For those of you on Zoom, um I'm just going to try and call out your name and I just want to make sure that we can hear you and you can hear us. Jesse, >> good. >> Jesse, can you hear me? >> Yes. Can you hear me?
>> I'm not hearing anything, Jesse. I see you're unmuted. >> Can you hear me? Nothing yet. H. Okay, Flora can hear you, Jesse. It's just not me. Let's see.
Flora or Mike or Michael? Are any of you able to talk that I can hear you? >> This is Flora. I'm talking now. Can you hear me? >> Well, this is not good. >> Are you able to hear me now, Maggie? Nothing.
>> We can hear >> Jesse. >> Yeah. >> Okay, bear with me a second. Where's my tech guys? Hey, Stephen, Amber, somebody. Um,
they can hear each other. They just can't I can't hear them. They can hear me. I've tried to unmute people. I have tried changing >> sound. Yes, you take control. I feel like I have exhausted every avenue.
Hey, Tyler. Yep. >> Well, they can hear me. I just can't hear them. Yep. Is this what happened? >> No, at least our microphones work tonight. >> Oh, last time.
>> Yep. So, even the default system settings for sound when we tested to converge, it's not even making an audible sound on here. Is there like a different? >> Yeah. When we go into the mixer
allows you to select a different output device, but only one output device displayed. >> Lauren, you still able to hear me? >> This one? >> Yeah, I can hear you fine, Jesse. Okay. >> And Michael was just texting me and saying he could hear both of us as well.
So, I think it's definitely something going on in their room. >> That's a lot better now for me, too. That's your microphone. >> I know. I was just trying to see if there was another option. Just >> Yes. each other.
There's Just reset devices and >> can try it. Not working anyways. I am. That might be an option. You can join by phone. turn one of the mics on even on another
computer, another device with the output going over our speaker for people that are aud We could do that. >> That'd be a roundabout way of getting it on. Have a use your computer. You're not navigating that.
>> I might have to use that one. >> Yes. Okay, we're going for those of on Zoom, we're going to try and do a work around because I have no sound for you guys. So hopefully we don't have a lot of feedback, but we're going to try and
open up a computer and have it join by phone so then we can plug it into a microphone. So, just bear with us for a second, please. All right, I'm going to test my speaker.
Can you guys hear me? Can hear you. Can you hear me? Yep. >> How's the sound in the background? All right. me. Maybe I did the magic touch back there.
>> Maybe you still got us. >> Yes, I am. >> Great. Good evening. >> Hello. Do we want to do just a voice check with everybody? How about Flora? Can you speak just to make sure we have volume here? >> Hi and happy St. Patrick's Day.
>> Wonderful. Thanks. How about Michael? Michael, >> I can hear you loud and clear in the room. >> Oh, I have a mic and a Michael. So, how about Michael? >> This is Michael. I hear you loud and clear in the room as well as those uh already speaking on the call. >> Wonderful. How about you, Mike?
>> I can hear you just fine. Thank you, Mayor. >> Fantastic. Thank you guys for your patience. We are recording and we are live on YouTube and everybody is remote that is going to be here tonight. Good.
All right. I will officially call the Nisa City Council meeting on this Tuesday, March 17th, 2026 at 6:05 p.m. to order. If you could all stand and join me in the pledge of allegiance.
>> I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. All right. The first item on the agenda
is to approve the agenda. I would entertain a motion to approve tonight's agenda. >> Second. >> I'll make a motion to approve. >> All right. Second. >> All right. Um, all those in favor signify by saying I.
>> I. >> Opposed. Okay. Motion carries. Next up on our agenda is the consent calendar notice to the public that all matters listed in the consent calendar are considered routine by the council and will all be enacted by one motion. There
will be no separate discussion of these items unless good cause is shown prior to the time the council votes on this motion. Uh I would entertain a motion to approve the consent calendar. >> I make a motion to approve the consent calendar.
>> Second. Any discussion? All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Opposed. Okay. Motion carries. Next up is open forum. Um this is a chance for anyone from the public who would like to address the council. You can come up to
the microphone. We ask that you state your first and last name and then you will have a time limit of two minutes. Um does anyone have anything for public comment? again. First, oh, first and last name, address, and then after you state that,
I will start the timer for two minutes. Okay. >> Andy Schaefer, 23962 Smiley Road. Uh, last council meeting, you guys talked about getting me in touch once again with the liquor committee. Uh, I reached out to Jesse on February 23rd, had a
little conversation, and I have not heard anything back from anyone. Uh, I know you're not supposed to respond to this part of it, but this is getting a little ridiculous. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Schaefer. Do we have anybody else that would like to address the council? If again, if you
can state your first and last name, your address, and then I will start the timer, and you have two minutes. >> Hi, my name is Ronald Dwey Jr. I'm at 26735 Middle Cullen Road. I have a very similar concern as Andy Schaefer does. I've called two different council
members, left three messages. I got no return calls. This is over a month or so. Um, they're elected officials. Please get back to us by telephone. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Dwey.
Anybody else for public comment? Going once. again. If you can state your first and last name and then your address, then I will start the timer and you will have two minutes. >> Uh Bob Fear, uh 4984 Ruben's boy, Nisma
by 6468. Um, I'd like to just uh reserve possibly a few moments for comments after the uh council members, whoever is the point person discusses this um purified water system project. And
that'll be later in the meeting, but I'm not sure what comments are going to be made or what information is going to be supplied. I've been gone for about better part of a month, so I'm in the black. Maybe due to my absence, but I know very little about it. Thank you. >> Thank you.
All right. Do we have anyone else for public comment? Okay. Going once, going twice. All right. We will move along then. Next on the agenda, we have reports. And we'll start with our city attorney, uh, Mr. Blomber.
>> Good evening, everybody. I don't have anything to report here. I got a couple agenda items to speak to coming up, but nothing else to report. >> Thank you. Um, next up under reports, our city engineer, Mr. Reese. >> Yes. Um, just to report, we're making
good progress on all the active projects currently underway. We have several action items for the city council in the packet tonight. So, that'll be a little later on. That's it. >> Thank you. >> Okay. >> Okay. Um, now we will move on to old
business. And the first item under old business is the administrator uh slash clerk position. Um, before I call on Mr. Humple, just to give everyone a background, uh, for those that may or may not remember, um, we did the city
council did choose to engage with a firm called SCSC based out of North Mano. um and they were working on sourcing candidates for the city of Nisa to fill the city administrator clerk role which was kind of the top of the um org chart
if you will from a staff perspective. We held final interviews uh at our last the date of our last regularly scheduled council meeting which was February 17th and then council had alignment on a a first choice for a candidate. Um and
then council opted at that time that if that first choice candidate chose to decline that we would prefer to go back to the drawing board. Um and unfortunately that candidate did decline. So back with us tonight we do have Mr. Humple from SCSC
um to go over with us I think Mr. Humble, if I'm not um incorrect here, an updated timeline and some other components related to uh this position. And I will turn it over to you. And Mr. Humble is with us via Zoom.
>> Thank you, Mayor, and and good evening, members, council. Um what I'd like to do, um you know, to start off with is um just just start by saying I think you had five very wellqualified candidates. one before the interviews took place. Um
was offered a position in Tonka Bay, Minnesota. You made an offer to one and that didn't work out. I think you had three more. Um, I would just want to have a brief conversation tonight about
your appetite for possibly interviewing another candidate, one of the candidates that was a finalist, but I felt has a lot of possibilities and maybe in a
different setting, maybe a little more casual around a table that before we went back out for um a a second search that maybe um you might entertain
interviewing this person. I I've talked to them and that they would be willing to do that. Um and I just want to get maybe some feedback on that. I I I think sometimes in the interview process we
can get too fixated on one candidate or the other and sometimes with a little more time in a second interview that's a little more enamant around a table not up in a in a structured council chamber sometimes things um change a little bit
and and things are a little more casual and we get more information. So just like some feedback about that idea. >> Mr. Humple, can you share with us which candidate that is that you are referring to? >> Emily Burns.
>> Um, let me start with Council Member Zan for his feedback. I don't have any opposition to the prospect of it. No. Uh I think that uh if that candidate's willing to come through then
if this council unanimously agrees then perhaps we can move forward with an interview. >> Um council member London your your perspective. >> I would entertain. I'd like to reinter. >> Okay. And council member Hall your perspective.
Um, I guess you know, we hired you to find us some candidates to talk to and so definitely not opposed to to um talking with this individual, but also to um if
we could just back up a little bit. Um, you know, uh, the top two picks actually declined to come back and talk to the city. That is correct information. The the second candidate, you know, that we had in mind that we
were going to reach out to to they also declined the offer when when we engaged with them. Is that accurate information? >> I don't >> what you shared with is what you shared with Mark and I. I don't recall.
Um I don't think any there was another offer made to come back. Well, >> I talked to I talked to two two of the two of the candidates that um weren't offered the position and asked them
whether they would entertain re, you know, reintering. One declined and one said no, but I don't know that I had any conversations with anybody about it. Boy, just that though that Yeah, that decline. So I I just bring
that up because we had talked or discussed in the meeting. There was kind of a uh a second favorite, you know, that we got feedback from the staff interview process, but I just want to make that clear that that person was off the table also.
>> Okay. Well, Council Member Hall, I'm confused because when we when we vote voted as a council, we were in close session. We only voted to make an offer to the top candidate. We had all said we were not
interested at that time in the second candidate that we would then go back to the drawing board and then we empowered or motioned for the personnel leaison which are yourself and council member Freillley to engage in whatever negotiations were necessary to hopefully close the deal with the first candidate.
I was not aware and I don't remember council taking action to make an offer to a second candidate. >> No, we did not make a motion to make an offer to a second candidate. We we spoke with them about possibly reaching out and engaging because the second
candidate was not here for an in-person interview. >> He was on the Zoom >> and so we had asked, "Hey, would this candidate be open to come in here to an in-person interview?" That's when Mark, myself, we were all on the phone just to bring everybody up to speed what's
taking place. That candidate said no, that they are no longer interested. And that was without an official thing just going by the rank from the employees and from what the council said would have been a number two thing you know going
back like what are our options at this point. So I just I just want to bring that up that they are off the table and now we're moving on to potentially candidate number five. Correct. the fifth one down
>> s I don't think she was number five Emily Burn >> that's what I'm asking we we never >> we so the I think the question Mr. Humble is asking is would we be willing
to entertain uh interviewing or meeting with Miss Burns again? I heard council member Zan say he is open to it. I heard council member London say he's open to it. Are you open to it or no? >> I'm I'm open to it. I guess my question with all this and and this information
is there anybody is there anybody else currently that you guys have or you know I believe that you said maybe there is 30ome candidates that originally applied. Is this person the only one out of the 30? Do you have any more
information? >> Mayor and council there was 20 that applied. But you know what? I'm not going to I'm not going to offer any any candidates below um number five. I I just don't think that um the candidates
knowing what I know and talking to Wendell about about the um interviews. I think that our best course of action would be to um interview the Emily, the other gentleman
that that was out of town and interviewed over Zoom, had originally said he would and then called us later and declined um to interview again um with really he he just feels he has some a little more
time where he's that um again I think that there's a lot to be said for another interview in a more informal setting where people can ask unscripted questions and have a little
more dialogue with one candidate for a period of time. So I I don't and and answer I don't think we have any candidates um beyond the five that we brought forward or four that we brought forward.
The one got received a job in Tonk Bay. Um so yeah I think if we don't want to reinter one then I have some other ideas. >> So >> Mr. Humple. >> Yes sir. >> Go ahead. >> Go ahead. >> If I may miss if I may have question for
you in regards to Emily. Was was Emily one of the four that we interviewed or was she not? >> She was one of the four you did interview. Yes. >> Okay, understood. Um, in regards to just some feedback that I don't I haven't been relayed. I don't
know if the rest of the council has or has not, but is there any feedback as to why the uh offered candidate was or ultimately declined? Is there any feedback you can give us? I think the
the feedback that he gave me was that he he felt the the housing market was a little higher than he anticipated and was concerned or I wouldn't say concerned, maybe a little bit of
hesitation with an election coming up and and and some of what um he saw, but it basically it boiled down to, you know, gee, I don't know if I'll be able afford to live in the immediate community and he just was not
comfortable with his with making a final decision to accept. >> Okay. Appreciate that. >> Jesse, for your knowledge, we haven't been able to talk the offer that went forward. You know, Mark and I were appointed for that. You know, um his
request, we had made the kind of top tier offer just so everybody knows kind of top tier offer. We had all offered kind of what would be the top of that position for the city, a really good
offer. And kind of in my own assessment, he came back and and even shot a little bit higher for the moon. And it just it Mark nor I really thought it was even a starting point to negotiate. And so it
was it was quite a bit out of bounds on what the criteria was even put in place by us as a city. >> Got it. Um so Madame Mayor, if I may, I'm going to take that I'm going to resend my notion of interviewing a
second time and defer to the personnel committee or a determination from this uh topic to be able to find a path forward. >> Correct. Now that I'm understanding kind of who this is. Correct. I >> Yeah, it's just been about a month. So, you know, try to put a name to a face
again. >> So, we we will we will not defer to the personnel committee moving forward. This is a council action. So, Mr. Humple, it sounds like there will not be a motion to interview uh Emily, Miss Burns, a second time. So, we would be interested
to learn since we have you here today, what the forward path is, what that timeline looks like, and any other input you can share with us today. >> Okay. Well, what I have to share is, you know, I
think that um and now I I I was not here, so I'm just, you know, Wendell and I talking. I think what we'd like to do is make sure that we have uh consensus from the council that if we're to talk to the the um personnel committee or the
hiring committee that that's who we talk to and we're we're not put in the middle of any communication dynamics. And then I would offer that um we go back out um
on the market beginning April 21st advertise for 30 days to May 21st. Um from May 22nd to May or excuse me from May 22nd to June 12th these things
would occur. I would interview with the or and talk to the first um five or six candidates. Um get a sense of that. Crystal Hansen would do her PXT assessment and leadership assessment. I
would do background checks, reference checks, and then um get ready to um finalize a top five. And hopefully we could get
that done and interview on June 23rd. >> Um, >> so I I've got a question for you. Well, I've got a couple things. >> My thing is >> I I can't tell who I'm talking to. >> Yeah, we got to council, please
remember, wait until I recognize you. Um, so go ahead, Council Member Hall. >> Okay. You're talking to Joe. So, a couple things that I want to address. Um, first of all, you brought it up. Yes, it was motioned and made a motion that you talk to the personnel
committee. That was always the motion. That was a issue this last time. Mark and I are the only people to talk to. Motion to even um the city labor attorney has weighed in on this. He was going to I know that he talked the
window. He also sent me an email this last time when the mayor called you. That was illegal to give out the information. State statute. It's >> council member Hall. You're actually you're incorrect. It is not illegal. And you are not from We are all five. I am
>> council member Hall. I am the presiding officer. >> But you're not I am I I am the presiding officer. You are not speaking right now. No, that was actually council member that was one of the things. >> Council member Hall, you have to drop the the decorum rules here. I am the
presiding officer. >> I you are not the city attorney. >> I'm not the city attorney, but I am the presiding officer and it is we are all this is the biggest issue with this council and it has to stop right now. Correct. We are all five equally elected
members of this body. It doesn't matter if I am a personal liaison, if council member London is, if council member Zhan is or not. >> Thanks. >> Because we all can get equal information at the same time. We are not having a shadow council. We're not going to do
this anymore. We're going to we're going to work at the best interest of the city. >> If we want this laid out, the city of labor attorney has clearly laid this out. Email >> any any council member can call can find out anything going on with the city. We
are all entitled to that information. We are equally >> here. My next question. This just proves my next question. >> Council member Hall with the current chaos of the city. We're throwing good money after bad money. Why? Why and how
are we going to get anybody to join this mess? Why are we going to get 20 good candidates that we can offer? We're not going to do it because of this. You were completely out of line, Jennifer. How I found out about this? How did I find out, Jennifer? You called me. What did
you say? You said that Wendle called you. You flat out lied. >> No, I said I spoke to Wendle. Okay, Joe. >> No, it it is and it is illegal. >> It is not illegal. >> Anybody >> Maybe you should brush up on state statute and
>> go to the legal Minnesota cities trainings like I do. Best practice share with other elected officials. It was illegal to close the meeting to go to a public to a private meeting. It was flatout illegal. >> If anybody wants to see the
>> council motion to go session, >> Jennifer, >> council member Zan made that motion. >> I told you a week ago this is done. You bullying, you talking over people, you just trying >> You know what? I am the presiding officer.
>> Well, that's great. I do carry the gavl and no I'm not bullying. I've been bullied by you and others. You know what? I'm going to stand I'm going to stand up for what's right and I'm standing up for the people. Okay, we're going to move on from this. >> This is nonsense. Yes, we are. This is not a >> follow the rules. We're going to follow
what >> council member. Please advise us to do not you end of discussion. If anybody out there wants a copy of the email, >> please do a data request. It was sent to me. >> Please do a data request. data. It was
sent to Wendle. We can provide that for everybody's information. >> All right. >> What happened last time flat out illegal. >> He brought it up, not me. He brought it up to say this time, let's do it correct because they know it was incorrect. I didn't bring this up first.
>> We're going to move on. We have a lot of things on the agenda tonight. >> Saying we do, but if we're going to do stuff, we're going to do it right. And I'm done with this. >> We are going to do it right. And I'm not going to be bullied anymore by you. >> You you the bully >> the
>> the politics that has taken place in this council and in this city. I I'm speaking I hold the gavvel. You you said your peace. >> So here is what's been going on. There has been dysfunction in this city long before I was elected mayor. When I ran
for mayor, I had staff employees come to me and denigrate another employee. council members come to me saying, "We hope you win because we got to get rid of this person." So, there was all this backbiting going on long before I became mayor. >> The staff letter. >> Yeah, let's talk about the staff letter.
>> The current staff letter with everybody signed. >> This is Okay, we're going to move on. If you want to play politics, there is an election in November. >> There is an election. >> If you want, >> council member Hall, this is not on the agenda. Well, you're bringing you know
what we are moving on. We are we are going to go back to the agenda. We are going to talk about the administrator clerk. >> If you want to hash out things at another time, we can do so. >> Points that all council member >> Hall brought up. The first thing point
>> what the point the consultant just brought out is we asked him I asked him what is the new timeline since this council the the individuals here council member Zan uh council well you not what what is the timeline Jennifer what what
do you suggest >> Mr. Humble just said from April 21st to May 21st he will repost the position. From May 22nd to June 12th he will conduct different components like the leadership assessment, background checks, finalize the top five, and then
his goal would be to do a June 23rd interview. So that's what we just heard from Mr. Humple. >> Yeah. And I'm I'm asking him how are we going to get qualified candidates? Who want who wants to join this mess? Who wants to join this current situation? We got a letter back. I was trying to
advise this. I got a letter back. Maggie did. She can speak to it, too. We got notified from the league that with the current situation, the current lawsuits against the mayor and the city that the league doesn't even want to help us step in and help. >> Um, actually, we're not to that agenda
item yet, so we can hold till that agenda item. >> Another point. >> Yes. And I do have points on that, too, cuz I spoke with them as well. So, Mr. Humble has given us a new timeline for um reposting this position back to get a
city administrator/clerk. And Mr. Humble, do you have anything else to add to that timeline that you shared? >> I don't have anything else to add to the timeline, but as I said, we did receive, you know, quite a few applicants before.
