--------- Hey, Bruce. Where are my others for the job description? Okay. Um, good morning everybody. I'd like to officially call the city council meeting, which is a continuation of our
meeting from September 18th, 23, 30th, and October 8th, and 21st to order. It is 9:01 a.m. Um, the first item on our agenda is again the continuation of the organization structure, admin, clerk, and finance department. Um, at our last
meeting, we were not uh ready and detailed as a council to come together and go through the job description for the uh city administrator slash clerk um position that we motioned as a council.
And so we wanted to come back and um do that. So, I don't know if everyone here had a chance to go through and make their edits, changes. Sorry, I'm trying to find a pen. Um, what I passed out from my end, I
titled it wrong. It's supposed to say city administrator, clerk. I went through the existing job description of the city administrator, treasurer and the city clerk and then looked at past job descriptions as well before the administrator structure was in NISA. And
I kind of tried to compile and take what was already there and note additions and then areas where things could potentially move to other departments. So that's what I passed out to all of you guys um with the two handouts. The first one, it says city administrator, treasure, but it's supposed to say
clerk, not treasurer. And the second one is just a one pager that says move the following items from the existing clerk job description to the deputy clerk and then move the following items from the existing clerk to the finance
specialist. So, those are just my thoughts, but I'll let everyone take a moment to look over those. and council member Zhan just walked in so we'll give him a moment. Why don't I um start Joe with you? Um council member Freley asked
me to go to him last since he ran in from a a different situation. So >> what do you want me to >> Well, first yeah, our goal is to >> do we want to start with the city administrator? >> Why don't we start with the Yeah, the new Well, the city administrator clerk
is the position we approved. So, why don't we start with that one? Um, I guess as far as the job description goes, maybe uh couple things to add or talk about uh
would be um just how they um what we want them to do as far as I'm thinking of our projects in the city, you know, Um, and I've talked to some other staff about this. Um,
are they going to are they going to lead the projects? Are they going to hand it off to somebody? You know, uh, they're doing the coordination on the back end. So, let's just take the roundabout project that we had out from the Grand View here a couple years ago. Are we looking for
somebody that is the city administrator that is going to be always the lead for that project or do we want them to be handing projects like that off? Another example, downtown master plan, stuff
like that and and define that. Am am I making sense on what I'm asking? You know, are they going to are >> like the department the department head would run it and just have the administrator be like >> they're like the air traffic controller, >> right?
>> Instead of having the administrator saying, "Hey, this is what you need to do and run it like that." Have the department heads run the the >> correct, >> right? And then just have the administrator kind of like make sure it is being done.
>> Right. I just what I I guess what I'm saying is I want to make sure that's somehow clearly defined in here so we don't get where the city administrator person it would it would not be my goal at all to have them running these
different projects. I actually want to keep them out and and looking more at the 50,000 square view of uh of stuff where they don't um where they are appropriately handing
it off to the correct staff within the city. >> Um and I I guess I would want to make that clearly defined um in here. that that would >> so are you Joe just to be clear so you
>> so as it as it is organized right now this the current structure the city administrator really is kind of the conduit or the lead for like basically key project manager >> right >> so you're saying instead of having them be the the core in that position where
they're the project facilitator so they're not establishing timelines tracking progress organizing keep keeping people communicated ated that that's going to the department heads and they're just there as needed. I just want to make sure I'm understanding. >> Yeah, they're as needed, but I don't I don't actually see the city
administrator's role to run a park project, to run a public works project, to run a downtown master plan project. Um, I I want to see it work differently and actually rely on our staff that we
have to do it and potentially um uh a maybe a new person that we don't even currently have on staff for the projects. You know, like the trail, you know, we just came off the trail. Um
that's a that's a pretty indepth management project that I think was outside of um you know a general scope for like even Amber's role you know and as we continue to look ahead um with our
property that we've just purchased you know stay at the 50,000 square foot view but for instance you know let Tom run with the engineer on how the infrastructure be laid out down there and coordinate how that would go. If
there would be another park down there, let Amber kind of figure that out. But they aren't the they aren't the going to be the lead project manager for us in all these areas. >> So if we were doing like in in the corporate world, everyone talks about the racy charts, responsible,
accountable, consulted, and informed. So they'd be more consulted and informed and responsible, accountable would fall to the department heads. >> Correct. Yeah. feedback on that. Council member Freley, council member London, good
>> council member Zison. >> Well, how is it being done differently? I guess like right now, like talk about how it's structured right now. So, if if there is a project that falls within Tom's department, a lift station, a a road bond uh project like it's going to be coming up here,
Tom would be essentially the captain of that project. the city administrator would be supporting and consoling through the process. >> Should be right. >> Right. And has that not been the case?
>> Correct. That has not been historically the case here. >> Okay. So that city administrator >> am I am I correct? >> Okay. >> So the city ad >> the roundabout in 77 would be the best example. Yeah.
And that probably go even as far as up to the council, right? Like if if if it's a department head that is going to be captaining the project as the quote project manager for their specific department, it falls on that department head. Is
that what you're kind of leaning towards? >> Right. Yep. >> Council doesn't have any need to be getting engaged on the dayto-day of that project. Now what if what about the liaison for that specific department head?
>> Yeah. So the liaison I would see them working with the department head you know kind of >> can sorry I I know we that's a whole other discussion but for this we're supposed to just be talking about like the job descriptions and >> well I think that plays into right you
know how this would work. Um, and so for the job description, I guess I'm not sure how we want to clearly define that, but but I do want to make it clear right off the get-go that um we um we do want
this person to understand that um they're to allow the department heads to excel in the different areas that they specialize in. you know, and and and I'll I'll just say
that's that's kind of my, you know, looking at the past, looking at some of the some of the stuff, whatever. Um trying to move forward in a positive direction. I'd say that's that's one big thing that I'd like to see tweaked or changed to make sure that it's accounted
that way. So looking at the job functions of the city administrator, we'd probably you'd be suggesting Joe to outline that city administrator would be >> there to support
the and further support on coordination of special projects. >> Correct. >> Within those departments. >> Yep. and to delegate responsibilities to different department heads. So yeah, I guess I guess without maybe
everyone up here clearly understanding kind of what's taking place and like I say the 70 the roundabout would probably be the best example right immediately. Do you maybe do you have any input Tom that you could help clarify for the rest
of them? Um when we first hired the city administrator in the past, if we were talking about a road project from the engineering to the construction of it, that would have been my purview. uh more of the finance and some of the business
end of it. So for instance, the bonding and that kind of thing would have fallen underneath the administrator to coordinate. You know, myself or the engineer would be letting that person know this is the project we want to build. This is what it's going to cost. and they would have taken it from there
and dealt with EFM or the state or whoever they have to deal with to figure out how to make it fit within the budget and work for the the city. I I would like to see something more like that, I guess, moving forward. >> Um I don't think an administrator should
be concerning themselves with um how much asphalt, for instance, we put into a project or the timing of construction so much. maybe um unless it's dealing with say entities say such as I don't know one of the larger
businesses in town uh resort. >> Yeah. No, I I agree that this >> so like the roundabout project out there, you know, Tom, I'm not gonna speak for him, but he wasn't involved in the weekly meetings or progress meetings
or anything. He just wasn't even at those meetings, >> but the project but the project fell within your privy mainly. Right. >> Right. Yeah. some of that too. Uh probably why some of that happened is it was a county project more than a state or excuse me more than a city project.
And so the county liked going to the administrator as a simple simple uh communication conduit I guess for them. Uh they weren't copying me on things and unfortunately it also wasn't
being copied from the administrator to my level either. So, >> so we just it would be more of a bullet point that would simply read something to the effect of just assist and support department heads as needed on special
projects and m while maintaining high level communication with the city council to ensure alignment with the organizational priorities. >> I think something to that effect, right? But emphasis point on uh like assisting department heads on department specific
projects, right? Like so the Tom projects within Tom's purview would not be >> as needed. >> Yeah. As needed for the department. No different than if there was a parks project. >> It's really kind of your two. >> It's those two realms mainly where the
projects are going to be coming in from, right? >> Planning and zoning though, stuff like that, too. You know, just let >> So, how about people run it? >> How about this? Assisting department heads on department specific projects as needed while maintaining high level
communication with the council to ensure alignment with our organizational prior or strategic priorities that the council sets instead of organizational strategic. >> It'll always be cloudy because you take something like the trail and there's always some parks issues and public
works issues on a project like that. Usually usually they're coordinated with a road project. And so that' probably be another duty of a city administrator is to is to help coordinate between departments in a in a bigger project like that, you know, so that say for instance the
park doesn't get overshadowed by the importance of the road that's being built. >> I mean, if you're effectively the project manager, right? >> Mhm. You own the purse. you own the purse of the project,
meaning your your thumb is on everything pertaining to that specific project. Right. >> Right. Well, what normally would happen is say when as they're working through a project, they always uh you get a pay application like we've had for the building here. >> And so, usually in the past, I've been
the one who approves those. Um only lately have we moved to city administrator approving that and then it comes to the city council for final approval. But like chain change change orders um there was more freedom for me
to to deal with change orders. Um now we find ourselves limited I guess and >> I know Joe has brought this up you know when we talk about say for instance um the dollar limit that I would have to work with change orders. It's it's so
small that it's it inconsequential because the the the order of magnitude is wrong. You know, most of the change orders on a million-doll project start at five figures. My authority is at four 9900
like 2500. >> 2500. >> So, but that's more in the policy thing that we're going to get to then. >> Yeah, that will be in the second that's in the second part. >> So, like >> So, another example would be like the downtown master plan here. I would view
that, you know, to be ran by both, in this case, Tom and Stephen to tag team a project like that that they would be the ones coordinating a project like that versus the city administrator directly. >> So, how do we feel about the language I threw out for the bullet? Because I
think we're now understanding the the >> I'm absolutely comfortable with it. Um, >> I can read it again. So, I wrote assisting and and again, we can make this clear when we're in the interviews with the individual too. assisting department heads on department specific
and special projects as needed while maintaining high level communication with the council to ensure alignment with strategic priorities. >> I I think >> I'm good. >> I think it's fair. >> I like that. As needed. >> As needed. And that's and assisting.
