Alright. Alright. Great. Thank you. Good evening. I'm going to call our meeting, to order tonight. This is the Tuesday, March 2025 meeting of the Northfield City Council, and I'm looking for a roll call. Mayor Zweifel? Here. Councilor Soukup? Here. Councilor Beamer? Here. Councilor Donlon? Here. Councilor Holmes? Here. Councilor Ness? Here. Councilor Peterson White? She is right there. Here. He's here. Perfect timing. Perfect timing. Thank you. Alright. We have I have two
comment cards for open public comment. Members of the public may, if you wish to speak, please fill out a yellow card for items not on the agenda tonight, and you have two minutes to speak. And tonight, I have, the first card is from Patrick, if you'd like to come up and speak. I'm ready. Ready. Thank you. When you said we'd be on the agenda really quickly, I didn't think it was quite that quick. I'm here with, Patrick Tomzick. I'm at 1203 Woodland Trail. I'm here because I just got my Dakota County tax statement. Dakota County gets theirs out before Rice County.
My city tax in this one went up $383. It has more than doubled over the past six years, the cost of it. My school district, went up $490 and Dakota County went up $90. We can't afford it anymore. We're the school we twice the citizens of Northfield turned down the ice hockey palace by very, very large margins. Miss Parnell was totally wrong. I don't know why, how able she was to get it going through,
but it's a boondoggle. It's gonna be a $44,000,000 thing that we can't afford plus the upkeep. Right now, these things are costing around $10,000 a week just to keep the ice frozen and the heat and electricity on. That's an everyday thing. Every single citizen in Northfield is gonna have to pay 75¢ every day. Just think of that to keep the heat, to keep the ice on. How much more can the people pay? I'd I'm gonna have to go back to work or something because this is just
getting to be crazy. I talked to Chad for quite a while, and mister Dolan and I played phone tag, finally gave up. But this is something that can be stopped because the money is just not there for it. I mean, this is we're not being, up in Eveleth Gilbert, Virginia. The IIRRB built a, ice hockey arena up there. They're paying for it. They're maintaining it. But we don't have that here. You're asking the citizens to do it. We needed a new high school, but we don't need. We don't need something that's only gonna be used by 3% of the people part
of the year. But, we have to pay for year round. Please, please consider no to that. Thank you for your time. Yeah. Thank you. Alright. I also have a card from Dorothea. Hello. I'm Dorothea Rosway, and I live at 8620 Ninetieth Street East. And I'm, I can't stay long. I'm not well enough, so I have to leave right after I speak. But I wanted to have a chance to ask the council to pay very careful attention when you start talking about the annexation portion of the meeting tonight.
I want to ask the council to pay a careful attention to the importance of agriculture. Rice County has right on the website the the importance of protecting agriculture in Rice County. If you look at the website, you can find that there right in the beginning of the website. And agriculture is important for very many reasons. We're in a climate catastrophe, and agriculture is important in those efforts. Farmers know how to sequester carbon, and many of them do. So I'm asking the council to keep these things in mind and,
and be careful of our values and be careful about the importance of the land and taking care of the Earth and taking care of the land. I'm asking you to do that, to pay attention to the importance of taking care of the Earth and the land. Thank you very much. Thank you. Is there anyone else who would like to speak during open public comment tonight? Alright. Thank you. Our next item is a to approve the agenda. I will note that, item number 14 has been removed from the agenda.
There are still some ongoing conversations there, and there is supplemental memo number one, with some clarifying information about item number 12, I believe. So, that's those are the comments I have about the agenda. Is there a motion to approve the agenda? Councillor Holmes? I move to approve the agenda as updated through the supplemental memo. Thank you. Second, councilor Nuss? Second. Alright. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Alright. Can I just bring yes? You have a I think it's important that item number 14 is the lease agreement
with the senior center fifty North just if anybody in the audience Thank you. Know 14 was that item. Thank you. Yep. That's a great point. If you're here and you're hoping to hear about the fifty North lease agreement, we will not be voting on that tonight. But if you're here for the oath of office ceremony for the Northfield Police Department, we are doing that tonight. So let's let's I love kicking it off with swearing in. There we go. Good evening, mayor and council. Tonight, we're doing the swearing in ceremony for officer officer Kenneth Eschenbach.