We had five very good and well-qualified candidates. I don't know what the future will hold this next time around. >> We won't know any longer. >> Pardon me.
>> Is there any benefit in waiting longer? >> It's you're you're asking him a political question. It's up to the council. So, >> okay. the the there is an election in November. There are two council members up for reelection. I am up as well. So, there are three seats. If this council
would like to decide tonight that we pause on this position until after the election, I would entertain a motion in that regard. If this council feels that in the best interest of the city, we should move forward with the process, then we can entertain a motion to accept
Mr. Humple's revised timeline. It's pretty black and white. So you you choose one or you choose the other. Council members on. Do you have any perspective? If you don't, that's fine, too. I don't. Uh,
no, I don't. It's It's It's going to be tough to fill the position. And I think we've all felt that way as a group. We either have to post it or we don't post it. And if we post it and we find another round of candidates and we're at the same
conclusion, we're going to be in the same situation for a third time come around this fall or late summer. So our options are pretty clear in my opinion. >> Then I would like to recommend that we table this item at this point in time.
Um, a motion to table is not debatable. So, does council align to table this item at this point in time? Council member London. >> Well, I would like to see us get an administrator. We need one and uh we've
got some turmoil going on right now. We've got a lot of stuff. Uh it uh it's plain as day. Um a lot of negativity right now. I uh I'm aware of this thing called the Nextoor app and it's just
disgusting all the stuff that we see on there regarding people in the community um hitting on uh the city council and all the negativity and you know I'm just concerned is where is this initiating from? Where's it coming from?
>> Let's let's let's get back to this. Do would you where is your preference on the city administrator clerk? Would you like to table this? Would you like to proceed as Mr. Humple outlined as a timeline? >> Is there going to be an additional cost to this? >> Mr. Humble, is there an additional cost
to this? >> Um, we sent Maggie some information. I've I've got it here. All we're asking is that you um pay some additional advertising cost. Let me get that number. >> It's in your packet. >> It's It says uh $1,734.
>> Correct. So that's an additional cost. >> That's it. >> Um I think that the council should get together and we should discuss this further >> rather than make a decision. >> I'm saying table it for tonight is what
I'm asking. Are okay council members on are you how do you feel about tableabling this for tonight? And >> I'm I'm in favor for tableabling it tonight. And I think uh Madame Mayor we can put it on the agenda perhaps for next month. >> Sounds good. Council member Hall, how do you feel about tableabling this for
tonight? >> I guess we can table it. I I don't know what what that's going to solve. I I would ask Mr. Humble, what what is your gut feeling? You know, right now you had um 25%
out of the candidates. Do you feel like you're going to get another 20 candidates even? Do you feel like you're going to get 10? What What's your read? you do this for a living. >> It's awfully quick to come back and readvertise.
Um, you know, I think there's going to be some hesitation on individuals parts um about gee, do I uproot my family and all of those sorts of things and you
know I it's but you that's in any search where where people are going to move. It's, you know, I don't want to get into the the politics of it. It's it's not our place. Um, but I just can tell you
that I feel candidates will continue to have some hesitation. >> So then let's table it. >> All right. So I need an official motion. I will entertain a motion to table this. >> Madame Mayor, I'll make a motion to table the uh agenda item. Excuse me. I'm
trying to navigate through screens on a laptop screen. Uh, I'd like to make a motion to table the city administrator/kirk clerk search uh until further notice. >> Okay. Do we have a second? >> I'll second it. >> All right. Any additional discussion?
All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. I. >> Opposed. Okay. Motion carries. All right. Next agenda item under old business is the spirits and pickles. So, at the February meeting, um the council motioned that uh the liquor committee
could look into different consulting uh companies to assess uh the city's liquor businesses, one being Spirits, the municipal liquor store up in Schaefer's parking lot, and the other one being the Pickle right next door. um
the liquor committee conferred and uh moved forward on a statement of work uh with a company called Delaney Consulting. Um that work commenced I think it was last Monday and uh from that work that took place uh Michael was
up here in the area um conducting meetings and doing his initial analysis. From that came uh a need to potentially rescope the uh consulting agreement and so that is what is before us this evening. Um apologies to all members of
the public but we this this rescope or statement of work did not um get into the original packet on Friday and that was because Michael was up here working hard till Friday and they had to work really hard to get this to the council and to the public uh in our packets on
Monday. So, it is now updated, but I will turn it over Flora and Michael to you um to update us here on where things are at. >> Thank you, mayor. Thank you, uh, council members. I'm Flora Delaney. I'm the president of Delaney Consulting. And
last week, many of you might have met Michael Bitser. He's my business partner. And together, we have been working with municipal liquor operations in Minnesota for 14 years now. Um, I want to briefly take you through the S.
So materials that starts on page 96 of your packets. I'm going to tell you about the original S. So that was signed. Michael then will quickly take you through what we learned last week and what's changed and then I'll come back through with a quick summation. Um,
we're hoping we can get through this in easily 10 minutes for you all. And then if you could want to hold your questions until the end, that way we can kind of hopefully anticipate what your questions might be, but then answer any that you might have at the end of that if that's okay.
So on March 2nd, we were first contacted by the city and it was the municipal general managers who reached out to us to say that in response to what the city council had asked, they were looking for somebody who could come in and help them do an evaluation. first and foremost on
the uh possible expansion of the Spirits liquor store that there were a number of avenues in front of them in terms of how many square feet it could grow, what the cost of that would be, but more importantly how to use that space and what that might mean for a threeyear to
fiveyear business plan. Um there was a lot of urgency put behind that. In fact, we were told we needed to turn that around in six weeks. And that in addition to doing some of the work around what some different scenarios might look like for expanding, not
expanding, the kind of space that they might need, would we also do an analysis of the pickle as we've done in the past with many on sale operations and come up with some recommendations for what we would think are some ways that uh the city could build its business with that
um bar and pub. So with that, we quickly signed a contract, an S. So um and Michael Bitser was up there last week to start his due diligence to start to gather all the materials and so that we
could get started with that six-week S. So it was then that he talked with um many of you and started to realize that perhaps the S. So was under scoped for what the city truly needed. And so, um, while we had thought that this would be
a six weeks, $22,500, um, when Michael started to do the work, uh, and realized what you were looking for, we realized we needed to redo that statement of work over the weekend so that it could be before you tonight. So, with that, Michael, if you want to talk
about what you discovered. >> Yeah, thank you, Flora. Uh, Madame Mayor, city council members, administrative staff, I know we've got some team MUN leaders, and certainly, uh, constituents. Uh, I had the, um, absolute pleasure and honor of being in your community last week, uh, starting
to engage on our existing S. So, so that always starts with uh, discovery and diagnostics. I was there to largely lead the team through our request for information. We had a signed agreement Monday
afternoon. I was there Tuesday morning at 10. And by the end of the day, Tuesday, it became evident that we needed to shift some of my priorities for the week to better scope,
understand the needs, and regroup so that we could address uh the business problems and needs of the city. So I'm just going to take you through that initial discovery and the meaningful change in the so that resulted. So what
was uh concluded last week was a validation of the spirits expansion opportunities and scenarios uh relative to newest uh space being ma made available to them by the Schaers. A highle financial review. Preliminary interviews with both uh liquor op
general managers and members of their team. multiple meetings with administrative staff, city council member Hall and Mayor Carneahan or facility inspections, operational inspections, limited competitive visits and then inspected and validated the
current data state uh and availability and then the relevant and normalized resources available from the city to conclude this work. Here's what we found. We found that
you are operating a relatively normalized MUN state business that we didn't find anything uh that we haven't seen before. There are some extreme variables that we found
that are relevant in our SW change. there were significantly new and different needs stated clearly in some of the conversations that we had. Um I'll express those in a moment. Uh and
then we gain some alignment across all of that. The outcome on page 100 of your new S. So at a very high level, this is what changed. We increased the number of strategic
decisions that needed to be supported. This was largely discovered in the pickle business unit and uh generally what we did is we elevated the pickle to the same level as what we had understood
with the spirits in terms of how we were supporting data and intelligence coming back to you in terms of uh data support. With that, we had an opportunity to further define two really important words. Business plans.
Those that definition is beholden to whoever says it. But most important to this engagement, we understood that there needs to be and was expressed a more balanced approach to your liquor operations, which are inclusive of both
business units. Prior to that, the 39 S. So, we were overindexing on the spirit side in our time and energy invested versus the pickle side. Ultimately, that resulted
in a broader and deeper collection and analysis needed into your historical performance required to model the future opportunities for your city. It also created a broader and deeper
need to look into your operational and staffing models. And we were given more operating scenarios to define for the city to consider in a three to fiveear plan.
We were were also asked to expand our existing gap and SWAT analysis to include a formal review of the existing leadership, staffing, labor model, and existing talent that supports the city's
liquor businesses. that was not included at all in the 39 so after great discussion and reflection we also decided that it would be best to reshape and expand the final delivery uh
of our reporting to include decision trees and next steps in a more tactical what I would say my language would be playbook type format that allows ows you to actually work through
things chronologically and understand the association of interconnected decisions. We discovered that there are four POSOS
systems and data sources versus three. We also validated what we knew were constraints on city capacity available to support the work. And this is one of those more extreme variables where um
normalized positions aren't filled. It's just a resource constraint where typically when a project like this comes on board, a city will naturally shift hours from this person, hours from that person to help support the work. Well, those hours aren't there. So, we
understand we'll be taking more of that on. The second way we define capacity outside of time and people is in skills and experience. And we now understand in data collection and analysis, we will
need to do more of that than is normalized in a city as well. And then because this is extending in time, we have a project support process that's appropriate for something like this. meaning we have to meet, we have to
review, we have to move decisions and work forward. So the number of those touch bases increases. It's relatively minimal but it's it's appropriate. And then the last uh part is
we increase the number of visits back to your community and business units as well to ensure that we're not running before we're walking and providing guidance before we all agree what the
versions of truth are and having to undo work. The last part I will say about this and then I I'll turn it back over to Flora is we're confident that the next step coming out of a new S. So is for us to
create a work plan for the city. You have not seen our work plan yet um for the old so or new so we're confident that with an extension of a of an S. W in time, we can prioritize the spirits
expansion opportunities earlier and still deliver you the the decision support and scenarios you need relative to that in a six to eight time uh 6 to 8 week time period. Flora. >> All right. Thank you. So that's what
Michael learned in one week. So we really we hit the ground a week ago today and um coming back we have expanded that statement of work so that we can provide you all of the information that we were asked to come back with in terms of making decisions
about your business unit about two business units about being able to see a three and fiveyear outline plans scenarios what decisions should be sequenced and if they're made early what is the cascading
um choices that will then happen after that. Um we are if we were to talk about it currently this is week two to us about this um engagement. we would say this is, you know, whether it's the six week or the 14 week, but if we move
forward with the 14-week, this is a week two and we would plan to deliver no later than the week of Friday, June 5th, if you are able to agree to this statement of work this week. It is more money. It is $72,000.
And while that is substantially more than before, we know what we're going to deliver you is substantially more than before. And I would just like to take a moment and say that this is a very normal thing for a organization to do that is running
business units, multi-million dollar operations that require some very smart strategic decisionmaking. setting a goal, setting a plan, knowing that plan is what you can hit, and then creating the actual ladder for how you're going
to get there is very standard for organizations like this. And I think what the city has asked for, we have delivered in the past to other cities. We know we can do this. We feel more confident than ever that we are going to
find the way forward for this city. But it's an important moment, I think, for this city to think about the gravity of the decisions that you're about to make because as you move forward and build out your plans for these two operations, it is going to
impact this city for years or even decades to come. So, we want to just make sure that we're very clear that we take it very seriously. We're going to provide the best possible analysis, scenario plans, and decision support we
can so that the city can feel empowered about having all of the information and looking at this business holistically as it makes plans to go forward. So we are excited and ready to begin and ready to
entertain any questions that you might have. Now >> the one sorry before doing so one uh I just want to expand one thing from Flora the 72,000 there's in addition to that is the pass through expenses
uh for visits back to the city. So the all-in number uh should be on your page on on 106. It's broken out for the engagement and then expenses but it's both of those numbers together. Thank you. >> Turning it back over.
>> Thank you. Um I'd like to move to council for any questions for Flora and Michael. And I'll start again with council members on since he's on via Zoom. >> Only question I would have for you off the cuff. Flora is is there a precedence for either spirits or pickle in order?
Are are you all going to start with spirits and be able to help us deliver on that in respect to the urgency piece of uh what I know you're aware of? That is what Michael said that we are going to help build out the anal the analysis of the choices in front of you with
regards to that expansion your different choices there. We expect to be able to still deliver against that in the original time frame of six to eight weeks >> so that you'll get that first and then inclusive of everything by the end. Yes.
>> And council members on great great question. We with that we will also provide risk in future uh to the to the end of the engagement to say we don't know these things yet right on the pickle side.
>> Yeah. >> Okay. Uh the only other question is are we six to eight weeks out from having that final product or are we five to seven weeks out since you've already got a week start? Oh, I don't think um I I would stick with six at this point. Let's let's cut
it down the middle. We're >> all right. Just modify your quote and you'll have uh as built by then for us. Okay. I don't have any further questions. >> We do have some time built in to come back and one of the things we want to do in about three weeks is come back and
say, "All right, this is what we've discovered so far. this is the information we've unearthed and validate and verify that before we go deeply into analytics, >> especially given that we have to pull the data from four different POS system. So, it's going to take some knitting
together there. >> Totally understood. I appreciate it. >> Okay, Council Member Hall, any questions? >> No, I I read it all over. Um I I think it looks great. I think it would be a great benefit for the city since we're
at kind of this pivotal moment with this whole business needing something to be done with the pickle facility and looking at this expansion. So, I think it looks great and I'd be excited for it. >> Council member London, >> I like it. I think it'd be very
beneficial. I have no questions. >> Okay. Were there any members of the public that wanted to uh share anything during this topic? Thank you, Mayor. Uh, Bruce Mhalt, 25628 Wooddale Road. Uh, my comments are not necessarily related to the off sale. I
think most cities in Detroit Lakes or in Minnesota that run off sales. U, they run them well and they're profitable to the city and they provide reserves for the city. So, that's great. But I do have an issue with um the city here
going ahead with a $70,000 consulting contract uh on your on sale business. And this isn't meant to to denigrate the the people that work at the pickle and the pickle itself. And I know the pickle is important to uh the Niswah community,
but I would prefer that it be run by a private business. I I have an issue with um the city competing with with private business on a a bar and restaurant. So, I think that's one thing that you should think about before you go ahead and
prove this contract and spend $70,000 to find out that ultimately you're aren't going to very be very profitable in the on sale business. And I say that if you look at and in and these folks maybe they've they got more information than I do, but I've seen the state
auditors report which says that most cities that are in the on sale business are closing them because they're not profitable. They're tough to run, uh tough to manage. Uh you've got the employee issues that that are there. So that's what I would tell you is that A,
you're competing with private business and B, you're running a a business from a city standpoint that probably ultimately long-term you're not going to want to to um to be in. And I understand the building itself needs some work. I
mean, I'm not intimately uh knowing what's going on here, but from what I've heard, you've got some u building issues. Wouldn't it be better to maybe sell this the building and the equipment and the business to a private venture? Let them go in and remodel it and bring
a a a nice bar and restaurant to the city of Nisah that's owned by a private enterprise. That's my comment, mayor. Thank you. >> Thank you. Do any council members have any response or comments that you want to make to Mr. Imhalt or Council Member Hall? Um, maybe you guys can correct me
if I'm wrong, but part of your research is going to help answer those exact questions, correct? That he had. >> That that that's that's also information that we're all looking for. And I believe that is that is your guys's goal
to help answer questions just like that, right? >> We enter this we enter this engagement objective objectively, right? We're we're here to do uh what we feel is best ultimately for the city of Nisa and its
con constituents. And that's how we we work through our processes and that's how we present our financial data. And then it's up to um this body and and the administrative um team to make decisions from that.
>> Council member London, anything? >> No questions. Council member Zan, anything? Okay. Thank you, Mr. Imhalt. Um, my only comment about it is I do think $70,000 is it's a it's a big jump from the
contract that was approved at about 22,000 and I do think that's it. It it is a high amount to put on the taxpayers. Um although I do understand too that the city does need to understand the opportunities
related to both businesses and a go forward plan that makes the most sense financially. Uh Miss Wentler, I don't know if you know this off the top of your head and you may not, but I believe is does a pickle transfer is it 40,000 a year or 60,000 a year to the general
fund? I know the spirits does like 220 or 200 >> 45,000. 45. And do we know what our roughly what the net profit was for the pickle for 2025? I know the previous year I want to say
we did like 1.5 million in topline sales and what flowed through to the bottom line might have been 85,000. >> I don't I I'm not going to play a guess on that one. Okay. >> I I believe it was sub 5% for every year, Jennifer. Okay.
>> Top of head. >> Okay. All right, perfect. Well, does Oh, Mr. Frell. Yes. Um, our manager of spirits, go ahead. >> Mini brought up how much we transfer each year. I just wanted to give more accurate numbers on that. You were you
were right on 225. That was about three or four years ago. We went up to 245, but we have extra money that we earn above and beyond that. So, I'm going to just go back to 2021. We above and beyond all expenses at
Spirits, we earned 450,000. It was a little more than that. And then in 2022, it was 425,000. Those years were during the pandemic. And I must have mentioned a million times, don't expect to make that much every
year. Unfortunately, this is a heyday for liquor stores, but it was not a good time for our country. Then in 2023 we earned 370,000. 2024 it was 397,000.
And last year was a tough year for most retailers as you can probably attest to um mayor and we brought in 282,000. Now those numbers are including that 245,000
that we um that we give to the city to lower the levy. So, >> thank you. >> If council doesn't have any more questions about the uh revised so here from Delaney Consulting, I would
entertain a motion. >> I'd make a motion that we'd move ahead with the um proposal as presented. >> I'll second it. >> Any additional discussion? All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I.