Right. So again, if if it's a racy chart, they're not responsible and accountable. They're consulted and informed. Um, >> as needed or required. >> Can special on a project as needed slash or
required. Yep, that's fine. >> Did you have any other key items, Joe? I guess I think that was probably my my biggest one that I wanted to, you know, kind of put in there to make sure that, you know,
got addressed. >> Okay, council members on >> apologies for being late. Um, so if you're looking at the city administrator/treasur sheet that was at the top of each packet, um, I just for ease of going
through these bullet points, I number them 1 through 12. There are 12 that are listed here. So, um, going down to the fifth one, we already kind of discussed this at the last meeting. Uh, it states coordinates the city budget process and capital improvement planning, recommends
budget and fiscal policy to the city council. Um, I'm suggesting striking coordinates and uh replacing it with something to the effects of supports treasurer as needed or required on that process. Um, I'm I saw a theme between the three
that we have. So, city administrator, city clerk, and financials finance specialist. There's a lot of cross departments, right? So this might be a little bit of a work in progress for us to try to realign. I don't think it'll be too much. So that's
my first one on uh that. Uh the next one is number 10. Works with financial consultants, bond council, tiff funds, and auditors in coordination with treasur as needed or required.
So mainly like to move those two to the finance specialist treasur. Uh then I created a new one number 13 supports council on uh I've discussed this in the past. We have council turnover essentially every two years with the two council seats
coming up and uh the mayoral seat um coming up every two years. So, I think it's important for this council and future councils as there's potential for a threeperson change every two years to uh understand the comp plan and to kind
of bless their version of the comp plan as they were elected. Uh, and they'll be fulfilling those terms to uh establish a or reestablish the Niswah comprehensive plan every two years per council turnover uh window. So, I see that as
>> Can you read it again? Sorry. >> So I wrote supports council on reestablishing Niswah comprehensive plan every two years per council turnover that can be rewarded but um does that all make sense? >> Yep. So that's an addition.
>> Then I drew up another one. Uh number 14 facilitates economic development authority. I know that's very gray right now. Uh we're not at the point where we even have information to put one in place, but I know Stephen's working on it. And uh Steve, you think November
meeting? >> Sorry, I'm losing my voice. >> I don't think it's been scheduled yet. >> It has not been scheduled. It's just one of those things that I have to follow up from the last October's council meeting to figure out when it works for Tyler and the council to be here to and James.
Jane, >> yeah, we have a couple speakers that can come and talk about, you know, what's worked well in their municipalities before. We have James Cranbeck from Brainer. Um, and then Tyler Glenn who works with other municipalities on more of a contractual basis for EDA implementation. >> Okay. >> On the spectrum.
>> So, I mean, I think we're all >> Yep. on the same page that we would like to have an economic development authority to be able to help drive. Um, >> I'm not sure that I I'm not sure that I would like to put
the city administrator person in charge of all that only because then that keeps us with the council because it's really our vision for that through this and that they would help assist facilitate but um I would like to keep the actual
the actual drive of that with the council and not with the city administrator. Yeah. >> So in response to that then as I stated already there's some cross duties here that need to be advised. We have for the
financial specialist piece. Um one essential function is takes and prepares minutes for planning commission and parks and wreck advisory commission meetings. Provides administrative support for the planning zoning department. So, if an EDA is established, we're going to need to
designate somebody from the city side to be able to accommodate. And if it's not the city administrator, it's likely going to need to be >> it would be the administrator clerk. >> I I would be in favor of having it be the city administrator clerk. >> Yeah. How would I
>> um now like authority of like quarterbacking it I I don't think without having too much information on like how an EDA will be structured here or could be um we can we we can modify that EDA piece
>> we could say for now supports council as needed with economic development authority and assists with committee meetings. >> I like that. >> Mhm. >> Yep. I like And again, if we have to modify as we go into it, as council members on said, we can, but this at least just gives us a baseline for the
job description when the search firm is out looking so people candidates aren't surprised. >> Then my only last other piece on this was the title, city administrator, clerk. >> Clerk. >> Yep. >> Okay. >> Okay. Um, any feedback?
>> Are we just going one by one on the three positions? >> Okay. All right. >> Any feedback? I'm good with it as far as this city minister and the clerk thing. Okay, >> Mark. >> Okay. Um, so the the changes I had I I
gave you guys kind of the handout. Um the two things I put is serves as a key liaison between the mayor, city council and staff proactively connecting I said connects connecting whichever one with the mayor and all council members prior to meetings to clarify issues answer
questions and ensure understanding of agenda items and then on the on the back side following council meetings debriefs with staff and department heads to ensure clarity around council direction developing you know actionable plans and coordinating follow-up as needed. So
basically what I'm trying to say here and this actually came from when we had uh one of the interims Tim Krookshank here is he had indicated in the city previous cities he worked on he always reached out and called every council member the week prior to every council
meeting once the agenda was out in the packet to say hey have you had a chance to review it? What can I help answer clarify before you get into a council meeting to help streamline things? anything that you think might need to be brought up, etc., etc., related. And then on the back end, however, council
actioned to make sure staff was clear. Hey, council action this. So, hey, department head, this falls under you. You know, council action this, department head b, this falls under you to ensure that there's uh forward moving progress on everything. And that's
essentially all I was trying to say with that feedback. I think it would help improve that communication um gap that we've continued to hear over and over. >> I'm an advocate of not having too I'm not I'm not an advocate of being a min
minimalist. Uh you know these job duties and I mean they're called essential functions but really the job duties and responsibilities don't need to be kind of condensed right. >> Y >> that creates a gray area. Um, my business, we we try to spell it out as much as we can. Like you're you're
likely going to be lifting 15 pounds at your job duty, right? Uh whether it's a box of paper or you name it. So giving as much clarity of
what that piece will be when it comes to these meetings and who's preparer who's preparing the who's preparing the agenda, who's putting together the topics. Um, in past life, we would get I think
weekly. I mean, Mark, I know you you were here for it and Joe, you probably got some. Jenny Max would send us frequently like weekly reports, right? And it was just odds and ends, right? But it was sometimes enough to keep us all fluent, right? Um I I enjoyed that.
And I, you know, also when there was communication from private citizens, right? uh emails that were sent to her or to a department head, they would then be relayed to us prior to the meeting via email and then a paper copy would be
here too giving us all the information as >> yeah as best possible. I like it. >> I think the most important thing is right and this is we've been in this period of gray for a while now is we're all equally elected. We all should have
access to the same information and not no one council member should have more information than the other because that's how we can come together and have the most robust informed conversation and dialogue here to make motions. But if if only one knows this or one knows that it becomes disjointed
and you know that kind of defeats the spirit of of what uh you know being a public servant and local governance is about. Um >> can I add to that? >> Yeah. I mean perhaps another function for the city administrators to do just that. Prepare. I mean let's task this
city administrator to prepare even if it's brief uh a weekly report on city news, city projects, city progress or related state statute news like Jenny would do from League of Minnesota cities
and just share it. >> Yeah. >> It'll keep us all in the loop, right? for the sake of to your point, right? I think even if you add that in there for for this reason for for broader
transparency across the board. >> Okay. So, adding to that, prepare a weekly report on city news, work progress, applicable state legislative action, citizen feedback, etc. to the council. and perhaps another one since we're on a roll. Uh your newsletters,
right? >> Yeah, >> those are great. >> We we we did say at the beginning of the year we wanted to do two, but we only approved the budget to do the one in April. It would be nice to if we could do a like a December, early December one to folks or if we just want to wait
until January and then do like January, June. >> So the the fiscal budgeting piece is strictly for like the the materials going out in the mail. Is that right? >> Yeah. Do you think that maybe if you stuck to that quarterly or or >> I think twice a year.