So Kenneth was born and raised in Prior Lake. She earned her bachelor's or excuse me. Her degree in psychology and minored in criminology at the University of River Falls, Wisconsin and completed the police training and education skills program at Alexandria Technical College. Sorry. When I went there was Alexandria Technical College. Now Alexandria Technical and Community College. Before joining the Northfield Police Department, she was intern with the Prior Lake Police Department, so she got exposure and first hand experience with law enforcement there. In her free time, Ken enjoys spending time outside and being active.
Her favorite things to do are in the summer going for runs with her mom and also spending time with her dad working on their cabin. Her brother is also a police officer in Belle Plaine and has been a big supporter along with her boyfriend. If we can get her brother to come to Northfield as well, we'll work on that next. Officer Kent Eschenbach is currently completing your field training officer. She's done here in a couple weeks. So doing during field training, the months that they go through that, they're with a field training officer that entire time who's training and evaluating their progress as they go, and she'll finish up on that in a couple weeks and be on solo patrol.
So tonight, we are here to do her swearing and ceremony. Raise your right hand and repeat after me. I, Kenna Eschenbach I, Kenna Eschenbach. Do solemnly swear Do solemnly swear to support the the constitution. To support the constitution. Of The United States. Of The United States. The constitution. The constitution. Of the state of Minnesota. Of the state of Minnesota. And to discharge faithfully. And to discharge faithfully. The duties of police officer. The duties of police officer for the city of Northfield for the city of Northfield to the best of my knowledge to the best of my knowledge and ability and ability and ability so help me god so help me god.
Congratulations. Thank you. So we'll bring up the family for pinning. We'll do we'll do a a little photo op here. I guess not all of them because it's the entire group the way it looks. How are we doing? Oh, do we do you want the us oh, yeah. Alright, everybody. Alright. Thank you. Kenna, you stay. And then Emily can come out and Okay. Alright. Alright. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. And Chief, I think you're the next item as well. I am. Grant, come on. I'll just get started as they come up, mayor and council tonight. The Northfield Masonic Lodge,
the masons were here to present fire suppression tools to the police department and fire department. They were able to donate or raise donations to donate them to both of us. These tools will be carried by these first response vehicles such as our on patrol vehicles. So the ones on media patrol, the tools will be carried in all of our squad cars on those first response vehicles as well as, three of the fire trucks first response vehicles. So, joining me tonight is Grant Loubould from the Masons, who's here to present the devices to the police and fire department.
With how fast today's fire spread, fire suppression tools are a tool designed to basically buy more time. So, to to get a larger fire department response to saving property and potentially injuries or death. With this donation, there's 10 devices that are going to the police department. So we'll put one in each patrol vehicle and then three would go to NAFRS as well. There's a resolution before you tonight as part of the consent agenda to accept the donation to the police department, not the fire department side of it. So just the consensus for the police department. So with that, I will go first.
We'll go to grant from the masons. No. If you can get an image of that or not. So honorable mayor and Northfield City Council, members of Northfield Police and Fire Departments. My name is Grant Lillebold, and I'm the current master or president of the Social Lodge in Northfield. On behalf of North Social Lodge number forty eight, we sincerely thank you for the opportunity to present these fire suppression tools to the police department and fire departments. We're honored to support our first responders and contribute to the safety of our community. Social Lodge number forty eight in the Northfield has been a proud part of this
community since 1864. One hundred and '60 years of dedication to this community and surrounding areas. We're not just an organization. We're your neighbors, your friends, fellow resident fellow residents committed to making this a safer, stronger place to live. That's why we're privileged to donate 13 fire suppression tools to the police and fire departments today. To date, Minnesota masons have delivered more than 500 of these units across the state, equipping first responders with a crucial tool in fire emergencies. I understand that at least four of them have been deployed,
to date. Each unit can suppress an active fire in a 5,300 cubic foot space roughly the size of a two car garage in under a minute. By simply pulling the pins and deploying the device in the room, the fire's ability to burn is suppressed within thirty five to forty five seconds, reducing temperatures by 800 to 1,000 degrees. This rapid cooling helps rescue efforts for individuals, pets, and even firefighters who may have be trapped, all without depleting the oxygen in the room.
The environmentally safe nontoxic aerosol remains in the air for up to an hour, reducing the risk of flare ups. These units have a fifteen year shelf life and function even in extreme temperatures as low as minus 55 degrees. With the negotiated price, each unit costs approximately $1,000. Thanks to the generosity of our Grand Lodge of Minnesota and Minnesota Masonic Charities, every $300 raised by our lodge allows us to purchase one unit through a matching grant.