>> I. >> Opposed. Okay. Motion carries. All right. Um before we move on to number three, the EDA resolution, I had just two things also still related to spirits in the pickle that I wanted to
bring up. So first is um the spirits. We currently lease our building from the Schaers. Uh so if many of you didn't know where Spirits sit, our landlord is the Schaffers. Um they are currently developing a new commercial space which
will include a CRMC clinic and improvements to the property where Spirits operates. Um prior to my time on the council, I think a past council may have approved or discussed approving up to a 10% expansion of the liquor store
space as a part of this new development. Um, as a part of that project, uh, Schaers has invested in improvements into the property, including a heated sidewalk out front of Spirit's current building, and then they're adding a new loading dock um to improve deliveries
for all the new tenants there. In October of last year, October of 2025, Schaers approached the city um through our manager of spirits, the liquor committee, council members on and myself were on that um to discuss amending the
existing lease that the city has with the Schaers for that Spirits building. That existing lease currently runs through 2029 um to reflect improvements to the property as well as market rate changes that come with new construction. So
since October, uh the revisions or amendment to the current lease between the city and Schaers has been discussed fairly extensively. It's gone through multiple liquor committee meetings which um included our city attorney as well. We had a special council meeting
dedicated specifically to this issue and it has been on the agenda at several of our regular council meetings also. Um and I think Mr. Schaefer shared earlier during public comment that it kind of feels like we're perhaps going in circles and council is not moving
forward to make a decision as to the path as it relates to our current lease. Um, for everybody's knowledge, the current the city's current lease, as I mentioned, goes through 2029 and our current lease rate is approximately
$17.85 85 cents per square foot and that building is about 6,000 square feet. Um, Schaers is proposing amending the current lease agreement to increase the base rate from that 1785 per square foot
to $21 uh per square foot. And that's based on the new constructions and improvements to the property. So roughly these numbers might be slightly off but about an increase of 2,000 maybe a little less a month or 24,000 a calendar
year. Um, just as part of my own due diligence and wanting to understand how these things work, I did reach out to Close Converse, obviously the most respected uh, commercial real estate brokers in our area and spoke with the senior adviser there, and just asked,
you know, are are lease renegotiations common when you're in the middle of a lease and your ex, you know, your lease doesn't expire for several years? And I was told, yes, lease renegotiations happen all the time. um as long as both parties agree. Um and I also just asked
about you know what is the going market rate per square foot and I was told on new construction in Nisa it starts at $25 per square foot. So, the reason I'm bringing this topic up tonight is because, like I said, I feel like it's
been discussed multiple times since October, and it's kind of gone in a circle, and I feel like the city really needs to think about moving in one direction or another. Is the city uh willing to look at making a change to the lease at
that $21 per square foot? Is the city saying, "Nope, we're going to keep our current lease through 2029." And I just felt we needed to bring it up because it's been sitting out there for five to six months and you know we owe it to you
know our landlord who is also a great business and community leader and h has been a win-win situation for spirits as a tenant to get some movement on this item. And so that is my reason for bringing it up. Council member Hall, do you have any
thoughts, perspective, comments? Yeah, last month I had made a motion that you know um the liquor committee as a committee. That was the motion um to
reach out to the Schaefer family and negotiate this stuff. I know I'm not on the liquor committee. I know everybody from the liquor committee is kind of here are involved with this. also too with uh Michael um
uh that was just here doing all the liquor stuff, you know, um from what I know from that that was part of the due diligence. But other than that, I'm not on the committee. I can't speak for it, but I agree that this is something that
needs to get done and addressed and moved on with. Um, and I believe that it's probably the top priority for everybody. We just motioned um for Michael to help us out with that. But if anybody from the liquor committee or
anybody wants to comment, I don't >> council members on. Do you have any perspective, thoughts, input since you're on the liquor committee? >> On what particular Jennifer? I mean, you you covered you covered a lot. just bringing up like giving the background on spirits and that like it just seems a
bit you know like we've kind of not really moved it forward one way or another and as Mr. Schaefer said you know he brought this for this initially came before all of us in October and now we're sitting here at March almost April.
>> Are you asking me why we're in this spot right now? >> Uh no not exactly. I'm just asking if you have any input or thoughts about this because as we all know the city was approached with a
a third amended lease agreement for Spirit's current space. >> Correct. >> Right. And we're at 1785 a foot and Schaers is proposing the 21 a foot >> as to you know when when are we as a city going to be ready to make a decision here? And as
council member Hall mentioned and Mr. Schaefer mentioned in public comment that there was the thought that there was supposed to be a conversation or a meeting between the liquor committee andor Mr. Schaefer as it relates to this lease agreement. And just a note, Mr. Frell is standing too. So, I'll call on
him next. >> Well, Jennifer, you you and I have been a part of these discussions since October. Heck, even probably pre-occtober um from the point in which we've had meetings, liquor committee or special ones with the city attorney, uh
Andy Schaefer and his father Ted uh to be able to discuss this. And those points have all been laid out. Those points haven't changed. Uh we have a current we have a current lease in place. Uh I think my last point I made in that meeting was as elected representatives of the city, we're doing
our best to try to manage the dollars. Um, and for an existing contract that we have in place, uh, I don't I don't think it makes complete sense off the cuff to move forward and sign a a new agreement, uh, upending our existing lease, which
still has a couple years left on it, um, which has some semi-favorable terms for the renewal as it's tied to CPI for the the following seven years, if I'm not mistaken. Tom Pearson. Uh, correct me if I'm wrong, but um, the whole point was
then is for us to be able to have tangible justification for why we're going to be paying more for the same space and and why we're going to be obtaining more space, right? And and you were there with that. And that's why we've been trying to get this consultation fasttracked so we can get a
decision made and get some clarity to uh, uh, Mr. Andy Schaefer. Um, the additional piece I guess I would throw in there as well is, uh, the council made the motion perhaps last October, I believe it was,
or perhaps even longer ago, um, to to your your point on the 10% uh, increase. I do believe that there's another provision there in the motion that you left out, Jennifer, or maybe forgot, but it was contingent on the the
renewal rate for that lease, right? So, I think we all covered that and, you know, I understand, you know, we're trying to get this moving along and I I want to as well. Um, I feel like with the Delaney support here, that's going to be able to help us push us closer, too. And there's a lot
of moving pieces into it from uh the conversations that Brian will have, Tom will have, I will have, you will have. Um so I made the suggestion to Miss Maggie, I believe, a few days ago to try to get a liquor committee meeting scheduled for next week. Um and I think
we got one response for a no, but uh I think we're holding it potentially still, Maggie. So that's my thoughts on it. Council member London, >> I see the concerns of Andy Shaver here. I think uh the liquor committee should
get together with Andy Shaver and nearest possible time and get this thing worked out. >> Okay. Uh Mr. Frell, did you have something you wanted to add? Council member Zhan did cover a lot of things and that was back in March or
April of 2024 when the council voted to approve a 10% increase contingent on a favorable rate from the Schaefer family. Then if we jump to I don't know the exact month but it was a few months ago probably four months ago where um the
city council said that they were not going to expand space and that we were going to stick with our current contract. We've we talked to Mr. Schaefer since then and um you know obviously he um is mentioning that we would be able to use
the loading dock and and um different items. So, our next step would have been either to go to court. Well, we really don't want to go to court with the Schaefer family. They're a great family for Niswah and they've been um we've had a good partnership. So, that's why we're
back to this square we where we are right now and I have no problem at all, you know, looking at our contract and renegotiating it. I mean, just to let you know, my biggest issue with that contract is our parking lot because that
does not look favorable at all to our business. And we're looking at areas with Delaney and great opportunities to improve what we're doing down there. And there's always improvements that a person can make and to do better. So, I'm really
looking forward to that. But when you factor in the parking lot, that is not helping us move the needle forward. And you know, as far as negotiating with the Schaefer family, I'm all for it. And um you know, I would like to state though,
you know, we are going to re renegotiate our contract. Threearters of our building is not new contract, is not under that the new contract part. and they realized that and they weren't going to charge us the $25 a square foot. But, um, I just
wanted to, you know, kind of fill in a few of those blanks. >> Okay. Council member Hall, >> real quick, Brian, um, I'm not on the liquor committee, but I guess can you elaborate what what the parking lot is? I I guess I don't know
>> there. So, there is a median that's going to be basically when I call that, it's a grassy area with the curb and um light pole and drainage right in front of our basically almost right in front of our entrance door, but it'll be out
farther away. And um so we have a lot of people that come in with boats, a lot of people that come in with fish houses, snowmobile trailers, and right now our parking lot has been very friendly to them. It's one of those things where it's easy in, easy out type thing. And
it is going to be a struggle. They're they're going to have to park over in the Schaffer parking lot and then walk over. I'm not saying that some people aren't doing that right now, but it is our parking lot is a lot less friendly. We've had struggles since they've started construction because we have
that fence in our parking lot and people are back almost backing into each other left and right. And I see it very almost similar when our new parking lot has that median in there, which the Schaffer family would
like to have it shrunk because it's about three or four cars wide, but the engineer said that it had to be that that big. Right now, we have a drainage in our parking lot and there's nothing around it. Cars can drive right over it. And I would just like to see something
get modified in that area because it is definitely a negative. I, you know, we we love the prospect of having a heated sidewalk. That will be really nice. I mentioned in the loading dock. Um the loading dock's a wash because it's 200
feet away. Uh but it is covered and that's awesome. Um I'm not going to argue about that one because it's um like I said, it's a wash compared to what we have right now. Can I ask a follow-up question then? >> Sure. >> Sorry, Stephen, you're in the crowd. Put you on the spot.
>> The issue that Brian's talking about in the parking lot with the curb and the media and everything, >> is that an issue that was imposed upon the construction via city rules from planning and zoning? So over here, this
hand of the city saying this doesn't work. I'm asking, did this hand of the city impose those restrictions or why can't we solve this problem for Brian? Can you answer that for us? >> Yeah, I I guess I'm just wondering full
full circle. >> So, I think the regulation that you're talking about is our landscaping requirement inside parking lots. Um, our ordinance has a 5% rule. Um, if you've been following along with planning and zoning commission meetings, we have
early language for altering that specific section to allow for utilization of landscaping around a parking lot as opposed to interior to it. The original plan set for the C expansion showed two curb islands within
the original parking parking lot back about a year ago today. Um then we entertained a variance last fall to approve a reduction in that leaving the one that uh Brian is referring to in front of there.
>> So real simple question just yes or no. Can the median and the issue that Brian's being that Brian is talking about, can that still get removed and addressed to solve this complaint to
make it more conducive for the city to run their business? Get yes or no. Can we can we fix that and get rid of that? >> I would say yes. We would want to see a plan that reflects the variance that was approved with the 2.5% or whatever the actual metric was. I'm trying to pull it
off the top of my head, but I think it was right around 2 and a half% landscaping within that parking lot. Um, was approved by the planning commission and board of adjustment through that variance. Um, so an alternative plans that could be proposed that would not
then violate that approval of the metric, I believe. So, >> so who's responsible for that since it's us as the business that wants it changed? Is it the city responsible with WSN's help to figure this out or or what
would be the next steps? Because I mean this is I think an important issue to discuss if Brian's bring it up and saying hey you know what what would be the next steps forward to help this you know get corrected.
I guess I'm looking for anybody. >> It's for anybody to propose. I guess um the plan set that I would need to see would just depict that 2.5%. >> Would Brian back and say, "Hey, I want to see these changes to help operate the business since he's the lease E. Does it
involve Schaers? What do we What do we do? Does it involve our engineer?" >> I guess the question I would have for Mr. Schaefer, is it even possible to make a change now? >> Well, be a great question. >> Let's ask him. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. I'm glad we're finally talking
about this. Thanks. Um, yes, we can still make changes. I concrete's not poured. Um, I just I can't keep paying more money, getting more drawings done, and still not have an answer. So, at some point we
need to actually talk about the lease, which I've been asking for for months. >> Correct. >> So, it would be nice if we could do something. I don't know how many meetings we can have and not get anywhere, how many times it can be on the agendas and whatever.
>> Yep. >> I think it sounds like if if there's going to be a liquor committee meeting next week, which I thought I heard council member Zan say uh to sit down with Schaers, that would be a first step. and then we have the consulting firm on it. But
when we have people approach this body, this council body and bring proposals or ideas, I think we do owe it to whether it's individual private citizens or businesses to not always be going in circles and to try to
find a resolution in a reasonable amount of time. So unless I'm hearing different council members on I thought I heard you say you were trying to pull a liquor committee meeting together for possibly next week. >> That's correct. >> Include Mr. Schaefer. >> Correct.
>> I would propose that we have that >> main topic. >> I would propose that we have that meeting on Monday. >> Well, you guys can figure that out offline. Um but I just wanted to bring this up because I thought it was important in any of these details. It sounds like the liquor committee can probably talk through and I'm sure it'll
come back to council for a final motion. >> I guess I would like to add that we would include Stephen andor if we need assistance from our our city engineer to help figure out this issue. um that we
also do that too cuz you know we need it to work for everybody you know and and yeah at this point Andy is a little bit of a tennis ball going back and forth and that's not fair and so I would say if we're going to have this
committee let's address all of this stuff at one time and get it ironed out. >> So I think it would be good for staff to pull in the right parties. Does this council give authority to liquor committee to negotiate the final rate without council approval so we can get it done?
>> It will have to the the final lease would have to come back for council approval, but the liquor committee, unless anyone objects, can definitely drive forward with those negotiation discussions. >> Correct me if I'm wrong, but that was the motion last month, Maggie, wasn't it?
>> To to negotiate this with Schaers. That was the motion I made last month. >> Yes. Yes, that was the motion. I can read it if I pull it up here in a second, but the council has to make the final decision. Yes, >> but the negotiation process just kind of
like the the labor negotiations, same sort of concept. >> Okay. If I may bring up a point, so if we've just hired Delaney, they've given us indications that it's going to be roughly give or take six weeks. Are we going to make a decision prior to that six weeks as a council?
Well, I think >> if so, then then do we need to consider rescending that motion for approval for Delaney? I >> I guess Delaney is still on with us. Do they have input into this and their time? >> Well, I I don't think that that's a them thing. I think it's an us thing. So, we
have to determine one Andy, if you're at this podium, which I I see you are, is six I know. Hi, Andy. I know it's six weeks, but you heard it from the horse's mouth. if they can deliver us a product, it's not going to take us more than an hour to comb
through and have an opinion with the liquor committee to bring forth to six weeks from now, we'll push it to the May regular council meeting. So, that's a question for you. And then two, if he says no, us council, we need to consider
next step from the point I already just made with what we already motioned with Delaney being a higher consultant. You guys understand that? >> Yeah. Let's see what Andy has to say for >> Yeah. I mean, is that even in the scope of work that they had for you? >> Yes. >> Yes. >> I guess it is. Yeah. >> Yes. >> Yeah.
>> Joe, are >> Yeah. Yes, it's in the scope of work from what I understand. What do you understand, Maggie? >> Yes, it is. >> Both Maggie and Brian are saying yes, it was in the >> I'm saying yes. I just read it Saturday or Sunday on the couch. >> They're also agreeing. Ya's on there.
>> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Andy. >> Yeah. I mean, it's there's things that have to be done for this building to go up. So, I guess if we get into a hurdle, we'll have to figure it out from there
as far as, you know, what what you guys are going to do. So, I can be in touch when those things arise. >> Andy, if you and I just if I have updates from the city, I'll reach out to you if you have updates on building that we need to fasttrack something.
>> That was the other question I had. You guys keep saying liquor committee. Is there someone I'm supposed to talk to to get this going? It's a pretty broad when you just say liquor committee. Is someone in charge of that? Is >> take your pick. It's flavor of the week. >> Yeah, that's the problem.
>> Hey. Hey. Now >> I would Andy. >> I see you laughing, Terry. You can't Don't laugh at that. >> Generally, Terry and I, we we call a meeting together. Um that's not always the case, right? The last one was Maggie
and Jennifer, but um we will call that meeting. We will um do everything we can to have it on Monday. And I just wanted to recap a little bit on this. So, we are having Delaney do our feasibility. And in the meantime, we're going to as a
liquor committee, we're going to negotiate with Andy Schaefer on a rate on that so that when our when we have our next meeting, um we can come back and present to the city council the rate that we negotiated. I don't know if we'll have that information back from
Delaney by then, but at least we'll have a rate that we can say this is what Schaefer family says that they will they will negotiate with us and the terms along with that and then if we don't have the Delaney outcome, we'll have to
wait for that and then that'll be on the next >> until May or >> until the May regular meeting. >> Right. Mhm. >> Okay. Does that sound accurate to everybody? Yep. That sounds great. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. All right. Um, one other item
since we're on the spirits pickle and then we'll move on to the EDA. Um, if council will remember in December, Lonnie Thompson, a 40-year employee of the pickle came before us uh with a request. She asked whether the council would consider allowing her to shift
from full-time 5 days a week to 4 days a week and maintain her healthcare benefits. Um, at that point, I believe council chose uh not to motion and to refer the matter to the liquor committee. Uh, Lonnie submitted a letter uh for me to share with council tonight. So, I just wanted to read that um to the
NISA city council. This is her letter to the Nispa City Council. I am sure by now Terry has told you I have given in exclamation point. By that I mean I will be taking every Monday off throughout the summer months and using a vacation day. I am very disappointed that I kept
getting put off for the next month. the next month, etc. This is an issue you will be dealing with as the city as a whole is getting closer to retirement. As for a 40-year employee getting precedents in quotation marks, by taking one day off a weekend to keep my
benefits, I have earned and in parenthesis and deserve is almost laughable exclamation points. Also, I work three hours overtime each week. So for a total of hours, I'd be working for a pay period to 70 7 is 70 to 73 hours
each pay period. I am hopeful we can work this out down the road. I have loved my job here. I have the best in all capitals. Customers exclamation points. Sincerely, Lonnie M. Balsamo Thompson. So I just wanted to share that. And gentlemen, I don't know if
this came up at the February meeting because I wasn't able to be here. Um, but this is another one too that's been sitting out there and perhaps maybe the liquor committee can since we already had motioned that the liquor committee would talk about it. Perhaps they can take this one back up as well um and
come back to council at the April meeting or perhaps even the May meeting with some thoughts. How does that sound? >> It is on our agenda. >> Great. Okay. Thank you. Go ahead, Terry. Didn't you already bring this up to the
labor attorney? >> I didn't. >> I thought this was discussed with them. >> I think Miss Wentler reached out to the labor attorney and they emailed back what she shared with the full council their position on it, which I think was >> At this point, our policies do not allow
for part-time employees to get full-time benefits. So, you must work 40 hours. We are. >> So, you'd have to redo the personnel policy. >> Yes. >> Correct. >> And it was I that reached out to the to the flattering hood and and requested
some sort of information. I found a statute that had potentially some provision for Maggie. Correct me on what the proper terminology of it was a uh uh kind of like a deferred retirement for a couple years that they could draw from their pension for the reduced hours. Uh,
but that wasn't applicable to us if I'm not mistaken due to uh >> I don't think it was really at my quick glance and it's been a while since I've read it, but um she would have to cut her hours a whole lot more than she is and she would have to start taking her
pair of benefits and I don't think she's willing to do that. But we wanted to all get together and have a conversation and the last meeting we didn't have enough time to discuss this. So, it is on the agenda for the next meeting, >> right? And I and I and I talked to her today. I mean, I I'll be transparent
with you. Um, she has no problem taking a vacation day and she's got enough ESST and all that hoo-ha, you know, if she wants to take one day off a week. I mean, she's certainly able to do that. Um, so
>> Terry, if I may, since you're at the stand, >> huh? >> I apologize. I thought you were >> Oh, go ahead. Go ahead. since you're at the stand. I mean, I the last I spoke to Lonnie on this, I believe, was either late January, early February. Um, got
that information in sometime after that and then there's just really no feasible solution. I think that the last message I had from her was perhaps that she was not going to continue to pursue it. But um Maggie has my email from earlier this
week to be able to discuss uh both the Schaefer situation for Niswah Spirits as well as uh uh Lonie's uh phase out request uh excuse me for the lack of proper termination but um
is there is there an issue that we need to try to accelerate here or is there any other context here that you can provide? from, you know, another perspective like yourself versus just the mayors. >> No, there's there's no there's no issue
at all. No. And and she even said today, you know, she's come to the conclusion that it would take time for the city council to even put something like that together. >> Yeah. I think council members on she just was felt like she was being put off, right? Another month and another
month. But she had conversations with Terry. >> I mean, she has Yeah, she's she'll she'll figure it out until we do. That's that's basically where she's at. >> Okay. Well, you guys can talk about it on the liquor committee when you, you
know, have the time to fit it in. >> Yep. All right. >> Thank you. Okay. Now, we'll get to the EDA resolution council action. Um, we received uh enabling resolution establishing an economic development authority for the city of Nisa. Um, this
came to us later today. So, I don't know if everybody on the council had a chance to go through this enabling resolution. Uh for those members of the public, at the last meeting, the city council made a motion to establish an economic development authority for the city of
Nisa uh to help the city as the needs the growth and the needs move into the future. Um any counc well Mr. Blomber, I'll turn it to you if you have any comments about this enabling or since you drafted it. Mr. Pearson, sorry. Um and then I'll go
to councel. >> Thank you, Miss Carneahan. The resolution, the enabling resolution can't be passed tonight. There needs to be a public hearing. >> Okay. >> That'll have to happen in April. So, it got into your packet. Just FYI, in case
people have some things that they want to sort through before April, so no action item on that today. Also, >> um, could you pull your microphone closer, please? I'm just having a hard time hearing you. I now I understand what Jennifer has been referencing for the last year when people can't hear.