>> Twice a year. >> Twice a year. >> Um doesn't mean we could couldn't still have one on a maybe if you're if you're doing four a year but you're only mailing two of them. >> Would the residents appreciate that more? >> I know the residents were very
appreciative of the one we did in April but we haven't done one since. So if we did one quarterly but maybe only mailed the second quarter and fourth quarter ones out, you still have your budget. >> April and >> the other ones can be >> October. >> Yeah.
>> And the others can be um would we want to put coordination of that in the city administrator clerk? Yeah. Or the deputy clerk. >> Deputy clerk. >> Deputy clerk. >> Clerk. If it's just because if it's just
the department heads are all writing their own sections and it's just collecting and handing to the designer, the deputy clerk that could go in there. >> What do you think about doing a newsletter quarterly but then having two two paper ones?
>> That was our original plan at the beginning of the year and it just kind of fell apart. Yeah, it was exactly what you said. Q1's digital. Q2 is paper and digital. Q3 is digital. Q4 is paper. >> Oh, all right. I like that. I like that. >> Okay. Um, did you have other items? Oh,
no. I was on mine. Okay. Let's see. All right. I had put also from Jesse as you had numbered them 1 to 12. Number seven. develops and recommends policies to the
city council in consultation with department heads. I had crossed this one out and here's why. Um because if all of our policies inherently are I didn't know if it meant policies like personnel policies or if it meant other
policies but if it's personnel policies I know that there has been interest from council from what I've heard in having not just one person the city administrator/clerk being able to have full authority over the policies and to have it as we're doing today action um
through councel But if I am misinterpreting what that bullet point means, then maybe me crossing it out was incorrect. >> Since we're all attorneys up here, right? It's all interpretation. My interpretation of number seven would be
develops and recommends policies to the city council. So I don't like the word develops because >> recommends. >> Yeah. I because that would indicate here go ahead and write a policy and then further recommend it to the council with
feedback from department heads. I like the collaboration but perhaps it's already it's initiating wasted effort if the council wouldn't be on board with it. Um >> maybe we change it to cross out the word develops and it just is recommends policies to the city council in
consultation with department heads >> because actually now one that's coming to mind is that special events permit right that that is a policy that would come to council but it would be in conjunction with multiple department heads. >> It's it's a part of the next topic or
the next agenda item the personnel policy. You know, we've talked about the personnel committee not having its maybe having its gray areas but not having its uh true bylaws. You know, this is what your tasks are.
If we want to provide the city administrator, department heads um that that feedback, if they have a suggestion for a policy change, it should probably go to does it need to go to the council immediately at on a broad venue or can
it be held? Can it first go to that personnel committee? The personnel committ about personnel policies only. >> Yep. >> Yeah, it should go to the ideally >> we should which is why one we got to spell that out. this one >> draft of that >> and then to outline what the personnel committee is expected to do and only
permitted to do that make sense. Okay. Um I had also added so I took a look at the city clerk description and again some some were crossover in areas
right and looked at how do we we have to shift those to other job descriptions. So the ones I shifted were serves as the city's primary resource for customer service and general requests for information and assists with various
city activities within all city departments. Functions as custodian of all city records, ordinances, resolutions, policies, etc. So that's just records. Responds to data requests, administers elections, issues liquor license, maintains record for the
records for the city cemetery. It's hilarious. >> You moved the same ones. >> Those are the same three. >> So, those are the ones I moved from the clerk to the new administrator clerk. >> Wait, move >> from the
>> move them to the finance specialist job description. >> Oh, no. I moved the I moved those to the administrator/clerk. >> Wait a second. >> You moved them to the finance specialist. >> Which ones? >> Okay. like the following items from >> administers elections, issues liquor
license, maintains records for city cemetery, functions as the custodian of all city records, ordinances, resolutions, etc. Response to data requests. Right? So to me, data requests would go to the administrator, clerk, the elections would fall under
administrator, clerk, issuing liquor license, administrator, clerk, and then city cemetery. >> We're on we're on the same page. I was just specifically looking at these three you had here. >> Oh, yep. And then >> moving then >> sorry finance specialist. I'm still on
this one. >> I gave you another sheet. >> But you want to pull these ones, right? >> Yep. And put those under finance specialist. >> I'm on board. >> Okay. But is everyone in alignment or have a different perspective?
Okay. Then that's all I had for >> I have a question for Maggie in in that regard. If those three functions were to move from the clerk SL deputy clerk/admin assistant to the finance specialist, they are Maggie. If you're looking at the clerk sheet,
>> um one, two, three, four, five, six, would it be number seven, eight, and nine? >> Payroll, taxes, and benefits. Is that the ones you're talking about? >> Yep. payroll
um per withholding quarterly reports W2s employee benefits. >> Yeah. >> Appropriate. >> Yes. >> Okay. And then what I had moving to deputy clerk from city clerk is ordering
supplies um maintaining the city calendar on the city website and then I wasn't sure if this should go here or not but taking and preparing minutes for public works >> because public works is not listed right either of these three. Y
>> that's all I had. >> I'm good on the deputy clerk. So, we got city admin/ clerk. We have a deputy clerk/admin assistant stacked hands on I believe. >> Yep. >> Okay. So, the next last one is the
financial specialist treasurer. >> So, the only changes I had to that are you already discussed one from the city administrator. I had moved three. I didn't have anything else. I don't know if you guys >> was the one from the city administrator. >> Um it was number five coordinating the
city's budget. So supporting the treasure as needed. So then that bullet point would go over to the finance specialist maybe with a caveat saying >> like and receiving support from the admin clerk as needed. >> Got it. >> Right. Jesse, you also had to move
number 10 in >> That's right. um >> coordination with the treasure and number >> I have an idea >> I didn't have anything else there >> we also number these so >> it makes it easier um okay so on the
financial finance specialist treasurer adding of course slashtreasurer um if you look at number five uh assist the city administrator in preparation for the annual budget levy. We discussed moving that already, right? Or >> correct.
>> Okay. Y >> number six, uh performs administrative support for the police department, including entry of uh dispositions, completion of tape statements, on and on. This is all police related items that Janelle Janal, excuse me,
>> that we'd remove. >> Yep. >> Okay. >> I just kind of serve as her backup because I know how to do it. So when she's gone, basic stuff, but it doesn't need to be in here. >> Okay, I think we can strike that. >> Yeah, I think we take it out.
>> The opposition. Okay. Um, then number seven. Oh, no, there's no number seven. I got it backwards. Um, to clarify, Mayor Caran, you said the next one. So that would be number seven, takes and prepares minutes for planning
commission and park and rex advisory commission meetings adding public works and then also being administrative support for P&Z. That is going to be moved to >> deputy >> deputy. Yeah. >> Great. Okay.
And then number 10, assist with updating the city meeting calendar and city website. >> That I move to deputy clerk. Got it. because that's more entry level. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> We talked about in the past
communication specialist, right? Or >> I'm kind of the deputy clerk for right now. >> Do but do we need to outline that any further in the deputy clerks? >> I don't have that job description in front of me. Do we?
No, you don't. I was trying to, but I don't have access. Oh, I probably do. Here >> website, meeting calendar, social media. >> Yep. >> Um, >> I thought social media was under deputy
clerk. >> I can't recall. >> Like the Facebook page. >> I'm I'm pulling it up. Hang tight, guys. Like does the city have an Instagram, a Tik Tok, a Twitter, all that? I >> think it has a Twitter, but I don't think anyone. >> So, this is a job description that was
approved I don't a few weeks ago >> for our deputy clerk. I'm trying to zoom in, guys. >> Can't see it. >> It's just going so slow. Hang tight. Should we just print it?
>> Is that better? >> Mhm. >> I'm afraid if I go one more, it won't fit across. >> Yeah. See all that's captured in there already. >> You know, since we were talking about it, we got a little bit of time. Mgie, could you print a few of these for us? >> Sure.
>> Sorry. >> That's all right. >> Because I'm already seeing one like number two, right? >> See that far? assist with accounts payable, accounts receivables, and enters in daily receipts for the pickle and spirits. >> I forgot to give
>> Yes, the job the job is posted. >> Correct. >> Yes. >> Yep. >> But doesn't mean we can't amend it. >> Okay. No, I'm sorry I missed your comment though. >> Item number two on this. >> Yes. >> I mean,
I just move that over to you. No, >> I can't see. >> I mean, I'm a rock star and all, but >> Yeah, especially on the daily stuff. >> Why Why aren't the managers doing the daily stuff?