And local support has come from our own members, the Northfield Rotary Club, Wheeling Electric of Northfield Community Resource Bank, and from Social Lodge. Combined with the matching grant, this represents a total donation of around $13,000. While we hope these devices are never needed, we take comfort in knowing that if they are, they could make a life saving difference. Social Lodge and our fellow lodges around the state of Minnesota remain committed to ensuring safety and well-being of our communities today and for generations to come. Over more than one hundred and sixty years we've been in Northfield,
we have had many members who have played important roles in this community. One of which was Henry Mason Wheeler, who was better known for his part in the defeat of Jesse James and the Younger brothers gangs as they attempted to rob the First National Bank. He joined the townspeople of Northfield to defend the local bank against these bandits who were bent on stealing their life savings. Had these ruffians been successful, the robbery would probably have changed the course of history of Northfield. I thought this might be a fitting backdrop as we are now helping to protect the community through this donation. In closing,
I would like to say a few things about Minnesota Masonic Charities. Minnesota Masonic Charities is an organization that was formed around twenty five years ago to combine the philanthropic efforts of various masonic organizations in the state. The ones you're probably familiar with are the masons, the order of the Eastern Star, and the shrine, but there's many more. And here's some of the highlights of the investments of Minnesota that MMC has made in the last twenty years. Sixty five million dollars to the Masonic Cancer Center at the University of Minnesota, dollars twenty five million to the Masonic Children's Hospital at the university,
$35,000,000 to establish the Masonic Institute for the Developing Brain at the university. It's first of a kind clinic in Minnesota works with children who have autism, mood disorders, and many other mental health issues. Thirty five million dollars to create the Masonic Institute on the Biology of Aging and Metabolism. They created the Minnesota Masonic Clinic for Childhood Communication Disorders and pledged a million dollars per year to provide free speech and language care. This clinic deals with a variety of childhood disorders,
including autism, cerebral palsy, cleft lip and palate, hearing impairment, and Down syndrome to name a few. They own and operate the Masonic Home in Bloomington, the number one senior care center in Minnesota. They recently completed a $12,000,000 renovation with more to come in the future. And millions of dollars more in matching grants to communities through local lodges, including scholarships, donations to food shelves, bicycles for kids, and this FST project, which to date approaches $500,000
So on behalf of our lodges, Minnesota Masonic Charities and our local partners, I want to thank our first responders for their service and dedication to keeping our community safe. Thank you very much. Are there any counselors want to ask any questions about the device? I was curious if they were rechargeable. That they are not. Once they go, it's it's quite impressive. You can see on YouTube how they operate, but it's it's really something. They're above 15 pounds or something there. Yeah. It sounds very impressive what they're able to to do. So, yes.
Thank you very much for the donation. We'd like to get some pictures. I have one for you. Yeah. We'll pause again for a photo op. I don't know. Do you wanna sit does anyone no. I don't know. I moved in. Whoever wants to be on for it, it'd be nice. I want one for our own use too. Do it. We'll do it with them in the background. Oh, alright. Let's get a big group big. I don't wanna be moving around. Yeah. I'm gonna put it for a mileage reimbursement. Yeah. You're gonna have to zip off them all over. Well, it's been quite an exciting evening already, and we have even more excitement up next with the presentation on Youth First activities
with Malia Follin and Martha Lundin. Good evening. Thank you, mayor Zweifel and council members for having us. We hope that it's exciting, but we also realize you're probably running a little late, so we'll we'll we'll run through this quickly. But we're excited to be here to talk about, the Youth First initiative and give you an update on what happened in 2024 and what we're looking forward to in 2025. What did it change? No. There, the agenda. Is that what you guys are saying? So I want to start off talking about the history and our partnerships,
for this initiative then we'll run through the fine five main, aspects of Youth First and give you a little bit of an update on what's happened in all of those this past year. So we are celebrating ten years of Youth First and that's really exciting. So back in 2015, Youth Prize, which is a foundation out of Minneapolis, approached Healthy Community Initiative. And they said and the city of Northfield about expanding youth voice here in our city. We were just Martha and I were just at a youth bank celebration because youth
bank is also celebrating ten years. And and I talked about how, the United Nations passed a convention on the rights of a child back in 08/1989. And one of the things that was in that in that convention was that, youth should have voice in issues that affect them. So decision decisions should not be made about youth without their input. And so it took quite a while to evolve and what does that really look like? Northfield was on the cutting edge. The mayor's youth council here in Northfield started in 02/2006.