>> Yeah. Also in April, it' be my intention to put um into the council packet also an organizational resolution for the EDA. So this enabling resolution creates it. The organizational resolution will have some other elements to it. Um that
doesn't the that one doesn't require a public hearing. The enabling resolution does. So in April, we will notice the appropriate public hearing for the enabling resolution. you can consider it then and approve it if you want to do that. Also, an organizational resolution
for the EDA uh will be in your packet at that time for consideration in April. Uh Mr. Pearson, the only thing I noted is on this resolution in number two, it says the EDA shall be governed by a
board of five commissioners. Um and then it says pursuant to Minnesota statute 469.095 subdivision 2A. Um, but 2 A says three member authority. So I wasn't sure if that should say 2B because B says five member authority.
>> Well, what two? >> Unless I was missing and I unless I was misreading that. Um I think our direction my direction at the last council meeting in drafting this was um and this can be
decided again in April but the but the pleasure of the council was that this should be a five member committee. Um the reference in two to pursuant to Minnesota statute 469095 subdivision 2A just speaks to how that
committee or how that how the commissioners are appointed. Okay. Um cuz A says three member authority and B says five member authority. That's where I was just confused. Does does perhaps uh that
reference three non-counsel members? >> Nope. It says three member authority. The commissioners con or sorry, the commissioners constituting a three-member authority, one of whom must be a member of the city council shall be appointed by the mayor with the approval
of the city council. B says five member authority. the commissioners constituting a five member authority, two of whom must be members of the city council, shall be appointed by the mayor with approval of the council. So that's where I was confused cuz this is five member authority, but then it points to
a three member authority and I wasn't at the last meeting. So I just wasn't sure what you guys did if you did three or five. >> You're telling me you didn't watch it? >> I haven't had time. I'm getting two hours of sleep a night as it is.
>> It was five. Uh, >> okay. >> It was five. And do we discuss putting one or two council members on there? >> Two. >> I I don't recall, but I require if it's five, the state statute requires two. >> Okay. Yeah.
>> Okay. Okay. That was just all that was my only note for that. Um, any any other comments from council? Otherwise, it sounds like we have to go to April for a public for the public anyway. >> No. Okay. All right. Um,
then ne Oh, go ahead, Mr. Dwey. >> Um, as you folks know, I like to I don't know why, but I like to look through the packets, um, I'll spend two hours, three hours sometimes. Um, if we can get the resolutions and things in a more timely manner where I can have time to review them, I would really like that. Just
Thank you. >> Thank you. >> It was in the packet today when I got it. So FYI, it is updated on the website. >> Yeah, I saw that, Maggie. Thank you. You did a great job. Um I It just takes me a while to kind of absorb it all. There's a lot of words, and if I could get it as
soon as possible, that would be great. >> Welcome to our world, Ron. >> Okay. Um next up, we have the Verizon cell tower appeal. Uh Mr. Pearson, I'll turn this over to you.
Um, Ms. Carneahan and council at the February council meeting. Uh the appeal uh on the permits that were granted by the planning commission board of adjustment uh in 2025
uh was granted by the city council and then instructions were given to staff to put together a resolution uh supporting the grant of that appeal. That's what this resolution attempts to do is
put wheels on the grant of the appeal. Um that's what this resolution it again is meant to do. Uh if you approve this resolution um upholding that appeal or
granting that appeal, then the matter should go back to the planning commission board of adjustment so that it can res formally resend the approvals that were originally granted for a cup and experiences.
>> Okay. Uh council, do we have any questions for Mr. Pearson about the resolution um granting the appeal regarding the planning commission board of adjustment approval of the communication tower permits. I'll start again with you council members on since you're on via
Zoom. You're on mute. >> I do not have any at this moment. >> Council member London. Council member Hall. I guess I just have a couple questions, you know, with um kind of I'll say the one through four
that was brought up. Can you speak to are are we saying those were outside of the ability of the planning commission or or
um something procedurally with it? But I guess can we can you answer why specifically those ones were picked maybe or kind of those four items so I just have a better understanding of kind
of the process or because the the the motion in February where February sorry was to grant the appeal. >> Correct. Um, and then I advised the council at that time that you should have findings of fact to support that
grant of that appeal. But the city council didn't give staff any directions as to why it was granting the appeal, only that it was granting the appeal. So staff was left to
try to cobble together some findings of fact that we believed that the city council was using to support the grant of that appeal. >> Okay. Yeah. So that's kind of my
question. So, does it kind of come back to us, you know, if I'm if I'm understanding the process and this is more of a question, you know, when the appeal was granted, us as the council member at that time,
it would have been maybe a cleaner, more thorough process if we said X, Y, and Z at that time, but that didn't happen. Is is that a fair assessment? Yeah, I don't I don't know if I would
say the more correct, but when I mentioned that we needed findings of fact, it was simply a motion that got passed to grant the appeal without more. So, I don't know about correct or any of that. All I know is that uh when I
advised the council that findings of fact were necessary, um Stephen and I were left to try to figure out how to put some findings of fact together that you would accept to support your decision to grant the appeal. >> Okay.
Um >> do you have additional questions? Well, yeah, I guess. So then my thought is, you know, moving forward, you know, with a cell phone tower, any other tower, you know, like this, you know, um
is is this uh more of like a policy change? You know, I'm still wondering, you know, does the board of of planning zoning, do they have the ability to
rule on these individual items or is it outside of their scope? Meaning, it was it within their ability to rule on something like this or or were they out of bounds in their
ruling? No, they had they had findings of fact in my opinion that supported the grant the approval grants that they made on the cup and on all the variances. A criticism by the appellant for instance was that the planning commission and
board of adjustment the board of adjustment when it granted the variances um adopted one set of findings of fact that they used to decide each variance. So you see that reflected here in this
resolution that the city council is telling the planning commission board of adjustment that they should have ideally made separate findings of fact even if they were the same findings of fact but made them independently on each variance grant.
>> Okay. In the text of in the minutes of when that meeting occurred and when that approval got done, they were careful to say that the following findings of fact apply to all six variances. I suppose they could be criticized in
retrospect for not having just said, "Okay, variance number one, here's our findings of fact. Variance number two, here's our findings of fact." even if they were the same ones as variance number one there and and so on all the way through six variances.
So that was a criticism that was leveled on the process by the appellants. Um and again without any other direction from the council as to how to populate this resolution, we're left to staff is left to understand that the
city council must have taken that into consideration when it made the motion and passed it to grant the appeal. Um, additionally to that, um, the sense that staff had was that the main one of the main objections to the variance grants
was the height of that cell tower that that required a variance at over 150 ft. So that's why you see this resolution populated that way. >> Great. Okay. So, >> okay. >> Then I guess follow-up question for
everybody and maybe Maggie. Um, this is a subject that's been talked about in this town for nearly a decade. Correct or fair to say? >> Correct. >> You know, so I this has gone on a long time. Definitely not a new issue. I also
understand that nobody wants a tower in their backyard. However, um with um the additional people, the need for cell phone coverage, you know, I view it as like power, sewer, you know,
communication. Um we can kick it back. Um I mean, I myself have sat in meetings where they've checked different locations, different heights. We've seen all the data. We've seen all the spreadsheets. you've seen
all the the work that they've done year after year and time after time that they've presented. Um I just you know um want to
um figure out a good plan forward to advance it. I mean, we can't not provide communication in our city. And if we kick this back again, then where are we
at? Where are the steps? What is the process? You know, um does it get kicked down the road another five years and we still have poor cell phone coverage for the people in the area and we're not providing the correct service. Um, and
so I think >> well Joe, I think that that's a fair question if I might interject to ask the city attorney as to if this was to pass tonight, what is the potentially perceived next steps if you're if you're
curious on that. >> Yeah, I guess that that's, you know, if we go this way, what's going to happen? And if we go that way, kind of what might happen with this. >> Mr. Pearson, you said it would go back to the planning and zoning.
Well, I'll let you chime in. >> The council already granted the appeal, >> right? >> This resolution is just meant to give reasoning for that appeal grant.
>> Sure. So this is really just backfilling the decision that was made in February about this appeal. >> From a procedural standpoint, I feel like the planning commission board of adjustment now needs to take this from
you and do the formal resinment of the permits that they granted because they granted them. It got appealed. You upheld the appeals. something's got to be done to reverse those approval grants. And then
when all when that's done at the planning commission board of adjustment, this application will be at an end. And then I don't know what the applicant will do at that point. The applicant could come back to the city with a different plan for this cell tower. the applicant could come back um for
instance with an application that includes a tower height that would not need a variance that would be at 150 or less. They wouldn't need a variance for that. Then it would be a question about whether the other variances that were for the ancillary parts of that
structure would would then be considered and approved. So, but from a from a housekeeping standpoint, after this resolution is approved, if it's going to be, then the planning commission needs to take the mechanical step to
resend the the approvements they made. >> Okay. So, at this point, we just need a motion to accept this resolution. Correct. If you believe if you believe that the findings of facts support the decision that was
made in February, then yes. >> Okay. So, do we have a motion as it relates to this resolution? >> I make a motion to approve the Verizon cell tower appeal with the uh proposed findings of fact as presented. >> Do we have a second? >> I'll second it.
>> Any additional discussion? Otherwise, I'd like to call the vote. Okay. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Opposed. >> I. >> Okay. Motion carries.
All right. Last item. Nope. Sorry. Item number six under old business is collaboration services. This was um on our last meeting council motion to move forward with the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust um to do collaboration services. they came back
that they are not able to work with the city at this time on these services. They provided a list of other other vendors that may be able to assist the city. Um Maggie, do you have any additional updates to that? >> Um I guess I wanted to get council
feedback because what the league had initially presented with their work was going to be free of charge as part of our membership. all of these other people is going to be a cost. So if the council is I will say
going to fulfilly fully engage and want something to work along with staff, I can certainly reach out to some of these folks to get a quote on what it would cost to do some collaboration services with council and staff. But if not
everybody's on board, I don't know that it's If I may. >> Go ahead. Council members on >> I I am not in favor of spending taxpayer dollars for this. Um there's five of us
on this council. Um what I am willing to propose and I was going to wait until the council report towards the end of the meeting was for us in the uh April regular meeting to move into a closed session to be able to have a
collaboration session uh amongst us five to be able to uh openly talk uh behind closed doors. Uh that is the motion I would like to make. I know it's not on the specific item, but that's what >> is that? So, is that Are you making the motion right now?
>> I am making a motion versus for that and versus spending taxpayer dollars. >> Do we have a second? >> Okay. Council member London seconds. Um, additional discussion. I would like to say I do agree with council members on I'm not comfortable using taxpayer
dollars to work out issues within this council. I also do believe um issues are meant to be worked out at the ballot box that are political and there is an election in November. Um so when I call the question, I will be voting in favor of council member Zan's uh proposal.
Council member Hall, >> I agree. >> Okay. And then I will call the question. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> I. >> I. All those opposed. Okay. Motion carries. All right. Now we're to the last item under old business which is
the 2027 community funding federal grant consideration. Uh Mr. Blommer. All right. So no um you have a copy of the application for this uh funding that we have applied
for. Um I've provided you a memo um stating what we did and why. Um basically we had a short window to apply for this funding. Um there is no obligation for the city to accept it.
Um, so we myself and the city engineer worked through projects trying to figure out what project made sense to apply for here. Um, we looked at the possibility of the water system for the property that the city owns.
Uh, we went back to engineering that was done for that project in the past um, and adjusted figures inside of that for inflation. Um, and we applied for a grant for 14.4 4 million. Um, this would establish a
300galon per minute water system along 371 in the commercial and densely populated residential areas in the location. Um, in this application, we suggested this project could be scaled back to fit available funding. Uh, this
drew the attention of the project selection committee for Mr. Stabber's office and they called to seek more information on her project. Um they said they would likely not support a $14.4
million project but could support something in the 1 to5 million range. With that background, we scaled back our project to one that will supply the city's property at the county 77 highway
371 intersection alone, but it could be expanded to serve other areas with later phases. This project would be a 150 gallon per minute project at approximately 4 to5 million. no matter what project we applied for um
they would require a 20% match from the city. Um we submitted the application on March 11th. Um what I was told is that there were at that time over 100 applications and only
20 would get funded. Copy of the application has been provided to the council. Any questions? Okay. Um, council members, are there any questions for Mr. Blommer? Uh, Council Member London, I'll start with you.
>> No questions. Council member Hall. >> No. The only the only thing I would add to this, you know, I believe, you know, Bob had asked maybe a question about this or to anybody listening or watching out there. It was I've brought this up
before, but it was probably a year and a half roughly ago at the um um public works committee that WSN put on a nice presentation of a potential water system in the city and
kind of laid out a little bit of a road map, high level. This is what it would look like. So, I would just encourage anybody out there that has specific questions to this to actually come in,
engage Tom, engage the staff. Um, you know, try and refrain from just making up something and putting out there on the internet because if you want to know the information, come in and ask. Um, it's there. It's available. And, um,
that that's what I that's what I encourage people to do. Council member Zan, >> I don't have anything to add. >> Okay. Um, the only thing that I would add and council member Hall, to your point, if people have questions, if stuff came up, they should reach out to
staff and ask, but I think that's one of the challenges um that we've seen in the city and and this came up with the Verizon cell phone tower. Um, you guys have talked about that this has been, you know, on the city's agenda going through different phases and variations
with the city over the years, but the folks particularly that live in the neighborhood right, you know, behind where the tower would be, they didn't feel that they found out about it until the last minute. I mean, people are busy. They don't necessarily always have time to watch every committee meeting,
attend every council meeting. Um, so yes, I realize some of the responsibility is on folks in our community to educate themselves, but I think it's also on us as a city to be as transparent, open, and overly communicative as possible. I can tell
you when this packet came out, I got a lot of phone calls, texts, people stopping by my stores. Uh, and there was a lot of concern from people in our community. I do want to I do want to say a thank you to council member Zan because he actually called me uh last
week to give me a heads up as to where things were. Otherwise, I would have had zero visibility into this as well because I didn't even know this was going on. I knew that council had approved um and that we had received an email from Congressman Stabber's office that there was a window open for federal
funding, you know, for uh different municipalities and whatnot in his district. So I knew that that council had motioned like yes we should look at um submitting something but I myself as well didn't know what that was either until council members on called and
filled me in and he and I had a conversation and the first thing I said to him was I think uh since you're the public works leazison and you're talking to Mr. BLMER. The first thing that has to happen is an email needs to go out to the full council because we all should know the same information at the same
time, especially on something as significant as potentially uh putting in a water system, whether it's for the whole city, part of the city or on uh the property that the city purchased. So there was a lot of concern, there was a lot of talk uh and people to my
understanding actually reaching out to Congressman Stabber's office um residents within Nisa that I had heard word that that happened. Um as some of you may or may not know, my late husband who passed away from cancer four years ago was a United States congressman in
southern Minnesota. So, I have a little bit of knowledge of how uh things work with different projects uh just by being his uh his widow or his wife at the time. Um and I know a lot of the people in DC as well um that represent us in Minnesota and their staff. So, I
actually just reached out to the Congressman Stubbers chief of staff and just asked, you know, hey, I heard we put this in um and their office did get back and said, um it was submitted past our deadline and even after review, we found that it won't meet the committee's
criteria. So, it sounds like, you know, I'm sure they'll get an official answer back, but it sounds like it it won't be moving forward at this point in time. But I would just again make a note to all of us staff, fellow council members,
sharing is caring. Like just put everything out there, right? We don't always have to agree on everything and that's okay. Um, everybody cares about the city, but let's make sure we're not cutting the public out of the process and making sure that everyone that's elected to this body knows what's going
on because we do get questions and it doesn't make any of us look good if one of us can't answer anything and says, "I have no idea this was going on." So, uh, again, a very thank you to council member Zan for filling me in. Um, I don't know if there's a motion that
needs to be made. Just to follow up on that to be fair, um at that meeting we had as a council um not had any one item in mind but
because it was a quick turnaround the discussion people can go back and watch the meeting. The discussion was to direct the staff, Tom specifically, city engineer, find a project that would fit this criteria because it was limited
criteria. So, just like yourself, Jennifer, I didn't know about it. Actually, I found out about it after you did even, but um I don't want to be negative in any connotation towards the
staff. they did exactly what we asked them to do in a correct way. And as far as about finding out, once again, you know, there's there's a policy, a procedure put in place on the correct
way to do that if it comes through the city administrator back to us. and to do that. Um again um you know you know being fully transparent and everything you know who
in the city knew that you were going to then directly contact their office. I mean this information is news to me. I don't know is it news to staff tonight? Did anybody know about this before right now? No. So, you know, as far as being
transparent, too, Jennifer, you just blindsided everybody in the room, everybody in the council, all the staff with this information. So, it just it it just goes both ways. And so, the staff did what we asked them to do and so did
our members of our um consultants, WSN. So, thank you for your work with it. Um, maybe next time it comes up, maybe we'll have another project that would fit. Projects like this would be great opportunities to do moving ahead. I know
a water tower is like a four-letter swear word in this town, you know. I mean obviously there's huge responses from people but at the end of the day we were also elected to what is the best
for the community overall? What is best for our lakes that it's most made up in this town? What is the best for the 5year, 10 year, 50year plan going ahead? And also too I am hear me out. I am not
in any way saying I want to spend our money to do this but when our you know taxing our local citizens but when there's a grant or federal money available to help a bigger project like that like this I fully support going
after any and all opportunities to do that. That's the only way we're ever going to get something done because I will never vote for taxing the local people to put this full burden on them, you know. And so we we've we've got to try. So, thank you, Tom. Thank you,
Dave, whoever worked on it. And I guess we'll try again next time. >> Unless Tom, >> do you have anything you want to say? >> No, I think I would just echo the the short turn on this. There was no opportunity to have a meeting about this or notify anyone. >> Yeah, exactly.
>> I mean, it was either that or we just don't apply. >> Yeah. No, you you did exactly what was asked of you. I don't think there's any disputing that it was a short turnaround and that council did direct staff to look for projects, staff and partners to look for projects and submit them. I think all
I'm saying is yes, we couldn't maybe have another council meeting on the issue, but it overcommunication I always find is best, right? >> Yeah, I'll try a ESP the next time. >> And um I would also say council member Hall, I agree with you. If we do have
federal grant opportunities, we should absolutely consider them. But when you are going to a member of Congress for federal funding, typically two of the core requirements they have are a project should be shovel ready and it should have widespread community support. And I think that's again the part and that's a huge opportunity for
the city of Nisa. Let's get let's get by and let's be transparent and let's make sure folks know what's going on and let's hear how they feel about it. Um Mr. Heidman, it looks like you would like to make a comment related to this specific issue. >> If I could, Mayor. Yeah, >> sure.
