher much higher levels of traffic. But if you would like me to look further into that u just say so and I will brings forward more information. >> I think it'd be beautiful along our
highways here. >> Min 94 in Minneapolis looks fantastic. Another graffiti target trash culmination. >> I agree with you. I'm absolutely not in favor of such a thing. Aposterous. >> Is there anyone on council that would
like Tom to cons to pursue this? >> Do not consider this. >> Yeah. >> I' I'd be afraid people would be shooting at it. >> Okay, >> Tom, that sounds like a no. >> Perfect. >> Um, all right. Next up is the 2027
street improvement survey proposal. trying to find that on my tablet. Basically, what this is is it it gives WSN permission to um perform survey work before snowflies um
in uh to work towards the completion of the 2027 road bond planning for the 30% uh plan. Dave, do you have anything you want to add to that? >> It's it's basically just survey to get
that in the can so that we can get that done before everything that's covered up with snow >> came through public works and public works committee approved it. >> That's right. >> For additional context. >> Okay. Do we have a motion? >> I'd like to make a motion to approve the Wits survey proposal for the 2027 road
bond as presented. >> Second. >> Any additional discussion? All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Opposed? Signify by saying nay. Okay. Motion carries. And Tom, I think your last item is the septic easement and
maintenance agreement for 21844 Tall Timbers. >> Right. So, this is kind of something new that we've had to start doing. Uh what this is is it's in reaction to um the state department of labor and industry has changed the way that they
um inspect step station installations in the city. And with that, our workaround for that has been to request new connections, provide the city with a clear easement uh for the step station and the line
going out to the street. Um, we've had at least one applicant who would have been required to put in a much more expensive step station if we didn't take this step. So, I'm recommending this with every new connection until uh we get some kind of confirmation that the state.
>> Okay. >> Won't require that. >> Um, so do we have a motion? >> All right. I'll make the motion. >> I'll make it. Okay. I'll make a motion to approve this as presented by Tom for the septic easement. >> I'll second.
>> Any additional discussion? All those in favor signify by saying I. >> Opposed signify by saying nay. >> Abstain. >> Motion carries. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Next, we um have an individual from the public here to talk about the
public access at Grand View. Brett, and sorry it's so late in the evening. Oh, you guys are running a tight ship here. Um, mayor, council members, thank you for your time. My name is Brett Coat, 4426 East Lynen Boulevard. Um, on and
off lifetime resident here in NESA. Uh, uh, full disclosure, I am part of the code family that owns Grand View Lodge, but I do not speak for either here tonight. Um, East and West Linen are an old residential communities here and then we even have our own special zoning
district, different setbacks. My understanding is original creation of that came with platted uh public water easements. Um, and you know, Grand View is in a it's not a private gated community. It's in public streets. We pay for those streets
and there are the public access. There's some always some tension there, but it's worked out very well over the years. Um, came to my attention this summer, there were some changes at the waterfront um that in my opinion that the accumulation of all four changes kind of
impeded the public's access and right away to the water. And so I've tried to bring that to the council's attention, the public's attention. And I think the this the solution is relatively simple but like a lot of motans or I'm a previous motan. You know I'm very
protective of our public water rights and access and so we want to get on you know make those corrections. Actually it's going to be hard water now. So we have some time until soft water again. But um and I don't think any of their changes were malicious. I think it was just an overcompensation from some past
behavior. So, I hope you guys can work together with gravy through some communication and encouragement. >> Are you seeking any action or any feedback from council tonight? >> Uh, I I think we have some time to communicate with Gran View, you know,
about keeping an access corridor, a year-round access corridor, especially off of Winward. No, Woodward is a street there. Um, and that's just wanted to have a public comment on that. >> Okay. Does council have any questions or
anything for Mr. Coat? >> No. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. Next up is the planning and zoning assistance discussion. Maggie, based on council's recommendation, maybe
August, I think it was, um, you wanted me to reach out to Crowing County to see if there was any assistance, um, kind of starting from phone calls to helping, mentoring, um, helping with planning and zoning, coming
in and doing that. Um, I did hear back from the county and at this time the county does not have any support or doesn't have any um, assistance to support us as a city with planning and zoning. Um, I took it maybe a little step further and
reached out to Sourcewell because they've always been able to help us in the past um, as we've had turnover in planning and zoning. So, I thought that might be an avenue. As far as assisting with ordinances, they would say late 2026 is kind of their specific time.
They're pretty busy through this winter and summer. They um have a lot of training opportunities and things like that that we do get notified on and at this time they have no capacity to take over planning and zoning as a whole.
I also reached out to Scott Ser who has um helped with city business in the past and does uh ordinance revisions and policies and things like that and he said he would be interested in helping with ordinances, processes, policies. Um
but he would like clear clear direction on what the council would like to see. Any questions, comments for Maggie? Well, thank you. >> Thank you, Maggie. Um, next on the agenda under new business is the
economic development authority discussion. I I know we've discussed this a lot as council and there is interest. Uh my recommendation would be for us to schedule a workshop and invite folks like Tyler uh Glenn who is the head of Bladec and other folks that have
experience with um different cities that have set these up so we can really get uh educated as a council. And then from there we would go to take some action as a council if that works for everybody but to set up a workshop sooner rather than later being cognizant of people's
uh schedules upcoming in the holidays. But we don't want to delay this too long. >> December maybe. >> Yeah. If you look at the calendar, I think we probably could fit something in in November is going to be tough. I think >> tough for me. >> Yeah. >> Is that for
>> Yeah. I would just say sooner and later though. >> I'll just let you know right now. I will probably be gone the whole month of January and won't be able to zoom in. Um, so yeah, if we can do it in December, I'd >> Well, maybe we can all separately get availability to Maggie and she can kind
of find a common time here that works for everybody and obviously works with >> with uh the partners in the community. Okay. Last under new business is performance evaluations discussion because we've been kind of in this interim where we haven't had uh or we
don't have right now in the sense like a full-time administrator that would do the performance evaluations. um in speaking with our labor attorney and I forgot to have him speak to this because this was so far down. Um it is considered a best practice to still do those performance evaluations. So the thought was just to have us as a full
council do them with department heads and then obviously the administrative department and then the department heads would do it for their own departments. Um and so that was what this was all about to potentially do that in November and December. any comment or feedback or if that works
for everybody, we would work to schedule those. >> You know, I was just thinking we could do this like we did when I was in the Navy where the lowest people evaluate the the boss as well as the boss evaluating his workers.
Just saying. >> Yeah. I don't know how >> currently the department heads do it that has >> that won't work well. >> Yeah, I can. >> Okay. Um All right. If there's no other discussion on that, we'll we'll work to schedule those to move forward in times that work with all of council and the
department heads in closed sessions. Um council liaison reports. I do not have anything for this evening. Uh council member Freley, do you have any report? >> I passed this on to Amber, but we had some people up over the weekend. They uh took a look at the new park we have and
they were quite impressed. Um and they do have backgrounds in that. So they were quite impressed. Really liked it. So that was a positive for NESA. >> Good. Council member London. Council member Zan. >> Nothing. >> Council member Hall? >> Nothing.
>> Okay. Uh last we have listed the announcements of the upcoming meeting dates which you can also find on our website or posted out in the vestibule. Uh with that a motion to adjurnn would be in order. >> So moved. >> A motion to adjurnn is not debatable. So
all those in favor signify by saying I. I. I. >> All right. Our council meeting is adjourned. Thank you everybody.