The district youth council started in 2012. And then in 2015, there was this big expansion of youth voice here in Northfield. And that happened because youth prize said, we believe you guys have the leadership here. We believe this is a is a city that's ripe to take this on. And so they invested some money, the city invested some money and we went from about 20 youth sitting on boards and commissions to now we have over 90 youth sitting on boards and commissions. We have our Youth Bank program. We have, Opportunity Reboot and Northfield Community College Collaborative.
All of these things came out of the Youth First initiative and we're really grateful for your continued support. So let's talk about the Northfield Alliance for Substance Abuse Prevention or Northfield ASAP. When we look back at 2024, our main focus continues to be supporting families. We want them to understand that they are the most important support systems for our youth. And so we send out mailings at, usually every other month that try and, help parents and families understand that they need to be sharing their values with their
youth. And giving information, helping them understand what, substance issues might be, their youth might be facing. We also really want to make sure that we connect substance use and mental health. So since the pandemic, we have seen mental health issues continue to rise in our youth. And with that, substance use is also on the rise. Particularly around tobacco, ecigarette use, vaping. And so we're seeing those thing two things being connected. And so through, Youth First and some other, funding, we have our mental health first aid trainings,
our mental health referrals. We have, the Rice County Chemical and Mental Health Coalition. We have our, database and everybody our resource directory that everybody can go out and see to get those types of referrals. We also run a be safe, be sober campaign at the high school and the ALC every spring. So we call it our celebration season. So, like, mid April through, like, the June that we've got prom, we've got graduation, we've got graduation parties. And so that is a celebration season. And so we wanna get in front of youth and just remind them, to be safe and be sober as they're going through those things.
And then, one of the big things we spent time with was working with a countywide ordinance, working on the countywide ordinance for tobacco ordinance. And so that was really started by, Rice County Public Health, but they asked us to come along and support those ordinance changes. And and the big things that happened in that ordinance change at the county level is they banned, flavors and menthol. They raised the minimum clerk age and they banned, promotions and coupons. So that's that's a big win when you think about how flavors really hook kids
into vaping and tobacco use. And then we support our community. So Northfield ASAP supports Night to Unite. We give out the gift bags. We've, purchased all of that stuff and give out the gift bags because we know when neighbors know each other, our youth are more protected. We do local beverage server training. We do medication collection, and then we have our naloxone support throughout the community. So looking forward, for Northfield ASAP, marijuana awareness campaigns that's going to continue to be an issue as, the Office of Cannabis Management gets up and running and we see more licensees coming
out. We'll continue to work with anti vaping campaigns. As I said that continues to be an issue that's a rising issue for our youth. And then our Talk They Hear You campaigns, encouraging parents to play that primary role. Our mental health first aid trainings, we have those in the high schools. So every tenth grader is getting mental health first aid, and we also have them available to adults, in the community as well. Beverage server trainings, we serve we train a lot of people to be beverage servers. DJJD increases that number,
but, yes, we do a lot of beverage server training. And then we'll be doing some advocacy work around cannabis ordinances and tobacco ordinances. The Northfield Community College Collaborative. So this, I hope you're all aware of the NCCC but it started in 2018 as a way for youth here in Northfield to work on getting an associate's degree locally. So we have local classes here in Northfield. They happen at the NCRC where we have two great classrooms set up. We have a new Zoom room. If you guys haven't seen it, it's fabulous.
So you guys should have a meeting there. The Zoom room is really amazing. But we partnered with 33 colleges and universities, through throughout the country, 28 of them in Minnesota as we supported youth throughout the throughout that, their college experience. If you've been following this for a while, you'll see that our last dollar tuition number actually went down than the amount we supported in last dollar tuition, and that's because of the North Stars campaign from or the North Stars program from Minnesota where if your family makes 80,000
or less, tuition and books are covered at a at a state university or a state college. And so we didn't have to cover as much last dollar tuition for our students. But on the flip side, that money really needed to go out in general support for our students. They're they're having a hard time making ends meet. So a lot of gift cards for gas, for commuting to school, if they were leaving the city, for groceries, etcetera. So to help with that, one of the things we started this year was is we started in person financial
literacy courses. And so if you are enrolled in one of our grants at the NCCC, you have to take in person financial literacy courses. So it's kind of a trade off but we're hoping that that general financial literacy, helps as they move through. So our statistics still remain pretty similar to where they've been eighty percent first generation college attendees, 69% students of color, eighty six percent low income, 23% are parents. Our number that is rising as the number of students we work with who are in active recovery. So, looking forward,
we're going to continue our expansion of partnerships here in the city to help, NCCC students. We were really excited to partner with the library on the library internships last year. We're doing that again this year. Working with the school district, we have the grow your own education pathway, and so trying to increase the number of students of color who are interested in becoming teachers themselves. As I said, financial literacy is a focus for us because we see that our students struggle with that, and then additional life skills training and opportunities as appropriate.