Um, so f first of all, I just say I Joe, something you said just really struck home and that was about a plan and and I'm not take I don't want to take that and change it into anything else, but I think something that really caught the community here is
a plan. Uh, the city purchased a piece of property. Um, for the most part, I don't know that there's been a plan that's been produced with public input.
And if we're, you know, if as this, if the city's going to work on something like this, um, a plan is important is really important. And if the um if a if if the opportunity for a water tower or or or
some funding just pops up, which it does every year by the way. Um this these monies come available pretty much every year either through the rep the reps or the senators. Um, but let I I would just ask that the city gets a plan together
and then once the plan is established, then look for the funding rather than just, oh my god, there's possibility of some money available. Let's just go after it. And then the citizens are like, what the hell's going on? Um,
a water tower, you know, it just comes out of the blue. Um, I had a council person tell me a couple weeks ago that that was 20 to 30 years out and then and I probably believed it. I'm not saying that I don't think the person was not
being honest. I think that's what the the their belief was. But then some money comes available and this just pops up out of nowhere and and so a plan with timelines really seems to make sense. And again,
these monies are available every year. So, thank you. >> Thank you. >> All the more need for the EDA. That's, you know, kind of the goal, the whole goal of the EDA is just that. >> I think Bob, do you have something? Bob, you're standing up there. >> 60 seconds. >> Great. Go ahead.
>> Um, yeah, I've been uh out of state for about three weeks, so maybe I've missed a bunch, but um Bob Bob Fear Fi R. Anything else? Okay. Um what resonated
I'm going to talk to the mayor just as representative of everybody. What resonated with me is um shovel ready and in communication and I guess I would like the council or whatever to define what shovel ready is. You know, I come
from the corporate world into a lot of projects similar to this. And to me, a shovel ready a written project scope is it a PNID mechanical, civil, and electrical drawings in the package with a conceptual quote that people then review and comment on. And I understand
that sounds like a lot of work, but is there a capital threshold in which you say anything beyond this, we're going to have to have 30 days of communication with the with the uh citizens of Nisma. So I'm I'm guess if I boiled it down is to I'd ask the council is what is a
shovel if you're going to go for grant funding what is a a trigger point for shovel ready projects in which the community needs to be involved in and and I don't think it's individuals members to might hear a rumor to go and talk to uh a council member on a committee. I think there should be a
central place whether it's on your website page where I can go and get detailed information on a project or whether it's if it's your quarterly or monthly newsletters that give reference to where to find things because um you know relying on the community to come in and because they heard something in the
app and look people up. I think that's kind of the I don't want to use the word but it's a little backwards. Thank you for your time. >> But so shovel ready is not it's not driven by us. It's driven by the Congress people >> it's a requirement for grant >> it's the requirement for them so it's
what it means to them >> oh to them but shouldn't we understand what that means >> their definition >> yes >> okay I'm I just you I come from pharmaceutical plant background so shovel idea is big package to me >> okay thank you um if there's nothing
else I'd like to move to new business but because we have a member um from the community and she's been sitting here waiting for two hours so unless Unless council members on, did you have something you wanted to add? Otherwise, I'm going to go to Miss Beath. >> No, though. Well, yes.
One moment. >> You're on. >> Okay, good. Uh, Mr. Fear, to your point, I I do completely agree with you. Uh, I think we actually discussed that uh to a decent extent. May maybe you recollect that. We we talked about what is
>> what is shovel ready, what's not. >> Another in our industry, we talk about what's also shovel worthy. Uh and Bob, we're in the power utility industry. Utility scale solar farm, substation, battery storage, transmission line projects. Shovel worthy means there is enough conceptual piece to be able to
drive things forward. Um this thing came up fast. I've been on this council I think four years this month. Uh I've never as a council member received an email as we got a month or so ago from any repres any rep from representative
Pete Staver's office about this. So to Pre point, you're correct. Uh but to be solicited like that via email, um that's why we drove this piece to a council discussion last month. So coun uh shovel ready, shovel worthy. Um it was
debatable. It was a a shot at something. Uh the staff obviously deemed that this was the closest project that was either shovel worthy with some considerations for shovel ready. Uh and with the mayor's update that she has right now, that's where we're at. So, um there is
still long-term planning that has to be done. Uh hence the drive and the urgency for an economic development authority. >> Thank you. Okay, we're going to go to new business. Um the first item is Roy Access Concerns and we have Laura Bee with us. She is a resident. She did
approach the city about this um to come on our agenda previously, but then had a beautiful new grandchild. So, she's here with us tonight. Thank you for sitting here so patiently for 2 hours. we will turn it over to you. Thank you so much. Um my name is Laura Bee. I live at 8010
Witstrom Road um in Nisa. I want to thank all of you for serving first of all. Um I've spent the greater part of my career serving on boards like yourself and and I know it takes a lot. So um just wanted to give my thanks to you. Also um as mentioned, I've reached
out on this issue. I didn't know where to go. So, I started reaching out to the police department. They were very respectful with what I'm going to share. Um, I ended up going to the DNR next. Then I ended up um talking to administration, going to the city
planner, and um ended up talking to the mayor as well. Um because of my concerns. In 2001, I had bought the property of 810 Witstrom Road. Um, I've been, this is my solo residence.
Um, I've been here for many, many years since 2001. Um, if you know our block, it's a dead end onelane road on a peninsula. I originally thought the property across the street on this onelane road was
mine. Since 2001, I've been taking care of this property. It's 100 ft. cutting the grass, planting trees, planting wild flowers. I've had a lawn service now for many years that come in
weekly to take care of the strip of land. They cut it, they fertilize it, they spray for weeds. Not once in 25 years has anyone stopped me to say that's not my land. And there's not anyone else that's paying for the service that's taking
place on that land. Um, however, this year I witnessed what I would believe is inappropriate use of the land as access to the lake by by trucks with trailers, cars, all kinds of vehicles, snowmobiles
and equipment. I heard now after this research, even talking to the county and the property area, that ownership is in question. So, my concerns, I've got several pages in
your document, pages 125 to 145. First of all, again, I live on a peninsula. It's a deadend street, very quiet. Each lot is 100 about 100 ft.
There's safety issues. Vehicles are coming going up and down this road and they've carved out a 12 foot axis onto the lake. There's very little land there. They go on this road. They've been going
on it day and night. Again, there's no place for cars to park in a street. People walk during the day. They bring their kids with strollers and their dogs and they walk to the end and turn around. I have photos and timestamps
documenting just minutes between cars coming off the lake and barely hitting people. Traffic, like I said, there's only room for one vehicle. If there's an emergency, no one can get by. It's a
small road. If the mailman, a garbage truck, a delivery truck comes by. Again, no, there's no access for another car. Again, I have photos with timestamps of the mailman coming, the garbage man coming, and all of a sudden, right a
couple minutes later, a truck comes out from the road from the from the lake, which could have been an accident. Our neighborhood is a nice neighborhood. Um, individuals went in and cut down 12 ft of trees and brush and brought a plow
through to make a road. It looks terrible. And the access is directly in front of my h house. So, lights shine into my kitchen, into my bedroom. And again, these are small lots. I'm concerned about the environment.
It's on the water's edge and someone's coming down to cut the trees and the bushes and deer and wildlife are walking through there all the time. There's not enough room and there's never meant to be a road to take a left
or right turn. Recently, my mailbox was knocked over from a vehicle coming off the lake. I I wonder if laws are being broken. The speed of the vehicles at times are fast. My cameras can't even take a picture of
them. They're that fast. The hours people have come off the lake after 100 p.m. at night waking me up. And it's noisy. People can be intoxicated in their cars coming off the lake trying to take a turn.
To me, it's like disord disorderly conduct disturbances. The other night, it was actually scary. I was out of town town. I came home, it was 1000 p.m. at night. Someone walked off the lake right behind
me when I went to get my mail and had a flashlight on their head. I ask you, would anyone want this to happen if you thought you were alone at the end of a peninsula? These individuals walk and park in a turnaround that's not meant to be for
cars to park and there's no room for them to park on the street. That is a turnaround for the buses or anyone that gets to the dead end of the road. I've wondered if there's this adverse possession. Like I said, I've been
taking care of it for 25 years and no one's ever stopped to say, "Can I pay that bill?" that weekly bill you pay. Um, as a leader and and I work full-time. I'm a healthcare executive. I travel, so I missed when someone had
made this cut down the trees and plowed the road. My neighbor who was always there was gone as well. Um, so I'm just asking for you when you think of this access is less than 50 feet from my house.
Um, and I can't think of any reasonable person that would want this to happen of what can we do to reinforce safety. I've shared um kind of the plots of this. It's a very small piece and like I said, it's 12 ft and they've
plowed it through. Um, I know the ice houses are off now, but I just wanted some resolution of what are steps. Um, I could give you a lot more pictures of what's going on with with trucks and trailers and other
vehicles going on and off, but if you look at some of those pictures and just see the size of the road and a normal vehicle, that's all that fits. And there is no way to make a sharp turn and not accidentally end up in my yard, you
know, knock down the mail the um mailbox or if there's if they're slipping off the ice and going fast, they could end up in my yard or hitting my house. So um I just felt like I you know after talking to everyone, they're so respectful. Like I said, I talked to the
city planner, the police, the DNR, others. I'm at a loss of what to do with this. Um, you know, my neighbors and I want to see an end to this for safety. Um, and we'd like to go back and
replant. Um, just again, I'm coming here because I don't think any one of us in this room would find this to be reasonable or safe. And I don't know how to stop it. Um, and I'm certainly at night. Um, if you're out at 10 o'clock
at night checking something and someone walks behind you, right behind you, and thinks it's funny, it's not funny. It's scary. And it's it all of us that are there feel like it's unsafe right now. So, I'm coming to this council just again thanking you for being heard, but
also, you know, wanting to make sure that no one gets hit by a car. Um, no one is running into someone's house or that we're not encouraging this disrespectful behavior
because this is a quiet little neighborhood with a peninsula, not an intended access to the lake. I don't know if you want me to go through pictures or what would you like me to do? What's the procedure?
>> Let me see if Mr. Timlin, do you have anything you want to add because I know you've you're aware of of this issue and have probably spent some time on it as well. >> And my neighbor also wrote a letter that's in your packet. He's very there. I mean, everyone's concerned with this.
>> Thank you. And you've been so nice when you heard me out on this, too. If I may, Madam Mayor, before Stephen starts, Miss Beef is are are your neighbors the the Pags. >> They're on one side. The that isn't
where the entrance is. The entrance is right in front of my house and at the Wakults house and the letters from the Wakultts. >> Got it. I I know that. I know your situation pretty well. I have some longtime friends that have lived down in that neighborhood. >> Oh.
>> Um and I agree with you. it it has turned into an access over over the years. Uh fishermen in this area, if there's a will, there's a way. It's hard to it's hard to damn them for it, but when it gets pushed too far, it's no
different than snowmoilers on private property that are giving uh property right access for a season to uh to grooming committees or trail committees. Um when it gets abused, it's taken away and sometimes it never comes back. Well,
it's it has changed. Um, you know, my neighbors will say that people have come up in snowmobiles right in their yard. >> Yeah. >> And is that how we treat our neighbors? Is that what we want? I mean, it's it's just gotten out of hand, >> right?
>> And if they're cutting down trees, who gives them the right to do that? I mean, I just I don't know who these people are, >> right? >> But thank you for acknowledging that. um your concern too. >> Go ahead, Stephen.
>> Thank you, everyone. Uh so, yeah, um Laura did reach out to me um asking me to make a site visit, try to determine um what's going on out there, whether or not it violated any provisions in our land use ordinance. Uh while I was on site, I was actually the one blessed to be able to take the picture of the deer
out there. So, that was kind of unique and wonderful at the same time. Um to me from planning and zoning it really comes down to is this a violation and is it occurring on private property or is it occurring in rightway. Um Maggie
Young at the um land services office teed it up very well in her email I think um that this was a element that was on the plat map. Um there is not a dedication in
that plat map for uh specific phrasing such as we hereby dedic donate and dedicate the streets and roads shown on the plat to public for public use forever. Um to me if that dedication isn't there the
question of ownership comes forward. if it's a private property, um how does that tie in with our land use regulation and who would be the recipient of enforcement action if a violation does exist? So, that is where this matter to
me gets very complicated because I wouldn't have any person to write a letter to, for example. um as it relates to feedback that we received jointly through the DNR um it doesn't appear that there's any public
waters impact. So the element similarly to our conundrum would be who would be the recipient of an enforcement action. Um from planning and zoning environmentally um to me the concern comes down to
intensification of use. um what you might see as snowmobiles one year turns into four-wheelers and sideby sides and now trucks with trailers. Um this matter appears to be more transient
in the winter months. Um and frankly I'm at a loss for how to advise this council on what to what next steps they could even take on it. Um if we don't know who the owner is, can somebody demonstrate what that is? Um,
so um, happy to field any questions, but I'm at a loss from land use development chapter of our ordinance for this. >> I've questioned if the police should be there to be checking um, if there's any drivers under the
influence because we've got people coming, like I said, 1 in the morning, 2 in the morning, and they've been out there for hours and hours. I have a camera that's I've got going. >> Well, let's let our our chief is here if he wants to maybe since you've worked
with the police department, maybe if Chief Shamansky has anything to add here. And then, um I I believe some council members will want to chime in. >> Yeah. As far as possible impaired driving, um we can't stand there and
just check people without a reason. Um, we can certainly do extra patrol in the area for that or parking issues along the road. Um, and keep further traffic issues as they would arise. Um, as far as anything is the land and the
access on our end until an owner um can be determined. It's kind of a the old saying, there's no victim, there's no crime. So, if we can't determine an owner or a victim in any of
that, we can't do anything as far as like trespass or anything like that. But we can certainly spend some extra time in the area down there if you have some certain times where you think it's more prevalent in the evening like that or
the early morning hours. I guess >> can they park in that turnaround? I thought no one's supposed to park there. And then I would also If I've been taking care of it for 25 years, is it mine? >> So,
>> can I can I ask a couple questions of clarity? >> Go ahead, Congal. >> Nobody can find ownership to it. That's that's the real issue. Nobody can find ownership. And then second question, has anybody done any survey work to just see
if it's like a a lot line adjustment, something's just off on a survey? Have Have you contacted a surveyor? >> So, I look at that >> document. I put every information I could on every plot. We thought when it was sold us, it was ours and our
neighbor thought it was theirs. And this is all new when we tried to call to find out what to do that it's kind of like this little strip seemed like as they had it said 60ome years ago when they subdivided it. >> It was meant to be kind of like a
private road and ours and then something happened here and it's like there's just this teeny little area. >> So has any has any surveyor looked at it recently? Have have you have you guys contacted a surveyor to help you or look
at it or look at the pins and ask them? >> We I went to um I contacted um the county where they look at the property and that's where they're saying the records. It was all one piece of land that was subdivided for our homes. And
originally it sounded like it was private. It was never meant to be a rightaway or ease any of that. And all of a sudden now this issues come up and it's they say this is happens once in a while where after time something happens like this where the broad is put in and
>> yeah I guess that be maybe my recommendation to start somewhere just to contact a survey company to have them come out there and just help you truly find what property is yours. Put some pins in re-evaluate it. Yeah, there's a
survey with the one document from the neighbor when he had to add on. >> Yeah, I would I would still say to come out and have your property surveyed, pinned, parcled, look at that, look, compare that to the abstract that you received when you purchased your home.
Um, that would be one recommendation to start with. Um, Steven's jurisdiction stops at the high water mark, the OHW. And so, what has the DNR, Stephen, said about them crossing that that area? Does
the DNR have concerns or, you know, have they sent out a conservation officer or anything because something's wrong in the vegetated area of the lake or what's the DNR's stance? So, if I understand correctly, you did contact a conservation officer as well.
>> Um, as it relates to this use, the hydraologist did weigh in on it. Um, Jake Free with the DNR that the in its current state, there's not a violation of public waters. There's no gravel
deposited there. There's no impact to the lake bed. Um, as you said, city's jurisdiction starts and stops at the OW inside the water body. that's more DNR or county surface water ordinance. Um,
to me, the the encouragement to engage professional services is probably a great recommendation. I envision prior to getting a surveyor, you might want to talk to a title examiner. Megie Young in her email did talk about that too that
she we as civic servants are not well enough first in title standards to know other common practices or state statutes. So that might pull in a leg of a real estate attorney telling you from advice from an examiner of title what
exactly that is what that means and what your next options would be as a neighboring property owner to it. identifying what it is before you start tackling a problem is probably a good first step. Um, from the city, I might
recommend that we kind of observe, document it over the course of time, monitoring that intensification of use element. Um, still at the end of that, if the use does intensify, again, we're left with the conundrum of now who do we enforce
upon for this violation? If it is if it's private property um for example providing access to your property that might be on an easement but private property typically starts with enforcement action of stopping the
trespass once the trespass is addressed if it is private property I can start engaging you on restoration of that shoreline what that looks like pairing with the DNR soil and water conservation districts um for recommendation of vegetation that
and proliferate there. Um, but identification without knowing what we're looking at specifically, that's where we're all kind of at a drawing a question mark on the board here. >> Well, and I've taken care of it for 25 years until this happened. >> And then I'd ask Tom Stephen is I can't
tell from the plat dedication language because this platform from 1968 has language, but I can't read it because it's small. Do do we know? And Tom, do you guys is Witstrom Road a publicly dedicated road?
>> You maintain it. >> Yeah. >> So it is a city maintainer agreement where they take care of. >> Okay. So it's it's it's publicly maintained. I just can't tell from the plat language. Stephen, do you know in the plant language is Wstrom Road
dedicated to the public? >> There's no mention of roads or streets in the dedication language. Um, these parcels at the end of the peninsula probably constitute 10% of the road's length. Most of it is >> well, even if Witstrom Road was
dedicated to the public in this plat, we're still talking about this access off of the road that is now going to the lake across private property. So, We have prescriptive rights obviously even if there's not plat dedication
langu language we have prescriptive rights to maintain um and consider which from road public because of those prescriptive rights but I I I guess the point of this is this is illegal activity happening on
private property and the city can't do much about that unless the city was interested in trying to protect its rights and Witstrom Road to somehow block that access. Um, >> well, it's so unsafe. I mean, it's
>> your your your best path on this is yes to consult with a real estate attorney because you might have some adverse possession rights. You might have a quiet title action. These things happen in plats sometimes where land that gets platted, there's some
useless piece of the land and it's not dedicated to the public and it's not used for the purposes of the plat. There is I've seen a situation kind of like this in Cailluna recently where a a portion of the plat wasn't dedicated to the public but it's a gap in the plat and so the neighbor uh started a quiet
title action to acquire title. Owner of the property is whoever platted it. So your your your effort with in a private matter would be probably a quiet title action or an adverse possession matter to cure the long-term problem that you're talking about that you've
maintained it. you think you should own it. Of course, if that happened, then you'd have rights to stop that access. I don't know what the city can do in the meantime to stop this activity because it is private property. Um, but I suppose I could investigate with Tom the
idea of whether something could be done um with respect to what's essentially illegal access on Witstrom Road. private property. >> Yeah. >> Yeah.