>> Cuz they got in their mind, they have bookkeeper. >> Oh, no. What what those mean are is all of the receipts for every day for pickle and spirits have to be entered in our system. So they make a deposit, we have to balance it with our
bank account. Um and so they're really just entering transactions like >> okay, >> this is how much um >> so if they're essentially then assisting >> Yeah. >> you >> Yes. They're doing data entry. >> Yes.
>> But the as we call it the purse, the full responsibility of APA receipts for those businesses. >> Yeah. >> So you're verifying their data is >> Yep. >> You're putting your name on their work.
>> Yep. You >> are a rockstar. >> Okay. Social media is on here already. receive two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight. Okay. So, going down to
number seven. Receives and prepares payments and bank deposits. Payments like what? Like P&Z fees. >> Yes. >> Yeah. >> Some sewer payments. >> Sewer payments. >> Sewer payments. >> Yep.
>> That's for a like being in a league or something at the park. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. All of those dollars funnel through the department heads and then we come to a central location and >> but you're still you're still overseeing that with ledgers and yes balance
sheets. All right. >> Yes. it. We're never going to get away from our audit report that says internal controls, but this is part of that, you know, to have one person do it and somebody else reconciles and matches everything
up. >> Okay. >> I think it looks >> Yeah. >> everything we discussed. >> I don't have concerns. >> Okay. >> Thanks for >> Bruce. Mark, anything on your end >> that I want to change? >> Yeah. Or any additions?
>> One, we keep calling it a company. We're not a company. We're a public entity, >> right? >> So, I want to see if we can take that out of there. The only everything that I was looking at to change has been addressed except
for one. I just want to the the new city administrator needs to have strategies to help the city and the staff run more efficiently. There have been some issues I think in the past but not in a micromanaging way. Um,
just to make sure things run efficiently, working with bringing in the different department heads that have to I mean, when you have a project that has two or three department heads in it that have to work with it, maybe they
help with coordinating, not overseeing it, just coordinating. Um, >> so that kind of goes to Joe's point at the very beginning, right? Is that why you're Not really cuz I mean they need to know
how to work with >> correct. >> Correct. What's missing is the processes for how all this works, which isn't defined. >> You know, they're up here. You guys are here doing your thing in there. And if there is a problem, you have a problem, Tom. They can go here
and the administrator can take care of it. But the administrator shouldn't be the one that's down there in the in the dirt and in the ground. Um, and also working with with you know internal if there's internal strife or problems that come in they have to have
>> okay actually hold on let me pull this up. So that language that we the first bullet point we added at the very beginning it's it's missing the piece on the process is what you're saying >> correct. >> Um
if we add in the word >> facilitate and track projects then is that adding that layer of micromanagement get in the weeds that we're trying to avoid? >> That's what I wondered. >> Right. Because there's a it it it it kind of also depends on the individual
in the role and what their management style is. >> Interpret it too. >> Yeah. >> But that's also I think our job as council members when we interview people, we need to be crystal clear on this and set those expectations as a council from the get-go because words >> can always be interpreted differently
depending on who the >> individual is. That's >> But assume to council member Freley's point, assume like it's not Tom and the public works chair, right? It's somebody else that is maybe struggling and getting behind on a
project. >> Where where does the accountability come through, right, from from that city administrator? So to your point, yeah, I get what you mean. Um >> I I wonder if it's because right now it reads assistsing department heads on
department specific and or special projects as needed are required while maintaining high level communication with the council to ensure alignment with strategic priorities. Do we add in assisting? Okay, so assisting department heads
on department specific and special projects facilitating and tracking as you know and adding that as needed or required. So it's not a mandate. It's just on a again as needed or required or
does that make it too in the weeds? Um I think again it comes down to the person >> as needed and interpret flexibility because like we need >> we need to be clear as the interviewers. >> Yeah. So I mean this is just a job description but when we get into the
policies and maybe some SOPs that we want to start to have with how the city operates where we define some of that. So, do we just want to leave it and note that we have that when we get to the process of >> Yes.
>> interviewing folks? Yes. >> Um, but the other thing you brought up, Council Member Freley, which I do think is completely missing from everywhere, >> is the HR component. >> Yes. Um, I did some calling around to
other cities and spoke with their mayors as well as city administrators. And again, this was just their opinions or suggestions is they thought, you know, if you have an opportunity to find a forward-looking administrator clerk that
has some background or experience in HR capabilities, that is an extra bonus. >> Yes. So, I don't know if we want to consider putting in um >> I would >> an HR bullet point.
>> What are people's thoughts on adding an HR bullet point? Yes or no? You're for your Yes. You're >> I guess you know that wouldn't be a bad idea either. >> Okay. What are your thoughts? Adding a bullet. Again, we don't know what the words are yet. You can always
>> I would think that we'd want to define um the HR like we had our um not our town hall meeting but our um retreat earlier you know and the rules
within HR vary and so if we have specific rules that we're thinking of you know if we pulled everyone everyone here today, you know, is that payroll?
Is that, you know, where where's the starting and stopping point for the HR, I guess, is what I'd want to define. >> Well, there's lots of different facets to HR, right? There's recruitment, there's onboarding, there's personnel policy administration, there's
performance evaluation management, there's employee relations, there's serving as a confidential resource, right? like it it can it can go as wide as you want it to or as narrow. It is it something that maybe
here's just an idea for now because our our goal is to get this job description done so that we can go out and get this firm looking right. We we don't I don't think any of us are interested in kicking the can down the road another month before we actually get the search going. I think we'd all like to see it
going if we could tomorrow. is do we just put a bullet point as a placeholder um potential a HR tasks as needed but to be you know or something like this is not the right wording but to be determined and we can
>> who's responsible for hiring and firing right >> well the council is but department heads would be in there >> reprimands >> yeah I think >> be in there to put right >> put something in there but at this point leave it a little open. >> Maybe just say HR functions as needed
and determined by council or something. >> Can I go back on the hire and fire thing there for a little bit? Okay, so >> a question came to me. Is the council are we going to interview the seasonal and temporary?
I mean, what was the exact motion we made? I know I'm going back on that, but it was >> no >> my What's that? >> I didn't I my interpretation was no >> my interpretation was you would hire and fire with the administr the administrative positions, not everybody
in the site. >> Well, if there's a department head, they would interview and hire their own positions and make a recommendation. >> And that's where clarification would come in with the city administrator to clarify with department heads afterwards. Can
>> Yeah, they should be. >> Is that more in the policies? >> That would go with >> the job description or not. >> But yeah, I agree. That should be all spelled out because that's been >> gray, >> right?
>> But it can be incredibly gray. So that I think because what is specifically on this special meeting agenda is admin clerk finance department. If if we're talking about you know Mark to your point seasonal and parks or
Tom to your point that >> that's going into >> we have to have a different discussion on that because it's not on the agenda. So, >> but as far as the HR bullet, I I think that should be in there. But >> can we just put for now just a placeholder HR to be defined?
>> Yes. Yes. >> Just so we can get this posted and we can have clarity on that. Okay. >> So, does anyone else have any other input than to what we discussed? If not, we should probably >> I don't know if we want to recap all
this. I've tried to write notes as we've been going. I see Maggie has two. Um otherwise, if we would have a motion to approve the additions, changes, and deletions that we've made to the
existing city administrator description, um the finance specialist position, the city clerk, and the deputy clerk. And I'm saying them as they're existing because part of the changes were to change the titles.
I'll make a motion to accept all changes. City administrator, city clerk, finance specialist, deputy clerk as discussed. >> I'll second it. >> Okay. Any additional discussion? >> I mean, I guess
feel more comfortable having them typed down laid out for us to review and then bless. However, in good faith that this is Are your are your notes conclusive, do you think of >> I think between the two of us? >> Between the two of us, I think we have it.
>> I can send them out. >> Yeah. >> Once they're done, just as a one look over and if something is concerning, we can >> have another meeting. >> Can have another meeting, can't we? >> I think between the two of us though, we've got it. Okay. >> This is a blanket statement. Um, one
thing that's not defined anywhere in here is kind of the emergency management stuff. Um, Crowing County has been doing a lot of stuff and I think as the city of NESA continues to get up from that, all these different roles that were defined, we'll need to add stuff to
their job descriptions for that coming up here in the future. >> We'll note that. >> Okay. Can I get a second for that? I think I just seconded. >> Oh. Oh, I didn't hear that. >> Okay. Okay. Any other discussion? >> No.
>> Um, all those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> I. Opposed. Okay. The motion carries. >> The only thing that I will say is once the job descriptions are done, I will send them off to our consultant to just make sure that they're in the right grade and the right pay. And then I will
work with um our search firm to get that posted. >> Who's the consultant? DDA. Yeah, >> that's who did our last study. and Maggie, I'll after we're done today, I'll work on I'll work on cleaning up my notes, getting you my notes so you have everything in one spot.