One thing we do know as I as I said our number of students in recovery has increased and so we need to increase training for our staff on that of like what are those specific needs that that student might need. And then we received a really nice grant from the Office of Higher Education for support for supporting parenting students. And so we've got in person childcare when our classes are going, but we also have the ability to pay for childcare for students that need it to so that they can study,
so that they can go shopping, etc. And so we're working with one love childcare that's also in the NCRC and they do drop in and so we're able to cover those costs for students that need it. Opportunity reboot. This is, a subset of the TORCH program, so within that TORCH subset of students, it's really helping those kids, with academic support, job access, and career readiness. It's really helping students get ready to put in that first application, write their resume, job skill training,
etcetera. A lot of career exploration, and we're really, working with this subset that is chronically absent. So what are those needs of those students that tend to miss more school days? We served 125 youth through this opportunity reboot this year, and we're looking to do that again. Our opportunity reboot funding has decreased a little bit. And so we're hoping, to find other ways to support that so that we can be at that one twenty five number again. But we're we're saying conservatively that we'll be at a hundred. 80 five percent of our youth,
our goal is to have them remain in school and, or get stable employment. And then as I said, we're looking for additional funding for these youth. Good evening, everybody. My name is Martha Lundeen, and I am the youth engagement coordinator for HCI. And I'm gonna talk about youth on boards and youth bank. So during the '20 during the year of 2024, so that includes spring twenty twenty four and fall twenty twenty four. We've had 131 local students engage in the program. We currently have 90 students active on 36 boards and commissions here in the community.
That includes city, nonprofit, a district youth council, mayor's youth council, and then district committees. Some of these highlights, these youth have focused not only on educating their peers, as with our mayoral school board and referendum forums, but have also really focused on inviting their peers to participate in the civic process through voter engagement, voter registration and a mock election. During this fall's mock election, more than 800 students cast a ballot at the high school
for the Minnesota Students Vote initiative. As we look ahead, I'm really excited by the energy I see from youth on board students. NYC in particular is finding its stride as a group as they dig into, initiatives to invite elementary and middle school students to think about what being an active community member looks like. This year, four students attended the MSBA day at the Capitol with the district superintendent and a school board member. It is my goal that instead of bringing a large group of students to youth
day at the Capitol to provide more opportunities for smaller groups of students to go to other days on the hill, with community leaders. Youth Bank this year provided more than $18,000 to youth led projects in the community. 59 youth were involved in developing and preparing those grant proposals, and there were 20 youth on the Youth Bank leadership team. We have granted out to the community nearly $200,000 in projects. This year was also exciting because,
one of the projects that finally got completed was the installation of the water station at the skate park. And I do wanna take a moment to thank the many city staff members who helped support that project for our young people. We over the course of this project, three different youth bank teams have had their hands on this project. And so having consistency staff members help nurture that project through to completion is so
valuable. And as Malia talked about earlier, Youth Bank turns 10 this year, which is so, so exciting. And so while some things will remain the same, Youth Bank members will continue to receive training, on racial justice and equity so that our work remains focused on that. And we will continue to support projects that are currently funded. But as you are probably all aware, Northfield looks a lot different than it did ten years ago. And so our youth bank leaders are considering ways to rethink,
youth philanthropy in the community. And so I don't know what that looks like. But I'm very excited to walk alongside these young people as they dream up what the next ten years of youth philanthropy is. Thank you. Great. Thank you. Are there questions, from the council on the presentation or any? Councillor Dolan. Marcela and Dean, you're doing great work because I hear it from the sources you know that I know. And when you hear from alums, I think it's particularly gratifying to how many dinner conversations where you hear about students
graduate from Northfield High School. And I can tell you the stories later. Thank you for that. It is it's really fun to hear from students I keep in touch. So I worked in the school for the first seven years of it and Martha has taken over since then and there's still students that I meet up with and and they talk about how this changed their perspective that changed their perspective on what it means to be a community member, what it means to be an engaged citizen and so, it's doing great things here, but it's also doing great things out in the community as our youth go out
and and hit other places. They've learned what it means to be in a city and to be involved. And so you guys the city was a leader and and I just applaud you for staying in that space to be on the leading edge of this work. It's it's very impressive when we go out and talk about it in The States or sometimes when we get invited to other conferences. So thank you. Thank you. Yeah. The numbers are quite impressive. And also, it's it's not just the numbers, but the two events or three now that I've attended,
the level the dialogue, the level of thoughtfulness and mindfulness of the students and the level that they're engaging at is very impressive as well. So thank you. Alright. That brings us to our consent agenda. So everyone queued up for that? Great. Alright. I'm looking for a motion to approve the consent agenda. Councilor Ness. I'll move the consent agenda. Thank you. Is there a second? Councilor Beamer? I'll second. Alright. All those in favor of the consent agenda, signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? Alright. The consent agenda passes. Alright.