>> Yeah. Well, I I was I didn't want to just say that to you without talking to you about it, >> you know, offline. >> Yeah. But >> I didn't want to speak for >> Scary. I'll tell you that. I didn't want to speak for you, but now that you said
that, yes. Probably a pretty simple thing to do while Miss Bee figures out her options to acquire ownership of that land is, >> you know, we've got essentially a legal access to our rightway, right? And and
in that case, could if you if your department could do it and if the city council instructed it, could you put a guard rail up there? Could you put a barrier there? Could you put something in the protecting our rights on Witch from Road? >> Tom, that's a fantastic idea that I was just thinking of. You know, Mr. Blommer,
you got quite a few leftover boulders in uh in your gravel pit over by the uh water plant, I believe, or the sewer plant. It would just be funny if you loaded a couple tons worth of those decorative boulders and dropped them off towards the lake.
>> Well, it's a it's a little dangerous, though. You'd want something better than that. Yeah. I mean, it's it's that would be under the under the under the theory that we're protecting
our road and we've got a right away that's an illegal right ofway that we would otherwise somebody would have to apply for a permit to access our rightaway like a driveway permit or something like that. Right. Well, what I would say is we have we haven't provided a
road there. So, every time especially here potential damage. >> Yeah. I mean, that's that's the idea, right? Is that again, I didn't want to say that out loud, but you offered it. So, that was what I was thinking. Yes. Could the council authorize you to place
some kind of barricade there to stop that traffic at least in the meantime? where you well there's a different solution figured out but that's that's not the whole solution for you. You're you have a private issue here. >> It's very close to my house. They knocked over my mailbox. I mean if
someone and they they go fast. Um >> so I love any help with this because you know it's scary. >> You you should do what you need to do to investigate your ability to gain title to that land which would put a stop to this permanently. But there might be a
solution for the city in the meantime under the um opices of protecting its road to block that. >> So based on the conversation, do we have any council member that would like to make a motion to empower uh Mr. Blomber to look into different solutions and see
what might be best? >> So moved. >> Do we have a second? I guess I'll second it, but I have Okay. A couple follow-up questions. >> Yep. So, we have a motion and a second. So, we'll go for any additional discussion before we call the vote. Council member Hall,
>> um, is the heavy use time coming to end? Obviously, the fish houses are off and stuff. Has it dropped significantly right now? >> Whoever started this this year cut down 12 feet if you look at one of those pictures. >> Yeah, I saw that. And so
that's all was planted before I used to have like wild flowers and everything in there. So >> it seems like they're getting bolder all the time. >> Like I guess that's my question. Are they using this in the spring to access it with a canoe, a boat, something else? Or is this just kind of a wintertime
issue? >> Right now I see more winter activity, but they cut down this huge area. I I don't know who these people are. They could be coming back for the spring. >> I'm sure there's a lot of emergent vegetation that volunteers itself in
spring months during green up as well. >> And if this road isn't plotted to the city or given to the city, then are our easements and accesses like another road that is there and available for us? Like do we have the 33 feet off the center
line because this isn't titled to the road? Does that still all exist and apply? Sure. >> So if it's not platted, as Tom was alluding to, um we are there by prescriptive right. Um and so it would
really be just the width we maintain. So while while you've been mowing the grass or doing whatever it would be you would follow along where the city has been maintaining that width from the center line is what would be the prescriptive
right as I understand it. So usually we mow about an 8 foot width strip alongside the edge of the road. So anywhere inside that 8 foot, we could do work. Anything outside of
that, if there's not a prescribed right ofway, we can't touch it. >> So I guess my question is, is there a reason or anything to look into the city actually getting that road designated plotted to us to have all this rightway?
Is that of any benefit to the city for the whole road? >> What do you mean Witstrom Road? >> Yeah, Woodro. >> Woodstrom Road. the whole road. Is there is there any benefit to that? You know, I mean, as we go through a road bond project, is there is there any benefit to doing that work?
>> That road was um resurfaced a few years ago. Okay. >> I would have to refer back to the plan set with that if it defined the right of way at all or if if so would Seth would have done that worse for us. >> Yeah. >> If if it was defined in any way that
might say uh if it's not recorded with the county, I I I think it's there, but the descriptive use as a publicly maintained stretch of roadway. And the one thing I'd add is
the turnaround is there for a purpose of uh maintenance and public safety. And so parking uh is not the intended use for that as you stated. And so, you know,
the city could put up No parking signs if there aren't any right now. >> Well, and I'll just say the other night I came there, it was like 10 o'clock and I walked to my mailbox and someone walked off the lake with a flashlight
right behind me at 10:00 at night and then went to that turnaround where their car was. It's It's scary. I mean, who wants that? I mean, so I think we we have a motion and a
second on the floor. Unless we have anything else, I'd like to call the vote. >> Okay. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> I. >> Opposed. Okay. Motion carries. So, thank
you for bringing your concerns and the city will explore options. >> Thank you so much. >> Thank you for waiting, too. >> Okay. Next, under new business, we have parks contract for Nisa Lake Park restroom. Uh, thank you for waiting as
well, Miss Moon Peterson. >> Good evening. Thank you. Um, this one's pretty straightforward. This is a notice of award um for Pratt to do the work uh at Nissle Lake Park. That's the trail in the bathroom. Um, we did quotes and Seth
can elaborate in more if you have questions on that. Do you have any >> pretty straightforward the the bid or the quote came in within the range that we were hoping and we have prior work
experience with Pratt. So we're recommending that that award be made. >> Um any questions from council? >> Seeing none, I'll entertain a motion. I'll make a motion to approve um the
parks uh restroom project as presented. >> Second. >> Second from council member London. Um any additional discussion? All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> I. >> Opposed. Okay. Motion carries. Um next
item again for Amber is the Nisa City Park DNR outdoor recreation grant. >> Yes. Um, so this one, what I'm asking for tonight is the approval of the resolution in your packet. Um, that is to apply for the DNR outdoor rep grant
for the city park playground replacement. You'll find in your packet there's a lot of additional information because I believe we should know what we're applying for. Um, so we are still diligently working through especially
the budget portion of it um to get it ready for submitting the application. Um, so a couple key points that I want to point out tonight, the grant requires specific um, accessible pathways to all areas of
the park. So that was kind of as we dove into the grant um something that we had to kind of add in that we weren't initially expecting that kind of drove some of the prices up um for the amount of concrete work that we were going to have to add as a requirement of the
grant. Um so I want to point that out to you guys. Um and then with that it also enhances the inclusivity and the accessibility which is a key factor in the scoring criteria of the grant. So um
couple key points I just wanted to point out to you guys uh as you look through those other materials there is a significant amount. Happy to answer any questions on them but ultimately tonight I'm just looking for approval of the resolution to apply for the grant. Um, and if you guys have any thoughts on the
matching contribution, it is a 5050 match. >> Do we have any questions for Miss Moon Peterson about the grant? >> No, I think it'd be a good thing to go after and you know. >> Okay. Well, entertain a motion.
>> I'll make a motion to approve uh Amber going after the grant as presented. >> Second. >> Any additional questions or conversations? All right. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> I. >> Opposed.
>> Okay. Motion carried. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. All right. Next up, we have 2026 Road Bond Professional Construction Services. >> Right. Um, what this is is there's a proposal from Woodsth, excuse me, to provide
uh professional construction services related to the 2026 road bond. Um uh some of this would be survey work, administrative services, construction observation, and documentation of the 26 road bond construction. Uh the proposal
has an estimated cost of $273,600 as detailed in the proposal. Um a copy of that proposal is in your packet. You have any questions on that? I'm sure Dave could probably expand on what's in
the proposal. Any questions from councel? Um, seeing none, then I would entertain a motion. >> Make a motion that we move ahead with the uh proposal for uh Woodset to do the professional construction services for
the road bond. >> Second. >> All right. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Opposed. Okay. Motion carries. Um, next is the 2026 road bond bid recommendation. >> Okay. Okay, this is second while I get
to the document. Um, as you may know, we uh recently went out to bids for the construction work for the 26 road bond. Um, inside your packet is a recommendation letter from WIDS.
They reviewed the uh bids um to make sure that they were um >> I'm looking for the word >> informing. Yes, thank you process. >> Um, and they are um the low bidder was Anderson Brothers. Um, and the bid
actually came in underneath our estimate. Um, so this is work that's gone back to 2023 as I allude to in the uh request for council action. Um, and it looks to repair the following roads. Edna Lake Road, Edna Lane, Roy Lane,
East Roy Lake Road, Sumac Trail, Lendy Drive, Pokes Road, Old Government Trail, Wooddale Road South, Cander Court, and Parkway Drive. Um, I guess with that, uh, if there aren't any other questions,
I would look for, um, the acceptance of the bids. >> Does council have any questions? >> No. It's uh exciting to see that it came under in under budget under what we thought. So that's I guess a win for the city.
>> Yeah. >> Taxpayers that it was quite a bit less than what we thought. >> Um so I would entertain a motion. >> I'll make a motion that we approve uh the letter of recommendation as presented.
>> All right. Any additional discussion? All those in favor signify by saying I. I >> opposed. >> Okay, motion carries. Um, next up is a proposal to Plat Backage Road, um, LRLR to County Road 77.
>> Yeah, it's lower >> Lower Roy Lake Road. Y >> Sorry, that gets hard to type out constant, so I did abbreviate. Um so what this is is um we've had several um projects looking to come into
um this area and what this would do is define the rightway um along there. Um, and that helps the contractors or excuse me the the uh developers who are looking to build in that area plus the city to define the
right of way ahead of time. Uh, budget impact on this is the proposal to do this work is $74,200. Um I recommend that um costs for this would
be um brought back to bear uh to the adjoining properties. Um currently we would pay for this from our road department reserves. >> Um we would expect that this pro um this
would be paid back into the reserves uh when the uh mills properties are sold. Um, if there's further questions on that, I think Dave could maybe expand on what the services would be for this.
>> Does council have any questions about um about this agenda item? I have a qu I have a question. Um, not sure who to direct it to. if we are looking at like putting, you know, we're putting together this EDA and that body
is going to help provide input for forwardlooking development and whatnot for the city of Nisa. Is there a reason we would be doing these recommendations now versus
waiting until perhaps things are more formulated or more plans are put in place? And so this would be my question actually probably for the two of the next three items. I understand we've been talking about the list station for a while, but just
so that's my question. >> Sure. >> I'm not sure who that should be directed to. >> I I can take a run at it. So um I think the city has been discussing
establishing these corridors for roadway and utility corridor for quite some time. Um along with all the discussions with Mandot on Highway 371 development, the highway
commercial um the uh applications that planning and zoning has been seeing come through um over the past year or two. Uh it became more
important uh uh the importance of preserving a corridor uh in advance of construction of a building or other private improvements that would prevent that from happening
or that at least the option of it happening um really became more apparent. And so, you know, through the discussions uh at the planning and zoning level, at public works, um and just, you know, in
general with all the discussion about the various developments, um we felt it would be a good idea to get this in front of the council. uh give you a chance to kind of absorb what the cost of platting, doing a rightaway
plat and kind of the three quarters uh from the intersection of 77371 would be and and to break it up because it is a a cost commitment to start down
the path of you know preserving and establishing these rideways. Um, but we feel it's that important to get it in front of you. Um, whether or not you decide to move forward tonight, at least
it gets the conversation started. >> Thank you. >> So, um, just to add, Dave, you had suggested that this is a process that other communities use as well. Uh, you' use the example of Cross Lake. I believe I still have, you know, some examples of
that on my desk. I think this is a good tool for the city to use. I think uh developers would appreciate knowing where we want to put this to. I've heard that comment a few times kind of to allude to the uh uh
transparency and openness that that we're seeking. Um I don't think people want to hear there's a backage road that needs to go through or some kind of a service drive or utility corridor. back. I think they'd like to know about it
ahead of time. So, this would help us provide that. >> Thank you. Um if there are no other questions, I would entertain a motion. >> I'll make a motion to approve um Woods Seth um working on the platting as
presented for the backage road. >> I'll second it. >> All right. Any other discussion? All those council members on do you have any? Okay. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Opposed. Okay. Motion carries. Uh then
next is the proposal to plat Backage Road from County Road 13 to Timberwood Church. >> Sure. So this is really the same thing as like Dave alluded to. So we're looking at the four corners of the intersection and there's three corners that currently uh there's interest in development along. And so this is really
just a second one. Same arguments. Um, bear with me while I get to that. Um, so this one, the fee would be $79,900 is the difference.
>> All right. If council has any questions, if they don't, I would entertain a motion. >> Sure. >> Oh, go ahead. >> So, in the bottom here, it says total for the proposal 799. uh these costs
should be assessed back to benefiting adjoining properties. Can you define that for me? >> Uh Mr. Reese or Mr. Blommer? >> Sure. So like anything else we would do in this uh you know there's a benefit to
the property owners along here. So if if you're going to establish a right of way, I'm not saying this is something you have to assess. I'm just recommending that you you would consider it >> because that's the proposals for the lift station also and there's a lot of
non-adjoining property including the city property that's purchased. Is that going to be assessed to the city? >> Yes. For the lift station. >> Yes. Yeah. So, I guess I mean it's not much of a breakdown as to how that goes
>> because it's it's um that hasn't been um the city hasn't established any kind of an assessment policy. This is merely a suggestion on my part that as you go along that rideway where this is established, there's a cost to establish that and
it's a benefit to a lot of the developers who would work here. >> Yeah. Well, this runs down a lot of my property if I do nothing with it and I get assessed. I think it would be most likely assessed at the time of development. >> Okay.
>> But >> seems like you're voting on something you don't >> Yeah. piggybacking on >> and Andy's question. We're not saying we are assessing people. You're saying it's just it's something you're just recommending, but council could say we don't want to do that.
>> Since you should consider an assessment of these costs. It'd be no different than if you were to drop sewer lines in here and it would serve these properties. The city can't just eat the cost of that. You'd have to have some way to these costs. >> Okay. So, just to be clear then, an
approval of this motion is not necessarily assessing adjoining properties. Right now, it's just approving um for the city to define the rightaway for this specific backage road between County Road 13 and the entrance to
Timberwood Church. >> Yes. >> Okay. I just want to make sure we're all clear on that. >> And one other >> point of correction that I understand from this too is they'll come back with here's what we recommend, here's the
path we recommend. that will still go through a process where we'll have input from land owners, input from people. We would still have to vote on it. We would still need input from all the adjoining land owners and stuff. This is just a
process. Hey, at a high level, let's get looking at it. We're not assessing anybody. We're not saying that this is a done deal. We are just engaging WSN to take the first stab at trying to figure this out. Is is that >> kind of the high level? That's what I
understand. >> Yeah, there there is a deliverable at the end and that's that's actually a rightaway plat that establishes the corridor. And so, you know, after going through all the stakeholder
meetings, getting the feedback, um getting public input onto it, um that's the end goal, correct, >> of each of these. But we would still have the right to vote on it, table it, >> deny it.
>> Um, you know, that that still comes back to a vote. And with this, you know, this is in conjunction with everything that we know from MIDOT on what they're kind of saying they're going to do or look at
doing. Anyhow, it's it's kind of piggybacking their plan, so to speak. Correct. >> Yep. Yeah. >> Just for more clarity or questions for people out there. >> Yep. So, this motion is not to assess. It's just to
>> move forward with the plat in the rightway. >> High level. But it doesn't even mean that we need to accept the plat if we want, but it allows the engagement with land owners to figure this out where we'd want to go. >> So Dave, perhaps you just clarify for
myself too. So once we do this, it actually moves forward to a purchase process much like we did for the road bonds. >> So once we get to the to the actual stage of of gone through all the public
feedback and the input, um it just like any subdivision plat, it goes through planning and zoning in a preliminary plat and a final plat. And once that's ultimately approved,
should it be approved, then it would be signed by the city um go on to the county for recording as a plat. >> Okay. And then the final piece of that once it is platted if it runs through
somebody's property then you know and we would have to purchase it down the road that would be yet another step on purchasing that land from them. >> Yep. >> And every property that it goes through will know the precise square footage um
of from each property that we're looking for. So with that piece then there would be the whole assessment piece that Tom would do just like anything else but that would be the next step. So just to talk about so everyone knows
>> the clarity with it. >> Correct. >> Okay. Any >> Yeah. >> Mr. Schaefer, did that help clarify things for you? >> Okay, good. Um, I would entertain a motion. >> I'll make a motion to approve the
proposal uh for planning um as presented. >> Do we have a second? >> I'll second that. >> Oh, you can come to the mic real quick before we vote. >> Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. Uh, Fred Hydeman. So, I I have a simple question
here. Um it's always been the city's um oper mode of operation that everything is developmentdriven. So why is the city looking to spend money on a project that nobody's asking
any I mean have have any property owners say come to the city and said hey I want to develop my land and I want you to put a street in and I'm willing to pay for it. Where did this come from? This has never been the policy of the city of Nisa.
It's always been developerdriven. >> The developer in this case is Mindot. You know, the the plans, you know, M mindot has clearly laid out been talking about this for years. >> They're not the developer. The land
owners the land owners would be the developer >> for for the roads. And what they're talking about, like I just said, this is in line with what MDOT is. >> It might be in line with MDOT's broad idea,
but Mandot is not the developer. A developer is the person who owns the property comes to the city and says, "Hey, I want to I got 80 acres. I want to develop it. um this is kind of what I wanted. Well, it goes to planning and
zoning and then it goes through that process and then the city helps design the street, puts infrastructure, gives a developer a price on that and then it but it works through planning and zoning. This is way out of the ordinary.
We're spending taxpayers money for something that nobody's asking for. And that's that's my point. and there's getting to be a lot of angst in the community about this. So, I'm just sharing it. >> Thanks for your input. Um, we have a
motion and second on the floor. Is there any additional discussion? Otherwise, I'll call the question. >> Okay. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> I. >> Opposed. Okay. Motion carries. Um, and then the last one is a proposal to Plat
Backage Road on the uh the new property. >> One second while I find that one. >> Oh, you know what? I I meant to note this. The cover sheet on G7 and G8 for background was the same, but
then the budget impact was different. So, that might have just been a copy and paste error or something. So with this one, this is for the mills property. So it's a similar process. There's been a little bit more background work that's already been done with this.
And so what this does is it uh helps the city to define the rightaway for proposed backage road between county road 13 and the entry. Yeah, you're right. Um that that part I probably didn't mess up
on on the uh p cut and paste. However, uh the fee for this is $31,300 and this would basically take from 77 uh into the new property.
>> That's correct. Some of the due diligence work has already been done on this one. So, >> sorry, what did you say the fee was? >> 31,300. >> Y >> Okay. Okay. Does council have any
questions on this specific item? Um, I think we have a member of the public that would like to make a comment or question. >> Have a question. >> Charlotte Filhower. F I L L H O U EI 25624
Roy Lane. So, in terms of this property that was bought at the end of what, two years ago, do we have a timeline and do we have a a developer that's looking
to develop this at this time that we're going after this expense at this time? I guess that's my question. I mean, you talked about due diligence. Have we paid a bill for you to do some of this work already for this property?