>> So, I know you typed some of those. >> Yeah, I was typing. Yeah. So, I'll try to get it to you before the end of the day. >> Okay, sounds great. Thanks. >> Okay, perfect. So, the next item is ordinance policies and personnel policy discussion. Now, this can be quite a lengthy
conversation because these are extensive packets. So, one of the things I did is I went through the personnel policy, but Maggie informed me this morning I used the older version. So, I used the older redline version and I went through and redlined the redline version. Um, but
that was not sent to each of you and I hadn't printed it, but >> there's a lot of notes and I know you had said Mark you had done that as well. >> I don't know if Joe you had your thoughts too. So, I I don't know how we want to hand because this
>> could be another two-hour discussion madam mayor >> discussion. So, do you is the best way to handle that to tackle this? Now, I I'm bringing this up because also we have a 10 o'clock special council meeting to talk about the spirits potential expansion and we do have guests here, uh, Andy and Ted Schaefer
who are also to speak and Brian, do we want to spend an hour going through this? Do we want to >> I Madam Mayor, I'd prefer to wait until we hire administrator. That's where I'm looking at to go through it with them here, but that's just my opinion. I'm actually
from a best practice standpoint that makes sense. I don't know how everyone else feels. >> I'm good with that with the exception I think it be worthwhile for us all to outline personnel through it >> because of >> yes >> the limbo that we are in. I think it
would be helpful for us to establish what that committee is. >> I have I just printed something on the printer. um a first draft effort I made at the personnel committee responsibilities. So I just need to grab it and give it to everybody to look at. >> Yeah. And then we can take that and
>> Yeah. I'd like to put this with the five of us before we get somebody else involved. Yeah. >> Ahead of time at least >> have a discussion. But yeah, I don't think we have >> Do we come back? >> We don't have the time for that today. So, do we want to continue the meeting
for like the eighth time, but maybe we continue it further away because it'll give everyone a little more time if if not everyone's redlined it and then I can print out this draft, first draft that I took at what the personnel committee is, then you guys can all look
at that, digest that. It gives everyone some time. Yeah, I think we can set this continuation meeting at a date to be determined until we have enough information at hand. We we have to set the meeting right now. >> Tom, do we have to set the date and time now? >> Just spin this to the next regular
agenda and then it'll come up there. Okay. If you want to spin it from there, we can do that then. >> So, do we have a motion then to move this to the next regular agenda in November? I'll make a motion to move the personnel policy discussion to the next
regularly scheduled uh meeting. >> I'll second it. >> Okay. Any additional discussion? >> And that'll be November 18th. >> Correct. >> Then >> then we can always push it from there. >> FYI, I'm likely not going to be here. Well, no, I know I'm not going to be here. I got a baby coming today before that. But um
>> that's okay though. I'll try to give my notes and feedback ahead of time. >> That being We can always >> because we want we want a couple hours of time to go over this. >> Um all those in favor signify by saying I. >> I.
>> Opposed. Okay. Motion carries. Now a motion to adjurnn would be in order. >> So moved. >> Second. >> All those in favor of adjournment signify by saying I. I. >> Opposed. Okay. Our special continuation of the council meeting is adjourned. I'm just going to take one minute you guys
before I gave the next one and to grab the stuff off the printer for you guys. Part: 2
call the uh city council special meeting for this Tuesday, October 28th to order. It is 10:06 a.m. Um and we just have one agenda item for this special council meeting and it is the discussion around the spirits of Nisa potential expansion
and a lease discussion. Um before I call Brian up, I'll just give a quick highle uh overview to the full council. Um we have had a few meetings through the liquor committee um based on the
expansion that the Schaers are putting in um where our spirits building is located. Um if you've driven by you've seen the construction well underway. It's moving. It's moving pretty fast and positively it seems. Um so there has been discussion because in the past um
past councils have made a motion about uh the spirits taking 10% of additional space which would be I think about 604 square ft and then some different inputs have come forward um related to our
current lease agreement what a forwardlooking lease agreement would look like and potential options for additional space. So, Brian, why don't we have you come up and and kind of give all all the details to council and uh Tom, feel free to chime in where
necessary and then we'll we'll just get into uh where it goes from there. And Andy, if if you want to come up and say anything after Brian um feel free as well. Good morning, Maggie. Are you able to pull it up on the overhead or not? the uh well, if we
can just go through the each each piece you have on there. The first um the second amendment of the lease. So, everybody has a second amendment of the lease on here. And the way I understand it, and Tom, jump in if if
I'm wrong on this, but um you know, our lease that we have currently right now goes until March of 29. And then at that time, we would have a 7-year re um we have an automatic seven-year
renewal if we are interested in that. And that would be um based off of the base rent and the um was it CPI? I believe it is. And so that I look at as you know a binding contract. We if we
move on to the next item on there would be the third amendment and that is a proposal that Schaers is giving us right now and that would basically terminate
if that's the correct word our lease that we have right now and that um as soon as the project is done on their expansion and it would be no later I believe in than June then we would be we would have a brand new
contract from them which the rate would change on that and then they have a shopping center lease agreement and I believe that is just for the new part that we would be taking on. So,
our existing space that we have right now, we're paying $1,779 and our um new lease would go up to $21 a square foot. And then on the shopping center part, which would be the new addition, that would go up to $25 a
square foot. We do have the site plan in there. I'm sure everybody's seen that. I'm just going to skim right over that. And then on the >> actually, if you want Can you start at the beginning because I'm not on it anymore. So, what what are
you asking to change? You know, we're in the lease agreements already, but I'm not even sure >> you're asking what my recommendation is right now. >> Yeah. What are you recommending for the Can we start there? >> Yes. Um my recommendation
if let's just go back to 24 at that time my recommendation was to add 10% if we could come come um to an agreement with Schaers on a acceptable lease rate. Now today my opinion has changed off of the
base rates that are being presented to us from Schaers and my recommendation is not to change anything that we have. So to keep our building and keep our contract exactly the way it is right now. >> So then >> and do nothing
>> and do nothing. I know we would lose um we're going to lose that storage space, but we looked at how much additional space is going to cost um compared to that storage and I don't believe that we can make it up on buys
to um pay for that storage space by having that extra space and getting better deals. Can I just jump in real quick here? Sure. >> Okay. So, just maybe to go way back and I wasn't on the council then and this is in the packet. I think it's the last
item from April 16th of 2024. I believe that's when the council so all of you guys motioned at that time when there was this discussion about the spirits expansion. So, the spirits currently has that container, is that the right word? a storage unit
out back >> where they store extra stock because their current back room >> um isn't big enough to store all the stock especially for high inventory turns when you get into the high season right so I think that was a discussion you all had last spring or April sorry a
year and a half ago spring to with the addition um that the Schaers are putting on to that building to take extra space for at the time you guys motioned just the 10% which would only allow Well, for storage, right, to store extra inventory.