Reports from mayor and council. I forgot I forgot which who went that oh, you guys would remember. I got it. Okay. Councilor Beamer goes first this week. My pleasure. Good evening. We had a, beyond the yellow ribbon meeting last week. We had a great turn off for the omelette breakfast, raised around $2,000 for that. We're now planning the, Memorial Day picnic that will take place at Lions Park immediately following, the Memorial Day ceremony down there. If the weather
decides to not cooperate, that event would then be moved down to the VFW. Got an EDA meeting, next Monday and a finance policy committee meeting, next Wednesday. Thank you. Councilor Donald? Thank you, madam mayor. Nothing to report from last week. So looking forward to the coming weeks and much activity. Thank you. Counselor Holmes. Yeah. Last Monday, we had a special meeting of the planning commission to look at the comprehensive plan. We have our scheduled meeting this Thursday,
and we just got the newest draft of the comp plan a little over an hour ago. So, it's work gonna work continues and then we're gonna get there for, at least get enough for the, retreat we have coming up, the strategic planning retreat. Also had the parks, Parks and Recreation Advisory Board meeting last night. We had a presentation from a member of the environment climate I can't I don't know the exact title. The the climate arm of Rotary. And so looking at how can we best how can the parks what role can the parks parks and recreation play in achieving the climate action plan?
I mentioned that I think it's good timing in that we when we're looking at the comp plan and the strategic plan, then the parks board can look at the initiatives and actions that they take on that then can hopefully achieve some of those short short term goals and help us achieve those longer term goals. We also looked at the CIP and the specifically on the park maintenance. So nothing new to members of this body in terms of we're still looking at Riverside Lions Park for our first update happening this year, but everything else has kind of shifted,
just to as we look at the CIP and where things are falling, so to better phase things out. So more of that will come to us as as that becomes necessary. But that's all I have to report. Thank you. Councilor Soukoup. Thanks. I had a Milltown's trail meeting with mayor's, the beginning of the month. We didn't have quorum, so it was more of just people going around and giving updates. But Scott Haugen from, DNR was there. He gave updates about most of the segments and talked about the Woodley to Waterford Bridge section and all the negotiations with the
Department of Transportation, and and he specifically made a point to give props to Dave and Ben for all their work and patience on on that. So I wanted to mention that because neither of you were are at those meetings. And then, he also gave an update that the that city of Dundas has authorized work, for a mile connection from Mill Park to I can't remember, but one mile section in Dundas that they've been working on since 2013. So for those of you who are new to council,
the Milltowns Trail has been in the works for, I think over three decades at this point. So various sections of the trail have really been worked on for a very long time. So that was an exciting update. And then we also talked about the need to start thinking about, a bonding bill for some Dundas to Faribault sections. And then we're looking to have an in person meeting in April in the Second Floor Training Room. So I have more information about that.
I can share it. And then I also had a HRA meeting. It was pretty brief, but, one thing to note for council is that we'll be, talking about some rental ordinance changes, and those will come in phases. But the first one to come to council will, be in regards to our short term rentals, so like VRBOs and Airbnbs, and looking at a, looking at a way to kind of regulate those and so make sure making sure those are safe, and inspected just like any other rental would be.
And then we're also looking at a change to the rental ordinance that, in certain sections of town near the colleges, there's a 20% rental cap. And, so that that'll be I'm excited to hear about that at the council level and to have a conversation around our housing shortage here in town and ways we can can, help. So I think that's all I've all I've got those two meetings. Thank you. Counselor Peterson White. I have nothing to report. Thank you. Counselor Ness. Thank you. Had an age friendly meeting last Wednesday.