>> Some of the initial work like um an archaeological phase one was completed. >> Oh, was that part done before the purchase? >> Yeah, >> that was approved. Okay. So, my question is do we have interested parties at this time
that want to develop it? Yes or no? I don't know the answer to that. Not that I'm aware of, but perhaps other council members or staff have a different >> Could you expand on that? >> Yeah. And so
again, timeline, are they can or is there some agreement in place to lease it, buy it from the city that we're going to put out $31,000 for on maybe
>> some of this is also defining what some elements the city would like to do with this property. You know, for instance, you saw that nowhere in the immediate future, but at some point in the future, the city has thoughts of a fireh hall when
we talk about >> need to spend that money. Now, that's why I'm asking city council. So just you know from a development aspect um right now before it gets advertised with
what we know from MDOT the best use of it like um um Dave said how to lay that out there before we'd go and say hey this is for >> isn't that isn't that someone who wants
to develop it wouldn't they be the ones driving the road plat. I mean, what their needs? I mean, if we have a if we have an apartment building, their needs are going to be different than maybe a re retail strip mall. I mean, I think to
me, we're putting the cart before the horse. And as a as a taxpayer, I don't like like, well, we might have somebody. Well, who are these people? Are there conflicts of interests? I mean, we keep talking about that there's
people that want to develop it, but I would like as a citizen to know who these parties are and what's going on because I would should hope that as a taxpayer that we would have some way of knowing what's going to be presented to
our city council and not like this like a a day or two before. >> Yeah. So the whole I think the whole goal is to put this together. That's the whole purpose of the EDA to have >> How do I get on the EDA then? Because I
have a real concern because I I'll volunteer to be on your EDA. >> Sure. I think you know >> do I need real estate background? What you know my qualifications? I'm just really concerned because I feel like I have come to the town meetings.
I've sat in the meetings where we have all the city work, you know, department chairs talk, but I think like several of the gentlemen here have spoke to, I really feel as a taxpayer that there isn't
transparency. And we go to these town hall meetings and we come away thinking, "Oh, good. They're being, you know, they're telling us everything." And then we get the agenda and there's just all these plat drawings and there's all these plans but
no one is giving us information. So then you criticize social media. You know why people are on social media? Because they're trying to figure it out because we don't feel people are being forthcoming with the information. So, my recommendation
is I don't think particularly on this property, unless there's more information that's been made public, I don't think it's a good way of spending our money. And no, it's not 79,000 like a lot of the other two prior plat. This
is only 31,000, but I just feel like there needs to be more transparency. And my recommendation for this particular one, I would like my city council to vote it down and not present it until you show us a plan.
>> So, a couple things with that though. Um, for instance, um, at the planning and zoning with Stephen, you know, the town halls, you know, we've only had two town halls, but >> and they're wonderful. I do them more often. I I just want to communicate to
the public, you know, just the last couple months at planning and zoning and even here a month ago, there was a group in saying, "Hey, we have an idea for kind of this area, this corridor. That all kind of ties together once again
back to mind ties together." So, is the information out there? It's out there. I understand that people can't attend the public works committee, the planning zoning committee, the council meetings, but the information is out there and
part of it is at the public works, part of it is at the city council. And so to answer your question, I think in that whole area, that whole corridor down there, there are people interested and before we we as a city engage or say,
whoa, whoa, whoa, we're trying to put an EDA together that would properly, >> okay, then I don't see why if we're doing the ED going forward with that development group, then this should be tabled until that is finalized and we spend this $31,000 wisely based on the
recommend commendation of that economic development board. >> Some of the roads and some of the backage like Dave mentioned, some of this leg work has been done. It's actually been done for a very long time. Um, >> so where is it? Is it in this room on a on a map?
>> So, um, Mindot has actually presented that. Yeah, it was hanging up here for for a year on how this >> on this specific property, the Mills property. >> Yes. through the mills of property through all these properties that we've talked about. I mean, um, over the last
five years, this has been talked about numerous times, numerous meetings, you know, once again, back to transparency with the community. I don't know the best way to get the information out when the meetings are happening, but yeah,
>> someone can spend four hours every city council meeting and then you add up, you know, whatever. Well, but I think the recommendation of one of the gentlemen up here, whether it was Mr. Hidman or is that with technology? I want you to know
if I went in on this city council packet and I go into the search bar and I put March 2026 city council agenda, it won't take me to the page of, you know, if I put city council and you've
got all the your faces there and I have to go up to that submen. What I'm saying is to an average person, they're going to do that search and look for today's agenda and it doesn't come up. It doesn't come up. Okay, I have signed up
for the auto alert. Somehow my address is no longer in there as an auto alert. I went and signed in today and it didn't say, "Oh, you already there." All I think what one gentleman recommended is that we should have a monthly recap, an
easy to read. This is what's happened and all the liaison could take upon themselves or a city person, I don't care, but there should be a one-page recap of highlights of what happened in our city and to have it right as a
splash page on our city of Nisa. People are coming to check out our town. It'd be a great way to show what's going on. >> Sure. and we shouldn't have to be searching for it and calling people or
looking on the Next Door app to figure it out. >> So, yeah. And and so that's right there. I don't disagree. The the city website could greatly use some improvement. I agree with everything you said. The only
thing that I will say too is the Next Door app is absolutely the wrong place. >> I agree. I agree. Have you ever seen my comments on there? No, I agree. But I read it because I like getting the pulse of our community. >> Sure. >> And I don't care if you're a a
bluecollar person, you're a retiree. >> Everyone has a voice in this situation. And maybe we don't like the Nextdoor app and what we gleaned from that, but it's still someone's opinion and it it should be valued. So, I'm not here to discredit
Next Door, but what I'm saying is people are turning to other resources to find information if we as a city are not providing it. >> So, I would recommend turn here, come in, you know, call Tom, you know, >> but again, it's this one-on-one. But
anyways, we're not going to take We've already been here long enough. My recommendation is is that if we're really pushing for the economic development, whatever name it is, I don't see why we can't table this for a couple more months.
As far as approval for 31,000, that's my opinion as a taxpayer. You don't have to agree with it, but as a voting person in this community, I'm asking the city council to to either table of it or not approve it on today's agenda.
>> Yeah. And I just want you to know that I feel your frustration equally as frustrated. You know, I want people to turn to the city, come to the staff on the on the uh Next Door app. You know, this past week, I was informed on there
the city's looking at buying a helicopter. I was informed that we're looking at I I'm just saying that this is the sort of stuff that is on there, right? and a $30 million fireh hall, lowincome housing, none of that has been
discussed here. I mean, and so if that's where we're looking for information, you know, the people that's putting that sort of garbage on there, I mean, I would say shoot for the moon. Let's get a submarine. Let's get a Le jet. Let's do whatever. Right. Yeah.
>> Right. So turn back. >> Give us a name. You can tell us it's, you know, an airport, an apartment building, a school, private school. I don't care. But that's where the rumors start because people are just saying,
"We're getting in this." Well, that's fueling the >> Yeah. And and that's what we're trying to get out ahead of. If there are true inquiries, we're trying to do it correct. Set the EDA in plan in place. Put some of this development in place.
Put the infrastructure in right and correct before we advertise it. I hear the same rumors. People ask me this exact question as a as a council person. I I don't know. I don't know how to answer it. It's a rumor. Where did you hear it? Who did you hear it from? the
you know that's where I would direct people every time come talk to staff come talk to Tom as far as this and the efficiencies of all the other projects within the city and the ability to recap
the money out of it but be able to start to have these discussions. You know we got to start somewhere to have discussions with neighboring land owners. This is the point. This is the tool that allows us to start to have the discussion. So without this, we don't
have the ability to have the discussions to get the public input. And so that's yeah, >> I can speak. >> So because I'll I'll just say that there is no deadline for these three projects. If you want to put all three of them
onto some kind of a hold, I don't think you're going to hurt anybody's feelings here. But I would what I would say is is these projects kind of to expound on what you were saying about MINDOT. What these are is for instance I'll use in front of Schaers because it's the best
example. There's a frontage road there and it doesn't meet a lot of the criteria Mandot has for that signalized intersection for instance coming off that corner. Everybody knows that when you try to turn in there, it's a sharp curve. If you're on anything other than
a car, making that turn onto that frontage road is difficult. In the summer when we have a lot of traffic, traffic backs up on the light and it blocks all that intersection. So, the idea was is to move those to what's called a backage road. And so, we're
trying to define the backage road in these busier commercial corridors. And the reason we're trying to define that ahead of time is so that they make sense. So you don't have something like uh you where it's it's convoluted. It's
not re reasonably straight or safe or there's enough width um for when they're built. So I think to to define that ahead of time makes sense. That's really all this is trying to do. Now, you'll get input from whoever wants to develop along these corridors
and maybe they don't happen, but um yeah, like you said, you got to start somewhere. So, >> okay. So, we >> that point >> we heard from a lot of folks. Is there a motion that council wants to make related to this? Oh, council member
Zan, you have your hand up. >> I do. Uh, I didn't hear the the citizen's name. What was her name? >> Carla. >> Carla. >> Charla. >> Charla, pardon me. Charl, I appreciate
your comments and uh I'm How can anybody disagree with you? Um I and I hope you understand some of Joe's points uh on a broad sense of uh in regards to looking down the pipeline for this property to be able to best market it to be able to
get it to be able to sell. Uh but I do hear your points loud and clear and that's that's the beauty about being able to be as transparent and and and collaborative as this specific session was. So, I would make a motion uh to
table this specific item until we have an EDA in place um and to be able to then package what suggestions come from the EDA to the council in tandem with this next decision. >> Thank you. Do we have a second?
>> Second that. >> Any other discussion? All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> I. All those opposed? Okay, motion carries. Um, may
>> May I also make another motion, Mayor Car? >> Yes. >> In regards to the last two motions that we approved and passed, um, in consideration for those points, I understand they're valid. I I see both sides and and my vote yay for the
previous two um were no different than saying yay for for the this third one that we just tabled. However, Mr. Blommer is is there any consideration that that you would have for tableabling or rescending those motions and and
their approvals to table until uh the economic development authority is established to be able to provide strong guidance in regards to a prospective sutor or suitors for that property. >> I personally have no issue with that.
However, what I would suggest is uh in in particular the um corridor behind Wendy's, I think there's been a lot of activity. We've had it here at the council meeting. So, >> um if we don't define this soon, it it
hinders their development, but um I'm not aware of what the exact timeline is for the EDA. Um, but I if you want to make that wait for that, that's fine by me. >> Okay. Well, Madame Mayor, um, I'd like
to make the motion to have the council consider and vote on uh, rescending the approval for the prior two motions and table them until a further date. >> Do we have a second? Any additional discussion? All those in
favor signify by saying I. I. >> I. Opposed. Okay, that motion carries. So, those two are rescended. >> Um, thank you for your input. Thank you council members on for your motions. >> Um, next up is a sewer line jetting and
televising. >> All right, good. >> So, this is maintenance for our sewer system. So, we haven't done the televising of our system pretty much since it was installed. We did do a third of this already with uh in conjunction with the
26 road bond and that was mostly to make sure that the sewer lines within those roads was in would be in good condition. Um so this is really just the next phase of that and so what we're trying to do is divide our s existing system up into three sections.
This would be the second section where we jet it which is cleaning it so it can be televised. What this does is it allows us to see if there's any pending issues uh with the con uh condition of the sewer line, anything that we need to correct. Uh
looks for uh what what we call INI, inflow and infiltration. This is a common problem with most sewer collection systems. Uh it's something that we're required to do by PCA is to control ini. Um and this is pretty
routine maintenance. Um, and so I outline that in here. Um, we're looking to establish that we televise a system every 10 years. And so that's just giving us a snapshot of what sewer line looks like. Um, just to try to identify problems ahead
of time so we can plan for them, try to coordinate them with road projects where possible. Yeah. So, uh, the the budget impact for this, um, Nelson Sanitation is the lowest quote that we have. Um, they will
do the work for $21,600. >> Do we have any questions for Mr. Blommer? >> I do. Before I make a motion, uh, Mr. Blommer, is this going to be coming out of the sewer budget? >> Yes. >> Okay. Uh, with that, I'd like to make a motion to approve the sewer line jetting and televising proposal.
>> Do we have a second? I'll second it. >> Any additional discussion? All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Opposed. Okay. Motion carries. >> Is it going to be live streamed? >> If you insist.
>> I make a motion that we do not insist. >> Okay. The next item is public works committee reappoint uh D to the public works committee. And it looks like there's a additional one which says to add council member hall as a second liaison. Mr. Blomber.
>> Yeah. So this is from a recommendation from the existing public works direct committee. Excuse me. So D has served two consecutive terms and so we're asking um that a waiver be granted so that he can
serve an another term. Dill's been a very valuable member of the committee and he's interested in in providing a third term. Um and so I think that would probably be the first part of what I'm asking. Um second part is and this is also a
recommendation from the committee that we have two council members as liaison to the committee um to try to bring back more of the what's talked about at that committee to this meeting so that u
there's there's an ability for uh the conversation to uh be repeated here and confirmed what what the uh intentions of public works committee are also um most of you members are fairly busy so it's
difficult for both of them to be there for every meeting so this way we have some backup. Um the third thing that they would like to do is we have a open spot on the committee and so we would be advertising
to fill a seat on the public works committee. Any questions for Mr. Blomber? Okay. I council membersh are you still Oh, okay. Um, so I do have a question,
Mr. Blomber. It it seems kind of it's like three different three different items here. So, the first item I don't have any questions on that. The third item, I don't have any questions on that. The second item I do have a question with. So, if it's stating that
you want to add a second council member to the public works committee because items with public works can be complex and it's having another council member there for additional information to come back to the council. Why wouldn't we just make sure that we have appropriate
updates to the full council? >> I think you do give updates to the full council. But what happens up happening in my um experience is that we go through all of the details at the public works
committee and when we get to the council meetings, we give us a quick summary like you're getting here and so there's questions in those details and it comes from the other council members who aren't on the committee. Um,
I think this would just lend a little bit more um, credibility is the words coming to my mind, but that's probably not right. That >> Tom, can I jump in? >> Sure, go right ahead. >> Uh, Mayor Carneahan, in that regard, Tom and I spoke about this, especially with
the the the populace of the public works committee. It was easy to come to the obvious conclusion that the public works projects that come through the the pipeline at any given year. Specifically this year with the 26 and then the soon
27 road bonds coming up, it's the highest dollar impacts to the city's budget. It's the highest dollar impacts to the property levies proposed or uh realized and having additional input
from an additional council member we thought was valid. Joe's name came to the forefront because of his experience on the public works committee uh in the past uh year. So with that being said that that was I think how these two both
came together. Um open to input from you. >> Yeah. So I in general I just I don't I don't see the strong value in doing it. I hear what you're saying. Thank you for sharing those points. But
to me to add a set, right? So we don't have two on the liquor committee anymore. We just have one to have two council members on. To me it seems like, hey, is this right? So now you've got two out of the five. Uh the other three are excluded out of these meetings.
Well, we can all attend. But what it kind of gets down to that point, are we trying to skirt open meeting law so we can have the conversations with two council members? Even if that's not the case, right? Uh you got to just think about that. and things we've heard especially tonight with people wanting
more transparency. The other thing I will share is I did reach out to the public works uh citizen members. I was only able to reach two of them. Um one of them was very strongly against this specific appointment. The other individual shared that if these are supposed to be
citizen advisory committees, why are we now adding another council that in their experience from cities that they may have worked in in the past, you really did have citizen advisory, citizen le and you don't need to stack council members on that. So that was just a
feedback that I got from two out of the three that I was able to reach before this meeting. I said I would share my feedback in this meeting and express the perspectives of folks. You guys are going to vote how you want to vote. Um I suspect there's already been discussions
around it, but I just wanted to share that point of view. We council member Hall is yes, he served on that committee before uh council members on I appointed you to that last year after I was first elected. Um thought with your background it'd be a a great fit for you and you've
been doing a great job on that committee. We moved council member Holliver to planning and zoning again to align kind of with his uh business his experience. Um council member Hall is also on personnel. Do we need one council member as well on three committees when gentlemen you stripped
the mayor who was fairly elected by the people from every committee. So just something to think about. Like I said you guys are going to vote how you're going to vote. And I suspect I already know how it's going to go, but I just wanted to have my voice heard as well. So, real quick, prime example.
Earlier tonight, the whole water tower discussion, it came up. I was the only council person there that saw that whole presentation. It would have been awesome. >> Presentation >> for the whole water tower that I referenced um about a year and
>> Mark Allen did a presentation. >> Mark Halen did a whole presentation on that. if there had been another council member there some of these questions when the water tower Oh, because then everyone sits up here and says, "I don't know. I don't know. I don't know." And I'm like, "How do how do you not know?
This meeting happened. I was at it." You know, I mean, if you want to go, like you said, you have the right to go to it. You can go to it. But it would have been fantastic for the city now to have somebody else in that chair to come back to this group and go, "Yeah, we were
both there. This is our input from two of us. We've heard about this. We know about it." And so, >> but why wouldn't then why wouldn't we put two on every commit? You know, I don't know. Like I said, you guys are going to vote however you want to vote. You've got your rationale and justification. It's fine. Um I'm happy
if someone wants to make a motion. Like I said, I just wanted to share my perspective. If you want to make a motion for all three in one, go ahead. It's 9:35 here and we still have like a lot of things to talk about. >> I'm really surprised by the comments from committee members to you because uh
>> as am I. >> We had a unanimous vote recommendation from that committee to appoint a second leaison. >> Like I said, you guys can make your motions. It's 9:35. We've still got
items 11 through 16 reports and moving to close session. So, >> right. >> All right. Well, with that, >> go ahead. >> No, go ahead. >> Uh I mean, mayor, if if that is accurate, um I'm going to second Tom's
points. That's surprising to me, too. Uh so, um I don't want to move forward unless there are stacked hands approach on that. Um we've had enough turmoil uh in the last few months. So, I'm going to make a motion
to reappoint Dale Stau to the public works committee and to advertise for the other vacancy down the committee at this time. >> Do we have a second? >> I'll second it. >> Okay. Any additional discussion? All those in favor? >> Well, well, hold on. >> Oh, >> yeah.
>> Well, I guess clarify that. What does that mean? I'm I'm I just made a motion from the committee. >> Yes. I I I want to get I want to hear it from them because we there's there's one take from the public works committee
that just recently happened versus mayor's uh comments. I want to get the story straight. So, I'm willing to make the motion for two of the three items that are within this uh action requested. And council member Zan is not
saying he won't make this motion maybe at the next meeting. He's just saying he wants to >> I was just asking for clarification from him. >> Okay. So >> just finding a facts afterwards. >> Um all those in favor signify by saying I >> I >> I opposed. Okay. Motion carries. All
right. Next up is the fire department 2026 budget and fire contracts. >> I have the uh >> Miss Maggie. >> Yes. So, every year, um, the fire department contracts with our local areas and communities, um, for, um, I'll
say dividing the amount of money that the fire department puts in their budget. So, we are just approving literally their contracts. All the contracts and their percentages are based off of their land and building values within their
township or community. And so, all of that has been vetted with Cass County and Crowing County. And so attached are the contracts that we just need to approve. And >> if there aren't any questions, I would entertain a motion.