>> And then I don't know if it is in here, Brian. Sorry, on one of your drawings, but the way the space is laid out is the the the building coming new, the space adjacent to where Spirits currently is. So, look at it like a long rectangle, if
you will. The space spirits would take would be in that very back. So, what the Schaffers is creating with this new I don't know if strip mall is the right word is all the front facing is coming out to the parking lot, but then in the back there's like a hallway or a hallway
if you will. The loading dock will move to the other end opposite of Spirits. So, that's where all the trucks would have to back in and then wheel the product through the hallway to where Spirits is at the other end. But then again for the motion of April
24 that 10% that was approved at that time was for storage. Mhm. >> So then the conversation came up when we when we sat down with um Andy and his father was hey actually that entire
adjacent space next to spirits hasn't there's no tenant there for it and if the spirits were interested in expanding and it it could be 100% of that space next to it. It could be 50% 60% right
the shaers were flexible and you know assessing the spirit's needs. So that's where we got into the conversation as a liquor committee of hey would we want to take more more space beyond the 10%. You know having that conversation first in the committee and
then coming up with a recommendation to bring to council. Right. Um >> excuse me. And that is where Schaers has that laid out in the third amendment. They have a few different options on there for us. You have a term one term
two and it it goes keeps going up. So, um, yeah, it's as far as they we need to know and they need to know what we want to do going forward so we can plan for it. But, um, yeah, it's it's laid out in
that one term. >> Yep. And then at our last meeting we had as a liquor committee, right, the discussion Well, you can you can share, you're on it, too. discussion was around, you know, looking at the financials of the situation, right? Um, obviously rent
prices have changed. So, as Brian said, we're at like what 178070 a square foot79 a square foot >> and for the new the new space >> would be 21 >> would be 25 I'm sorry the new space would be $25 a foot and then jumping up
to $27 a foot after >> uh 5 years. >> Mhm. So then that opened up the discussion with us is wait how does the new pricing impact the current spirit space
>> and I do have a sheet in there if it would be right after the two um diagrams that we h that you guys have Joe you have it right in front of you be the next page I believe and that has some scenarios laid out so right now we are
paying $108,000 a year for the um for our lease. And then if we went to term one, which would be 600 um which would be an extra 604 feet, our base from our old building would go from
108 up to 127. And then the new space would be 15,100. So that would be 142,600 and which would be an increase of $34,612 for that extra space that we be, you
know, for the for the basically the 604 square ft. And then if you go down the list, it just shows term two, you know, if you wanted 1400 square ft. Term three, I only put three of them. they have more than that on their um contract, but um
it just has it all laid out. And you know what I what I look at on here is you know right now in our contract we have a little bit of protection as far as um our increases of rate. Not that
they would do it, but shapers can't come back, you know, and and the end of our lease and say, "Hey, we want 100 bucks a square foot." They wouldn't do that. We know that. But um we do have a protection in there where it's a base rate plus the KPI and in the new
contract I did not see where that was in there. So then we're vulnerable on that aspect also. But if we just take a look at you know right now we are probably averaging 8 to
9% um on net profit. So, if we were to do the term one, which is the 604 square ft, we would have to sell an extra $432,000 and 600 650 uh just to
put the same amount back into the city that we are right now. And obviously, um you know, things do change in there. But, um and then you go to term two, we'd have to sell an extra $681,000. So I mean we're we're talking those
numbers are getting close to what we sell in July and um that's our biggest month and that is our cash cow. >> So there's two core things here. One is a discussion around space additional space from council to give feedback. Is
that something we want to consider or not? And the second is discussion around the lease. Right? We that's why the existing lease is included. The third amended lease is included. That last one, the shopping center, that is only related to additional space. So, there's
kind of the two components. Does that make sense, Joe? Yeah, it makes sense. But, um I mean, we're flat out missing any sort of business plan here. So, I mean, great,
we're talking about a lease. A lease is a lease. You know, that's language for the city of attorney to define, for Schaefer's family to find. I don't know that that's even our discussion. You know, the lease is to protect both sides and to dive deep into those weeds. I
that that's not even our role, I view. Um that's what we have the like I say the attorneys on probably both sides to figure out the lease. If we're talking about um changing, upgrading, renting, adding
the 10% rate, we have all these numbers here, but there's no business plan. What would we do? What would we add? Wines, would we add more seltzers? Would we add more domestics? You know, would we do any of that? Was was any sort of business plan
>> talked about or put together or >> or or plan for for spirits? >> So, back in 24, we put a business plan together and we looked at all different um all different angles on what we can add and what we can't add. Um, I know a
lot of people threw some things, hey, why don't we add this and why don't we add that? We are restricted on certain things that we can sell in a liquor store for Minnesota state laws, but um, you know, some of the areas that we looked at is more um,
more trinkety stuff, which is going to be a slow seller. I mean just to give a a a frame of reference here about 20 to 30% of the products that we have in a store are going to be our what I would say are cash cows are fast turners the
rest are items that trinkle out but you do need to have those items so that people know that they can come and they can depend on you for having the products that they want even though they might not buy certain ones very often. So, anything that we would add would I
would classify in that category. The only item that we um we looked at was that would not be in that category would be the THC products. And that would um that would totally change, you know, what we make for revenue for spirits.
But I still go back to are we we're going to bring all these new products in and if we wanted,400 square feet we have to sell it was like six. Let me look here. >> I guess
>> we have No, let me just finish this please. Um, so if we went up to the term term two, which is 1,400 square feet, we would have to sell $681,000. And the only product that I can foresee in there that would
get us not even close to that would be THC products. And we we did have that in our business plan. Um, I could go way into depths on this. I just we as a liquor committee we talked about it and we said, "Okay, how much time do we how
many different angles do I want to go at um with the city council and how much time do I want to spend if they're not interested in this direction at all?" So, I'll jump in. I mean, I was on the committee in 24 and I would not call or
say that a full business plan was put in place at that time. Those discussions did happen, but it was not fully evaluated out. Um, I guess at this point in time, this just highlights the issue that we have with the city owning
businesses. There's no owner. I mean, it's us and these decisions, you know, just quite frankly aren't made in a business fashion because we're a city trying to run a business and without an actual owner in there to dig
deep into this, I'm not sure what we're doing. So, I mean, yeah, the numbers don't make sense. you know, I mean, it's not only here, but with the pickle. We've seen that before from my past time on the liquor committee. And at some point, the council, um, we need to
recognize that, um, running a business without an owner is is pretty difficult to do. Um, and so yeah, I don't know financially, you know, if these are the numbers, I don't know why we'd change
something unless we can actually put together a full-on business plan to make it work to evaluate it, what we're going to do, lay it out, actually have um actually have um something completely
laid out. But I mean, I think those are the steps that we either need to look at and take as a council and say, "Yep, we want to do this." We probably want to seek outside help in doing that and say, "Yep, we're going to we're going to keep the liquor business going in the city of
Nisa. We want to keep this going for the next generation, the next decade, whatever our timeline is, and go, "Yep, we want to invest in this. We can make the math work. This is how we're going to do it." or we just say no, hey, these
rules are going to probably change in a couple years. This might be obsolete and we'll just stay as is and and see what the state of Minnesota even rules on this for not for keeping liquor out of grocery stores, gas stations, you know, like every other state, you know,
in the US and just make that decision. So either it's not so much about investing into the building as investing into the business and actually you know are we going to try and grow it and run it or is it just going to be what it is
and we just leave it alone. >> Let's hear from council member Zan quickly too and then council members on because he's on the liquor committee as well. I just wanted to respond to a few things on that and I agree with you. there is no owner in it. But um the city has done very well over the last 20 years by
having a liquor store and it has provided a lot to the citizens as far as reducing their um property taxes and helping on other directions. And I know that there is um you know talk about you know from certain members. I don't know
if it's been in a meeting or not but you know should we be in the liquor business or not. And I just want to remind the city on how much money that um and that is on this page right here. Um on how much that the spirits in Niswah does bring into the city without an owner.
And I'm not saying that I'm disagreeing with anything you're saying, Joe, but um it has done very well by um you know using the format in the system that we have right now. You look at 2024 we raised just a little under 400,000
and then in 23 it was 370,000 and in 22 it was 425,000. Now, those numbers are before we gave the city contribution, but that's a chunk of change that I don't think we should be just saying that we want to get out of the liquor business.
>> Yeah. And that's not what I'm saying, you know. However, I am looking forward instead of backwards. Sure, it's it's done great, but we have to look forward. We're not looking backwards on how great we've done. We're looking forward and we have decisions to make looking forward.
And those are the those are actually the decisions we need to make. So if we're going to um I agree with what you said, it has offset taxes for the people, you know, and all of that. So if us as a group are going to say yes, we want to
continue doing this, then we then we need to look at these numbers and say, "Yes, this is a viable thing. here is our business plan put together to cover that increase of 34,000 or 54,000 or what it whatever it is, but here's our
plan of attack. This is what we're going to do. This is how we're going to do it. This is how we're going to streamline staff. This is how we're going to cut overhead in these areas. Not just find what product we're going to sell, but you know, look at how the business
operates, you know, and redefine it. um just as we go forward to because to take that next jump it might not it might not operate at all the way it currently is operating to make this work and that's just part of making a
business. I want to ask Andy really quick because Joe, you're talking about a business plan if we're going to consider taking it or even consider it, but you know, you're you're under construction. We can all see everything moving cuz so there must be a a timeline or a time window for you that you would
need to know if you want to just come up and offer input there. That would be helpful. Yeah, I guess I mean it's until somebody else wants that space, it's open, but I mean if you're just going to keep going back and forth and no direction on it,
I'm not going to hold that space for you to move forward. Um, >> and that's fair. >> Yeah, that's completely fair. >> Yeah, it really doesn't matter to me. I think the city needs it personally, but that's what I've said for the last three years and we've had a bunch of meetings on
this with different council members and Jenny Max was still here off the start. I mean, just hasn't really gotten anywhere. That's why I felt that this was a need to actually get in front of the council and have you guys talk about it because ultimately it's your decision
on what we do. And Jesse, do you want to weigh in? Because you're on the liquor committee as well. Joe, we've heard your perspective and I hear what you're saying. You know, obviously, yes, if you're going to make a decision, you want a business case, but I'd love Jesse to chime in here.