I'm still learning about what that whole organization does and how they do it, and I will have more detailed reports after future meetings because the learning curve is large for me. Thank you. Thank you. Yes. So yes. As reported, I did attend the Milltown Trail joint powers board, which was, delightful. I was on that when I was on the council for many years, so it was nice to come back and see so much project process and, progress being made. And, it was though wholly represented by Northfield,
the elected elected officials. It was our Rice County Elected Official, Galen and David and I. So, we get our Dundas and Faribault friends to, come to the meeting so we can have a quorum. Alright. That is it for reports from council. We'll move on to our regular agenda item. Again, if the public is, welcome to comment on these items, if you want to comment on a specific agenda item, please use, a yellow card up there and it will be, I'll note in our process for each item when public comment will be taken.
So we'll start off this evening with, a motion to consider the redirection of federal funds from the water treatment plant to the water tower in the Northwest area, and that is to mister Wagner. Thank you, mayor, members of the council. As you said, there's a motion tonight that, we'll look to redirect the federal funds that were planned to be used for the water treatment plant to a water tower in the Northwest area and seek those design services. So back in 2022, the city was, And we pulled a presentation up in the back.
Thank you. Alright. So back in 2022, the city, requested federal funds, and was ultimately awarded $3,945,000 for fiscal year 2024. That is through the Army Corps of Engineers, and it's through section two nineteen funding. So, as part of that, it's a 75% cost share for from the federal side. City would have 25% cost share or $1,315,000 for this. And that specific project really needs to be less than $5,260,000.
So the total of that amount, really more on the, engineer's estimate portion. So if the project would bid higher than that amount but be very close to that amount, it would still be an appropriate project. It would just make the city's portion of that cost share a little bit larger. So the Army Corps engineers, the max that they can have is really that 3.945, million dollars. So we really were looking through different uses for the water treatment plant. Originally, we asked the Army Corps, just some different options that we would have kinda looking through our capital improvement plan.
We looked if potentially office or garage space for that water treatment plant would be you or would be a usable, federal or use of that funds. Since there's not a water treatment plant being constructed currently, it is not a viable use to do anything up at that water treatment plant, site for garage or office. So really looking through the capital improvement plan, the water tower in the Northwest area is kind of the project that fits, the funds the best. So really looking at the water tower, in that Northwest area,
currently, we did have it or planned through our water system study, that it would be a 1,000,000 gallon water tower, in that Northwest area. But with the cost, of a 1,000,000 gallon tower, we would not be able to do that with the funds just because it would be over that $5,260,000 so really from there, we would be recommending to go with a 750,000 gallon tower up in that Northwest area. We don't really see that there would be a major change in operation. Just as a whole,
It would just require that our booster pumps really would be operating more often. So the booster pumps at our booster station on North Avenue would just have to operate more often to fill that up. And then, really, it would just be that little or less storage, for there. So, yeah, so that with water storage in general, cities are recommended through American Water Works recommend, recommendations to have the same amount of storage as your average water use for the day, for the year, or your historical water use.
Our historical water use has been around 2,600,000 gallons. We currently have 3,000,000 gallons of storage. This would be that additional 750,000 gallons. Storage, through our water system study in 2032, we would be needing additional storage. So with the planned water treatment plant, we are going to have an additional 300,000 gallons of storage for the clear well there and that extra 1,000,000 gallons. So that really would have been enough storage through twenty, seventy, or forty five years from now.
Just by building the smaller tower, we would lose about ten years of storage. So in ten years sooner, we would have to, construct additional storage or if we ultimately build the water treatment plant at a sooner date with Clearwell, that would also prolong the amount of time that we would need to build additional storage. So the project itself, the city would be really looking for a request for proposals from design engineers. So we would solicit that, then the city council would ultimately approve those contracts, sometime either most likely in May,
for the water tower. Design services, the Army Corps engineers themselves, they do not have engineers that, really have the expertise for designing water towers. So we would actually be hiring that consultant. The Army Corps, the fed use of the federal funds would really just be for construction of that water tower, which would be estimated around 5 and a half million dollars. We would not be able to have that connected to our system. So as part of the design services, we would need to have a separate project. So that's where that total project cost we're estimating is around $7,000,000.