>> We'll make a motion to approve as presented. >> Second. >> All right. Any additional discussion? All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> I. Opposed. Okay. Motion carries. Um the next item is the town hall meeting
structure. So, this actually came about council member Zhan had sent an email to Miss Wentler and I uh bringing up the idea of potentially moving the townhouse into the council chambers for the sole reason of being able to have this uh connectivity like on Zoom if people
aren't able to attend in person. Um I shared my feedback that like I do agree like having connectivity, having it live streamed, right? Maybe people being able to ask questions that's all good. You know, the more we can provide access the better. My only kind of hindrances about moving it in here were I think at the
first one we had 88 or close to 90 people. The second one it was 60some. And in the community center there's just more space like to set up the chairs with little aisles going in between and then to set up tables on the side for all the department heads to sit at um if
people want to walk about and then for myself moderating it then I can kind of get around and see things. And then lastly, why I like the community center is the town halls are for the people. So then we're sitting equal with the people. We're not sitting above them behind the dis. But I don't know what
people's thoughts are. We thought it would be good to put it on the agenda. Council members on I'll turn it to you because you had brought the email forward to begin with. >> You know what? I had a fantastic idea. put the departments uh all the department heads in our our chairs for
the town hall and us five can sit right in front of where Tom and Ron are right now for the town hall. I would like to have an online presence. So there's a potential for even uh live stream question and answers. There's a lot of
folks that live in this excuse me there's a lot of folks that have stake in this community that are not full-time residents. that they contribute heavily to our property taxes and perhaps they would like to have a voice as well. Um I've been on the council for four years.
Mayor Carne, we never had town halls before uh you came here. It's a fantastic addition. I hope it continues for decades to come. Um my opinion is I think that this would help enhance it like I alluded to in that email. Um, and I I I do believe that we got the proper
technology in that room to be able to fully amplify and maximize the return on a town hall. And even hearing tonight that the town hall was really wellreceived. Um, makes me happy because it's it's a pretty intimate session and u I don't care how we sit, we can
rearrange our room a thousand ways, right? >> That would be my suggestion. Miss Wentler, you had said in the email back that there maybe could be a way to set up technology there. I can't remember if you said something to that effect, but I don't want to mis misquote you. Yes, I
will say like you can and as many people can join Zoom as they want and there is a chat feature within Zoom. So, it would just be somebody I'll say myself just monitoring the questions that come in. I do in my email as well. I just want to say that I know we've kind of had an
agenda and a timeline. I would say if we want to go this live stream question and answer session, I would probably focus more on that piece because two hours was our allowed time goes really quick. I think every
town hall we've had has gone over and so I just want to be mindful of that that if we set this up >> and that we're not not answering people's questions because of time maybe people can submit questions ahead of time as well so we could have those ready and
queued up to go with some answers as well just to be on top of things as >> that's a that's a great point. Ironically we just did that at my company's annual meeting. They submitted 13 120 questions prior to and every
question was answered. And another point I'd make, if we can spend four hours here on a Tuesday night in the middle of March, um we could probably spend an extra hour or two for a a once or twice annually held town hall meeting that
really opens the mic up to every voice that is a resident of the community to be able to get feedback on. Yeah, I'm not opposed to trying it here. My only thing that I would say is if we try it here and we get feedback from the people that attend
like, hey, we liked it better there. Then I say if we want to try it here for the spring one and if we find it's, you know, people are too packed in or it just isn't working from a operational flow standpoint, then I'd say could we agree at that point and get feedback from the public if they want us to we
move it back there for the fall? >> Yeah, I'm wide open to that. I even asked Terry and Terry said he'd sponsor uh the beer for our next summer town hall. So, I mean, we can ramp it up uh to even greater proportions. >> Yeah. Um Council Member London, do you
have any thoughts or input? >> No. >> Council member Hall. >> Okay. So, I Jesse, I shared where I am. So, if you want to make a motion, >> I'd like to make a motion to have our next town hall uh in the council
chambers. Okay. Do we have a second? >> I'll second that. >> Okay. Any other discussion? All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> I. Opposed. Okay. Motion carries. All right. Next up, we have supervisors,
union contract, andus January 1st, 26 through December 31st, 28. And I see our labor attorney has joined us on Zoom. Yes, Chris is here. >> Hello everyone.
>> Hi there. >> Okay. Um, so the first of three agreements to be discussed or considered by council tonight, the supervisor's unit for um, MINPIA, you know, this is negotiated to be a
three-year agreement with a annual wage increase of 3.5%. um you know they basically just asked to track the increases across the city and that includes insurance and that's what the numbers that I had provided to you all as far as insurance for the year of
2026. Um they had requested a reopener for the years 2027 2028. Um and then one outstanding piece is that in the past there hadn't been any wage increases considered for the fire chief given the nature of his um job
like what he's expected to work. Um, so we had agreed on, you know, marked increases for wages per month as well as an additional $35 an hour for meeting and, um, at the recommendation of council member Hall, we included some
language in there to, you know, clarify to what extent that $35 an hour be applicable. And then like the other unit um for this exclusive representative, we also have two memorandums of understanding. One being the
memorialization of the paid uh family medical leave or Minnesota paid leave 50/50 premium split um which is required under law. It's basically the lowest we can go. And then also the um memorandum understanding that if during the life of
the contract that the rest of the city gets a wage increase above what is negotiated for in the contract that they will also get that wage increase. And if I you have any questions let me know otherwise um we can put it forward.
>> Any questions from councel? >> Can I make one comment? Yes. as we go through all of these union contracts. Um, our payroll is next week. I would like some grace to maybe do the back pay from
January 1st on our April 10th payroll to allow me a little bit of time to figure out all the increases and hours and things like that. >> Yeah, that seems more than fair. >> Okay. Okay. No questions. >> All right, then. Chris, are you just
looking for a motion? >> Yep. Just a motion to approve. >> Okay, I would entertain a motion. >> We'll make a motion to approve as uh presented. >> Second. >> Any additional discussion? All those in favor signify by saying I.
>> I. >> I. >> Opposed. Okay. Motion carries. Um the next one is the clerical union contract andus 1126 to 123128.
>> Yes. Um so the terms that were negotiated for this proposed agreement for the clerical unit um there's only one employee currently in that unit. They mirror the changes that were negotiated for the supervisor's unit. Albeit the additional wages for the fire chief in the supervisor's unit are
obviously not included. Other than that, you know, it's the same paid family medical leave, 50/50 split. Um wage increases if it's incurred by the rest of the city or approved by council for the rest of the city that they also receive those increases. Three-year
contract 3.5% insurance increase that mirrors the rest of the city. Okay. Any questions from councel? >> All right. Then I would entertain a motion. >> I'll make a motion to approve as
presented. >> Second. >> Any additional discussion? All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Opposed. Okay. Motion carries. And Teamsters Union contract andou again
January 1st 26 to December 31st 28. Chris Yes, that is correct. This is also a three-year agreement. Um, in 2026, they negotiated for a 4% increase, and this was partly due to, you know, a respect for the law enforcement position and the
really high demand that they have and um the ability to retain good law enforcement officers. Um, other than that, they negotiated a 25cent increase to shift differential. And then there was only one memorandum of understanding
for this one. So, with the 50-50 premium split like the other two unions, but they also had requested that they have the opportunity to supplement wages with other paid leave. And that's a permissible provision under the statute. Um, you know, it's up to the employer
whether or not to permit employees to supplement their wages. And the reason why they even request that is wage replacement under Minnesota paid leave is not at 100%. Um, so essentially they'll be able to draw from other paid leave, you know, vacation, that sort of
thing, comp time, and they'll be able to get full wages while they're out, but they'll burn down um their bank. So essentially just reserving the right to do that. And then also with employees that are permitted to supplement wages, um they'll be able to continue to
receive payer contributions uh while on paid leave. Okay. Any questions from councel? >> All right. I would entertain a motion. >> I'll make a motion to approve as presented.
>> Do we have a second? >> Okay. Any additional discussion? All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Opposed. Okay. Motion carries. All right. Item 16. um recommendation to
move to close session pursuant to Minnesota statute 13D.03 for union negotiations. Do we need to do this? >> Nope. Uh that was more of a placeholder in the event that we need to continue on in negotiations to determine how to move
forward, but with the three agreements being approved tonight, we can pass over that item. >> Okay, perfect. Well, thank you for joining us. >> Yeah, absolutely. Thank you all. Have a nice rest of your evening. >> Thanks, Chris. >> Thanks, Chris.
>> Okay, council liaison reports. Um, I wasn't here last month. The update I was going to share is I went to the League of Minnesota Cities um, elected leaders conference in February in Plymouth, which I also attended last year. It was a two-day session. Um, lots of good training, uh,
lots of good networking with other elected mayors and city council members from all over the state of Minnesota. Um, I will be attending the League of Minnesota City's annual conference this summer, which I attended last summer, and I would highly encourage if it fits
into anyone's schedule, um, to consider joining for that. I think I was the only one representing NISW last year and this year, the conference is being held in Rochester, Minnesota. Other than that, um, I don't have anything because I know we're
getting really late, so I'll save it for next month. Um, council reports. Council member London. Okay. Council member Hall. >> I guess the only thing I'll say is Jennifer, I do not want to fight with you. This
the city deserves better. But at the same time, I told you I'm not going to stand for what you're doing behind the scenes. And neither is the staff. And there's the letter that the staff is all written and signed. I know you don't want it talked about. But I know you
don't want it in public, but enough's enough. I I am not going to put up with what you are doing. >> Okay? I'm the I'm not going to get into tonight. I don't want to fight with you, but I am telling you, I'm letting the public know. I am going to stand up. I
am going to say something. And I'm not going to not address stuff that you're doing. >> And I will do the same thing, Council Member Hall. I will do the same thing. And I will say, sure, you can share whatever letter you want. We can share it next month. you can put it out every month. Um,
>> it's just not us. It's not us. It's all the >> But there but there's other you know what that's there is an election in November. It can be sorted out at the ballot box. So I don't I don't see the need to play politics in this chamber. This chamber is to do policy work on behalf of the people. I will always
advocate for transparency, for inclusivity, for oversharing, for overcommunication. And if that means that I am enemy number one within this building, then that's what it is. But when I ran, I went to all the doors and I heard from the people and there was a
reason I beat an incumbent mayor because people wanted change. They wanted more transparency and and that's something I pledged. They wanted to keep their tax levy low. We did that together as a team for the 20 uh six uh for this year, which I think was great for all of us to
get there. And I know that the taxpayers in this city, we've gotten a lot of positive feedback for that. But I'm not going to continue to be the punching bag and to be blamed that I've done everything wrong. This council made it very clear that you guys wanted me to
resign. You did your censure. You did your no confidence. You took me off all the committees and it just it it's just continuing to be a battering ram against me. It's exhausting. It's just the flat out lying. >> There's no lying. >> You you there's no manipulation.
>> I don't want to argue with you. It's the Then let's not argue. >> I agree. Everybody wanted transparency. Everyone wanted something different. We will vote and be in agreement on city policies as most of the time we are.
Nine times out of 10 we're voting for the same thing. It's not that what I'm talking about. This is integrity. Who you are in a person. You can sit there and say there's nothing wrong with you, that you're not lying, that you're being total transparent.
I can, like I say, um, that you're above the rules. You're not listening to the city attorneys. I, but I I can prove this stuff with it. And and I'm saying enough's enough. I have worked hard. I have worked hard to be a mediator
between you and other people in the city over the last year. I have tried everything I can, and I'm saying enough's enough. I'm saying I would like to work on it, but this this this is going to end. We're going to work on
it. We're going to fix it. >> You've admitted no fault to any of these issues. And it's not you and me. It's not you and the other council members. It's not you and all the staff, but the council, the staff, the people working
inside this building with the councils. They're unified by their signatures on these letters, by everything. There is a common denominator and I want it to stop. It needs to stop. Even you calling um the senator's office about
blindsiding Tom and all of us up here. That is the sort of thing. Transparency, transparency, transparency. Yet you held that and you blindsided everybody in the room tonight. And so you're over here saying transparency, transparency. Don't do this. And you did the exact thing
tonight in this chamber to us, to Tom, to Dave after doing work. And I'm saying enough's enough. I will call it out time and time again. The behavior, the change, council member. >> I hope next month in a closed door meeting, we can work this out.
>> We don't need a closed door meeting. We should do it in the public actually and I'm happy to do it. You want to do a closed door meeting, we'll do it. But I'm not >> That's what Jesse is. >> You know what? And and I appreciate council members on I'm you have your perspective. I have mine and usually with things, you know, it's not 100%
here. It's not 100% there. It's usually somewhere in the middle, right? Because everybody looks at it from their own lens. >> But I I'm sorry, Joe. I when I ran for mayor, when I met you at the beginning, I I we had a positive working relationship. Correct. Things have, you know, things change at different point
in times. It is what it is. >> Change because you have lied. You have flat out lied to me. manipulated it and and just not done positive things. Yeah, you presented yourself one way, a great thing. And and
and I'm saying enough's enough. I'm going to call out a spade when I see a spade. I'm going to stand up and say this behavior, what you're doing is not okay. It's not right. I'm going to stand up for the staff. I'm going to stand up for the department.
>> You should stand up for the people. You should stand up for the people. for the people in the community because yeah, >> this this all started with people in the community. >> It did. That's why I got elected. >> Mayor, I do. >> Actually, I'd like to respond to him first. >> Yeah, I want to add something.
>> I mean, it's almost 10:00. Really? I don't I This is This is has nothing to do with policy. >> We're We're here to do with policy. Let's keep >> have to deal with, >> you know what, >> on a weekly basis, >> we were all >> It's like it's a we're all equally We're
five. We're we're a five elected member council body. We all should be getting information at the same time from folks. That's what I'm saying. >> How the >> it is how government works. Look at look up the definition of democracy.
>> But just how democracy works at the meeting. You don't have to know at the exact same time. We still have to follow the rules. that we should we should know if the city's putting in a submission for city water and the original proposal was 14.4 4 million and then it scales
back. And the only reason I knew was because of council members on look, I'm not going to sit here and fight about this anymore. You can say whatever you want about me. Bruce, you can I know we already know what you think. You can say it, too. Pile on. I just >> I just I just want to add something. Okay. >> Go ahead. And like I said, we can figure
it out in November. >> I'm very proud of the people on the city council and the councilman and stuff. And what is very disturbing is I see things and I hear things about
this Nexo app and it's just disgusting. >> But what is that? I don't have anything to do with the people's post. >> Why don't you Why do you think we're having all this and where are these people getting all this information from? Joe, are you giving it to him? >> No.
>> Jesse, I can you hear me yet? >> He can hear you. >> Okay. Are you giving these people this kind of information? >> Because I'm I'm not. >> Okay. Well, >> and I don't think Mark is. But where where and why is all this happening? >> You'd have to ask them. I'm not going to
sit here and be blamed for what other people post. And gentlemen, I'm sorry, but we are all elected. We're all public figures. And I've said this to multiple of you before. Ignore the chatter on social media. What you President Trump like look at all the
chatter on public media. I'm talking about direct communication between me, direct communication from the city of labor attorney to you on what to do, what not to do, and direct violations of what you did. >> Okay, >> that's what I'm talking about. I'm
talking about you and the way that you conducted yourself, what you did in this whole process with the city administrator. I addressed the first comment that he made. I wanted clarity on that. I was addressing that comment.
Clarity, you want clarity. You want transparency. That's what I was doing. I was telling everybody, I know Mark's not at the meeting. Next month, Mark was on the call. It wasn't just me. This wasn't a call. This wasn't hearsay. Mr. Freley can back up everything that I was
saying. At no time did we not have a three-way call where Mr. Freley was on and talking and communicating about this. I'm saying I do not want to continue this process any further, but something's got to change because I'm
not going to back down. I'm not going to continue to call you out. If this behavior continues, I am going to do this over and over and over. I It's not okay. It's not cool. It's not helping anything out. I mean, I don't know. You
can't read the room tonight with the the the staff and everybody in here on what happened. Transparency and then you blindside us tonight with all the stubborn stuff and say, "Oh, we didn't know." We specifically ask the staff to
go and do that and then go and call. Who who said that you're supposed to call? How do we know what that transparency? What was that exact conversation between you and them? Why all of a sudden was Tom and everybody? Why all of a sudden
were you doing what we directed the staff to do? That it's a weak mayor position system. That is a dayto-day activity defined by the rules on what we do as council and mayors versus what
staff do. That was a staff job, a staff position, but yet you inserted yourself again in doing what we instructed staff to do. And that's what this letter says that all the staff signed and says, "We're done with we're sick of it." It's
a prime example right in front of us right here tonight. And I can't be more clear. I want to come to a resolution to move forward in a positive direction. >> Hear me. That's my goal. That's what I want to do. That's what I want to do. I
I do not enjoy doing this, but I am not going to back down. I am not going to give up. And I'm not going to stop calling out this behavior. I said enough's enough. And I meant it. And I will >> Hey, Joe, do what you got to do. >> I'm not doing this.
>> But if you're looking for resolution and trying to find a way to work collaboratively together, uh maybe talking down to someone as aggressively as you are to me is not possibly the right approach, but I don't know. Different things work for different people.
>> Well, it's it's no different than I've experienced from you or the staff has. >> And perhaps >> I'm just I'm just speaking I'm speaking your language. >> You want you can speak as much as you want, Joe. >> So, >> anyway, um I didn't go to council
members on for his report. Do you have one? >> Guys, the city deserves better. I know you all know that. I know it. Staff knows it. Citizens know it. We I think we can all agree. You can nod
your head yes or no. We have some work to do. We have another three quarters to accomplish some potentially really great things, but we have to we have to find some sort of path forward.
Otherwise, what what are we doing? Just like you and I just like this past week or last week, Jennifer, when I called you, you know, when when we spoke about working on the business, not in the business. That's that's from my perspective, it
has always been. as councilman and and and and mayor, we have to work on the city. We are not working within the city. We do not dictate what they do. um we support them at every turn in which they perhaps come to us and we do
our best to try to find us a plausible path forward for success. But um we're also not we are we any any elected official is is set to be able to to govern for future
uh for the future of that given municipality and we have an obligation for that. I don't feel like we accomplish remotely enough in 2025 in which I perhaps hoped and I hope that we can take advantage of next uh next
month's close session. And I don't have a problem if if we open it. I think enough's been set in this 4-hour long meeting alone. But um we have to identify a path forward and if we need more clarifying verbiage, Miss Maggie,
to be able to put with uh to put into that close session so we can have productive conversations on trying to find a plausible path forward on a handful of issues. These people deserve it. We all deserve it. We're all taxpayers.
We all contribute thousands of dollars to this city collectively every year. And there are some serious initiatives coming up on the forefront and one particular one in which I'm very confident that we can do very well on in regards to that property.
So my council report is we need to walk away from this meeting tonight and look forward to the next 30 days and and look at how we can make as uh productive an of an April meeting to kick off the second quarter as possible. Otherwise,
what the hell are we doing? And I wish I could have been there with you all tonight. As I mentioned to I know one or two of you. Uh flights just got cancelled and delayed like I haven't seen before. So um wish I
could have been there. Apologize I'm not but we we need to start collaborating otherwise it's going to be a very painful another nine months. That's all I got.
All right. Uh, a motion to adjurnn would now be in order. >> Make a motion to adjurnn. Second. >> All right. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Okay. Meeting is adjourned. Thank you everyone. Thank you, Jesse.