>> Going back to Council Member Hall's points in regards to the business plan optics, um, kind of where we sit right now. Would you would you say then you're leaning towards the suggestion that Brian is making as of right now? So
>> yeah, as of right now, if we don't have all this other information, there's there's no decision to make because we don't have any of that information. So yeah, it'd be foolish to do anything at this point without without, you know, without kind of a robust
business plan put together. And Brian, I think I made my my point relatively clear in that last meeting that we had here um as a group. Uh which is why I think probably came through up with this exercise is what's our additional sales going to need to be
to offset that cost. Um I don't see the justification for it right now based on the dollar figures that you would need to be trying to generate now. uh even if that's going to erode into the margin as it is right now, if sales
did not increase to that extent, then that's that much less that we'd be taking off of the return from the investment to the city. you're comfortable, Brian, because I know this was a talking point in our
last meeting of if this was not to go through and we don't have any additional square footage from this expansion that they're that they're doing right now. Are you absolutely comfortable with the current square footage in that
storefront and the coolers to the racking of the shelves, etc. with inventory? Comfortable is a tough word to say because it is a struggle. That store is small. We do we do have about $200 a
square foot additional sales than average liquor store sales in the state of Minnesota per square foot. But um just looking at the terms of it, you know what? We don't have to be comfortable. We can thrive with not
being comfortable. And um we'll adapt. I mean, we we did just fine. I wouldn't say just fine, but we survived without a storage container and we before because we've only had it for probably three years and we just have to go back to the way we were doing it back then and there
might be a few deals. Um maybe it'll make me a better buyer and um you just have to look at it a little closer. I mean, like like what Joe's saying, I um you know, just because we were doing it that way in the past doesn't mean that's the way we should be doing it in the
future type thing. And so, yeah, I think I think we would be I think we'll thrive no matter what in that store. It's just a matter of how much money we'll make. And I feel at this point um with the rates that we've been presented um that
our best bet is just not to add any extra space. And if we could come to an negotiation where it was um a price that the city would be more comfortable with, I probably would have a different opinion. But just jumping back, I just want to jump back a little bit to um the
um con comprehensive plan that Joe was talking about. I don't disagree at all with that. And I guess if we are going to do that, I recommend that we have an outside agency come in and do it because that's not my specialty. I have I have strong opinions. I you know hopefully
they would work with me and we we would um kind of hash things out. But if we were to get um the extensive comprehensive plan that um would make sense for a um business then I would think we would want to have somebody
that does that professionally. So question, not having the storage container unit out there, is there a possibility of losing sales because we don't have that square
footage. >> I don't see us losing sales, but we just might not make quite as good a margins on those sales. >> So, we're still losing >> profit profit. But there but there's a reason for that and that's because of the the bulk discount buying correct
>> the deals. >> So then if it's profit what would be the percentage of profit because I'm I'm just looking at this and going okay if we're going to lose you know if we're not losing sales that's one thing but if
we're losing profit that's even more troubling. So if we're going to lose profit are we going to lose $34,000 in profit? No, we actually ran through that scenario. You used Brian the Svveetka,
>> right? Right. Sevkite exam. >> The bulk discount was $3 per bottle. And how many And how many bottles? >> Well, we bought literally it was a really good deal. So, we bought 100 cases. And that's so that's 600 bottles
and um at three bucks a bottle. So that's uh >> $1,800 through the course of each >> that was well we would turn that at like in about nine months >> type thing. And so, you know, going back
to would yeah, we would have less inventory and um we just it would sometimes and I'd be the first to admit it. Sometimes I buy more products than um because you have a certain amount of terms on on the product every every
year. And sometimes I'll have I'll be long on a product because it was a really good deal. And I don't necessarily always I'll pass some of that savings on to the customers, but I'll pass some of it on to the city also. And um there's a lot of different ways
of arguing that and saying is that the right way of doing it or not? And it could be argued on both sides. >> Um we haven't heard from council member London or Freley yet. So, do you have any >> trying to get a picture on this big
expansion >> as far as the uh storage building and so forth and how much more money you're going to make, what's going to be the cost of it and you it's going to have to buy the inventory, too. So, I guess let's see what happens. Let it play out, but if it works for the best, you know, I'd be in favor of
>> Okay. And council member Freley, we haven't heard from you yet. Any questions? No, I understand that the loss in profit, Joe, with working with many liquor stores for almost 30 years is minimal. It won't even come close to what the added cost would be. I'm
comfortable if Brian's decision is we don't need the expansion. He can work with what it is. I'm I'm comfortable with that. Um but I just don't want two years going, "Hey, we really should have done that."
So, if if your recommendation is no expansion, um I'll back you on that one. I'll say no. >> And I'll just be really clear. Um the only product that I would ever see that would um we would say, "God, we missed the boat is if um would be THC and
whatever else comes down that avenue." And right now, the city as Spirits is not selling it. And that was my decision or that was um not my decision at all. That's your guys's decision. But that was um from a comfort level of myself.
But um would I still go back to it is your guys's decision. >> Andy, >> yeah, Andy has something. >> Perfect. Numbers openly.
Thank you. missing what I call a double technology. >> Oh, no worries. >> The main thing is the last page
>> or the first page. >> First page. >> Yeah, first page which is actually >> this one right here, Andy. Okay. But >> well, it' also be interesting to see what D pickle does on their sales, too. But >> my question is this on if THC's were to
go in and we say yes, we want you to sell them at the spirits, would we be without you? >> Uh, that it's irrelevant if you're without me or not. The next person, I'm not saying that I would quit at all. Um, but I'm not saying I went to either, but
the next person that would come in would do just as good a job as me. >> Can I interject something quick before I forget it, Andy? That stuff you just brought up to the council is THC related. Uh, >> it's just sales. It says sales store.
>> Okay. >> No, no, I don't. No, I don't. What I'm just going to say is once you're done with that part of the conversation, then I want to give have you give that back to Andy. >> Okay. >> So that we don't have it. You've seen it. Give it back to Andy. You You read what you read. Just don't want that to
be out there in the world. That's proprietary stuff. >> Sorry, I wrote on it. >> Nice. So once again though, I think one of the fundamental questions and just like what Andy shared with us, you know, there there is potential I think in all
sorts of areas for growth. And the thing that's never been defined and like Brian said too having an outside company. So as oasis so to speak the owners of these businesses are we going to invest? Do we see this as a business and a
business model that is worth investing the time, the money, the effort, and the dollars of trying to grow it into something more than it currently is, you know, and that would be like Brian said, probably bringing an outside
group to help us grow it, see what we can do more efficiently, THC or any other products. What can we do that we're currently not doing there to increase our sales, increase the benefit for the city? And then and is
this still a long-term plan in my mind? Long-term meaning, you know, 10 plus years for the city to do it? Does that pay off? And um looking at that because then fundamentally that's that's still a
missing question here today. Well, that's the question for council, how council feels about that, right? So, that's one question. Then the second question is, is council prepared today to make any motion around this >> or do we want to gather more information
come back in November? The reason I called this special meeting today is because, you know, obviously Shavers are a key partner in this and Brian being the manager of spirits and Andy is not in town for our November meeting and Brian wasn't sure if he was going to be in town or not at that time. And so I
felt like for this to be the most productive, transparent, robust conversation, we need to have all the key players here >> more information. >> Yes. Otherwise, it's hard to do it if someone is trying to go in on Zoom and maybe their schedule change isn't right. So, there really are kind of two
decision trees. So, does council want to have more information come forward and to and to have this on the November agenda? Is council prepared to make any motions today? Right. >> Could I just interject? I don't know
that we could get any extra information in one month to this to the council and because the only other information that I could see would be um an outside firm coming in. >> I mean, I don't know if you agree or disagree with that, Joe. I can we get
anything else within a month to you guys? I don't know. I mean, I >> from what I know and what we talked about back in 24, it it kind of got to that point where we'd need an outside consultant that specializes in municipal liquors stores um to come in and maybe
help us on what we want to do. But yeah, the question is, are we going to invest in a business? Is this once again, is this a long-term business that the city right now sees that we're going to be in? Well, how do let's just take a high
level pulse check. Council member Freley, how do you feel? >> Like I said, I'll Brian can't come back in one month with everything that's needed. That's not realistic. You know, you're looking at three months. Uh, >> but how do you feel in terms of
investing in this as a long-term business for the city or, you know, >> I want to keep it? If we can invest and it makes sense economically for us, for the city to do it, then I'd be for the expansion. If not, no. But it's going to
take at least three months to get the information that we're looking for. I think it's an important business to have in a community and I think that it's a it's a good investment and I think we need to look at it and of course get as much information we can make good decision but I think it's a it's a very
wellestablished and important business. It draws a lot of people in the area. I think we need to support it. >> Council member Zan >> I'm not exactly clear on what that question is. just how Joe keeps talking about, you know, are we as a long-term investment for the city and, you know,
then if if council's feeling like, >> yeah, we might then we would look at maybe >> I think it would absolutely I think it fundamentally change if the state legislature relinquishes the municipal liquor
exclusivity. If that happens then then perhaps that business model changes and perhaps if that changes in the next five ten years regardless of when terms of the contract are and I know there's some clauses in there to help protect the city but
are we that's why I go back to the question of are we comfortable where we're at right now. If we're comfortable we're at right now. >> Yes, we are. >> Swap some product out on the shelves, put some THC on there if that's what we're thinking is going to be able to drive some additional sales
and proceed forward as is >> and I think we know where you stand unless you have additions >> same as back in 24. I think, you know, just from the information that I'm I've learned, if the city is going to
continue to do this, then we need to look at the uh liquor in the city as a whole, both the off sales, you know, down there and up here and the pickle business, and just re-evaluate the way
that all of those are working together throughout the city and what the best dollar amount is for the city. I I believe right now we are um missing revenue
um in the way that as a whole that whole system works and do we want to invest in it and so I'm I'm looking at it as one whole big picture on you know because obviously this is down there but we still have the same question with the pickle.
So, I wouldn't be opposed to looking at it more in detail and in depth with somebody, but I also agree with Jesse. US being basically the last state and it
changes, it's going to change the whole model for us. >> I'll clarify that. Alaska, Maryland, and South Carolina all have municipal liquor stores, and Minnesota does, too. Now we go into Tennessee, Kentucky,
Texas, and a couple others. They have stateowned municipal, but we're not the only one that has still has city-owned municipal. >> I'm not in the legislature, but I don't I haven't heard that that is >> a high priority or on anyone's radar on
either side of the aisle to make any changes, >> right? >> But again, you never know. Legislature changes. Is is this something maybe that we could have a workshop or something to dive more into it to kind of get a plan of action for the liquor sales as a
whole within the city? >> Well, ju just to be clear, the topic of this or the the purpose of this special meeting is to discuss the the expansion of >> the building >> and if the and if we're going to entertain modification to the lease or a new lease
for that cooler space. And I think >> he's made his recommendation. We have all discussed it. >> Do we have a motion related to the purpose of this special meeting? >> I have no motion to make.
>> You do or don't? >> No. Because if we're not, why would we need to have any council motion if we're not taking any action? Right. So, >> because I think a past council did take >> You want to say anything else? >> The motion you guys did make that motion for that.
>> I did I I looked at the uh the minutes from the last meeting wherever it's at in this packet here. Um we stated so the motion going back to April 16th 24. >> Here it is. The motion was made by
former mayor Ryan, seconded by Council Member Freley to approve that staff continue conversations with Schaers regarding a 10% expansion pending approval contingent upon acceptable lease cost. Motion carried unanimously. Where it leaves us today is terms have
been proposed. The evaluation has been done and conducted by Brian and the liquor committee. >> Now it's up if we want action, right? We don't need to take additional council motion based off of that to my >> No, I think that motion I I interpret
that language you just read, Jesse, from 2024 as just sort of continue the conversation. It's exploratory, which is where you are now. >> Yep. >> Um if you're if you're going to take no action with this any of this these expansion scenarios, then I think you
know Andy and Ted are here. They're hearing that. And what that means to them is that um and and they were always going to do that. I mean, if they I don't know if there was some sort of I don't want to say right of first refusal, but if there was something hot in that additional space, I'm guessing
Andy would let you know so that you've got to make a decision. But if you're if you're coming out of this with no intention to do anything with those other lease scenarios, then at least they know now that they don't need to worry about whether they need to communicate with you about that further.
is what that feels like to me. >> And then Tom, related to anything on the lease, that would just you would work directly with you and Brian with >> with Andy and his folks on or >> if you were interested in exploring some
additional space, then we would have conversations about what lease scenarios look like and how they're written and everything. But I don't hear you saying that here. No, what I'm talking about is there's the current lease version which is a second amended lease and now
there's a third amended lease based on irregardless if we take more space um the work being done about how that financially might change or the terms of the lease the the remainder of our lease might change. That's that. Unless I'm
articulating this incorrectly, please correct me. That is what that third amended lease agreement is in the packet. >> I I really didn't read it. I just took the third amended lease to be an offshoot of the discussion. If if you're getting extra space, then there
would be an amendment to the lease that exists now to account for the different square footage and all of that stuff. So if you're electing to do nothing with respect to extra space now, then there's nothing to do with the lease that exists now. >> Okay. That was not my understanding, but I may have misunderstood. So I want to
let Andy speak. >> Yeah. So that third amendment is the loading dock and heated sidewalk that we're installing. >> Okay. I don't I don't I don't understand. >> You don't What?
>> Well, I haven't really looked. So, if you I I guess ultimately if you're not going to pay that third amendment, then you're going to have to take your deliveries through the front door because if you're not going to pay for the upgraded amenities, then you can't use them.
>> So, maybe to help clarify, Tom, behind their building, they're putting in a whole covered loading dock to their back door, new access that just doesn't walk outside. So now I'll be in covered a whole hallway system that will be shared
>> with all the parcels. Correct. And and so what Andy's saying is if you want access to that new heated covered loading dock area, access to use your back door, all that stuff. It doesn't add square footage, but I'd say it's
common space access maybe that you guys are now providing that Andy is saying if you want to be able to use that the way you have then they want to charge something for the >> access space. Does that am I correct?
Yep. >> In explaining that >> and that's so Tom that's what I was asking. Is this a discussion just with you directly as a city attorney and the Schaers on this third amended restated lease agreement or is this something that we need to talk about here since we're all here today?
>> Yeah, I didn't know that that's what this third amended lease agreement did. So, probably the answer is yes. >> Yes. >> Some continued conversation. Yeah. I don't know what this says about this increases the rent. >> It increases the rent from its current
base rent to $21 a foot. Yeah, I put I I thought I put this in an email to you and council member Zan and Brian uh last week after our meeting with Andy to make sure everyone was clear about it. >> Yeah, if you you want me to explore that
then I will. I haven't done that prior to now. A quick review of that then in that context is obviously additional square footage but then it's taking away the the indexing that takes place that currently exists in the lease when it
would come to an extension. So there's all kinds of issues with that and I don't know about the I don't know about the logistics of taking deliveries differently. I don't know if if the reconfiguration of that building which
re which would revise what we're right what our rights to are under this lease right now. I don't know whether that's doable. >> So would would you need a motion from council to give you the direction to be able to look into the leases and then
coordinate with Brian and Schaers on discussions as related to those leases? Yeah, you probably should designate if that's the question. If I'm going to do that and Brian and I are working and talking with the the Schaers about that, then you probably should designate somebody within your group also to be >> Oh, the liquor committ.
>> Probably the liquor committee. >> Yep. >> Okay. >> The motion. >> Okay. So, um I make a motion that the council uh give the direction for our city attorney to work um and assess the lease
agreement. are existing and the amended and then to engage in discussions with the Schaers uh involving Brian and also the representatives of the liquor committee. >> Second. >> Any additional discussion? All those in favor signify by saying I.
>> I. >> Opposed? Okay. Motion carries. >> Can I just have one more comment in there? Um, you know, right now we do have the loading dock on the side and um, we have a place to put the garbage
and um, recycling and all that stuff. If we weren't to use the loading dock, I know you guys are putting that service drive in the back. Then um, you know, to keep our our um, what we've have right now, we they could make the deliveries
in that through that um, service drive. >> They what? they could make all the deliveries through that service drive. And so that way we would not because >> which is also new, >> but we're losing a loading dock. >> This conversation can happen now that
the council motion has been made. So, >> yep. >> Have these conversations. >> Okay. >> Offline. >> Okay. Do we have anything else related to the spirits of Nisa expansion and lease discussion? >> Do we as a council want to continue any
other discussions with any of this liquor and investing into it or anything or just leave it alone? Do we want to do we want to try and explore this to give staff guidance as we continue down the road or just
leave it as is? for, you know, are, you know, we're the we're the owners. Are we going to look at exploring any of this stuff, investing in it, or we're just saying, "Nope, it's just going to run as is." >> I think it would benefit the city to
consider exploring what the spirits could look like into the future, right? We don't have that data. We're just going off of kind of uh best guess estimates based on historicals and and Brian's experience up there. But if we're serious about a
city, as we do have two streams of revenue that many cities don't have and we want to consider that, we should consider professionalizing it and and looking at that with an outside entity to help us do an assessment to see, hey,
is this worth the investment? But I think it's not shouldn't just be limited to spirits. I think it should be the liquor portfolio. >> Yeah, I would suggest anybody that has any input or insight of a particular direction to contact us on the liquor committee and then we could start um
formulating ideas, opinions, getting some leg work done with some any documentation, any data that we can pull and then start putting that forward to uh future council meetings. We're getting into the slow season anyway. Yeah, we have more. >> So, we got we got some
time if that works for everyone. >> Yeah, I think that's great. Just so we leave here with a little guidance and we're staff and kind of >> Okay, good. If there is nothing else, a motion to adjurnn would be in order. >> So moved. >> All those in favor signify by saying I
>> opposed. Okay, meeting is adjourned. Thank you everyone. >> Thanks. Did you catch him before he left? So, are you able to sign or do you need somebody else? Well, that's better.