So it can get actually connected to the system, and really get that engineering services as well. So the Army Corps, that portion of the project is that $3,945,000 City's cost is estimated around $3,000,000 for the project. Here's the location. The land has already been purchased for the water tower. It's just north of the Northfield Hospital. We would have to connect on to the existing water mains that are on the hospital road loop to get the water to that site. Advantage for this is that we would really have redundancy to the water tower or
to the hospital. Currently, if a line would ever break on North Avenue, we do not have a redundant system out to the hospital. If that would happen with the water tower, we would just be able to feed that system off just the water tower. So, it would help help with redundancy out there as well and have that extra storage. So project timing, it's really in the spring, the city sometime around May, like I had said, we would expect the city council to approve the contract and design services, with an engineering firm.
Sometime this spring or summer, we would be working through project partnership agreement with the Army Corps of Engineers, still working on kinda timing on everything with that and getting that set up. And then that water tower design would really take place during the spring to fall of twenty twenty five. The Army Corps of Engineers has some additional processes with it that we would have to work through. So that would take most of 2025, and then construction really is expected to be close to two and a half years, for the water tower. So that would take place from 2026 through 2028.
And then we also just wanted to give a quick update on, the water treatment plant road extend In the utility project for that. So we're still planning for this spring to bring the road extension, so Jefferson Parkway and the new North South Road extension, for approving the plans and specifications and then ordering that for bid. That would also have the raw water mains with that out to the site as well as the trunk sewer line out to that site as well. So that's planned for this spring. Construction would take place,
most likely summer of next year through spring of twenty twenty eight just to give enough time, or I should say summer of twenty twenty five. I should say not 2026, so that we could actually get those raw water mains installed on Jefferson so that construction would be enough time that they could the contractor could either choose to build the roads either this year or next year and then give us time for, that final lift the spring after like we typically do with, road projects. And that so for tonight, it's really that motion to redirect the federal funds for the water from the water
treatment plant to the water tower in the Northwest area and authorize staff to seek design services for the water tower. Thank you. Questions from counsel? Councilor Beamer? Thanks, Justin. That's very informative. Do we currently have the funds from the Army Corps? Or is it something that's been promised, don't have? Could you explain how that that all works? Yeah. So the funds themselves, we actually never will receive those funds from the army corps. The army corps actually holds on to them the entire time, and we will actually have to pay our portion to the army corps.
So that 1,350,000.00, we will actually have to write them a check, so they'll pay the contractor directly. But they do have the money, and it has been allocated to them. Thank you. Thank you. Counselor Holmes. Yeah. And so, like, with all the conversation of everything happening with federal funding, like, we have no fear that that money is gonna just disappear. We do not. Okay. Oh, hold on a sec. Administrator Martic. Thank you. I thank you. If you might entertain me to follow-up with mister Wagner on that, I asked him kind of a similar question recently. You comment about the timing of the expenditure of the funds,
which is important that we received that might or might not relate to some of the executive actions that are happening. Yeah. So basically, we need to have the funds started to be allocated by September of this year. So, needs to be in their fiscal year. So they need to start spending the money to guarantee that it'll still be a usable fund. So, basically, we need to use that and have it allocated by, September of this year. Good question. Yes. Yes. A couple more. Just following along the what's happening in the in the bigger world.
Presumably, a water tower has a lot of steel in it. Is that correct? That is correct. Do we and, I mean, does this and I know we don't have any of the we don't have engineer estimates yet, but in in terms of what we've looked at in the price here, is this factoring in the probability of tariffs and and or do we think that we might anticipate seeing a much larger engineer's estimate and even bid when we go out? I would say the engineer's estimate, we are told for a basic tower, so just straight tower,
no additional piping, footings with it, but no pump components inside it or mixers, I should say, any extras, was around 4 and a half million dollars. For the tower itself, we would plan for a composite tower. So that's what that timing is. So, basically, the bottom structure if you've seen Fairboughs, it would be basically the same thing. So the bottom structure is concrete. The top actual bowl where the water would sit would be steel. So hopefully less impact from tariffs, but, yes, we would really have to monitor that and try hopefully,
the numbers do come in that range. So we would be planning for this project to be under that five point, two six for the engineers estimate so that we could get the project bid through the army corps. So that's why we're doing a lot of engineering and piping outside of the site as a separate project. Okay. And then So you can keep on potential. Last question then. And I should probably know this, but and I probably should have asked this question when we were when we had previous votes on the water treatment plant, but we well before this council was a body,
we the previous council had approved the increases to water rates for in anticipation of the water treatment plant. My assumption is going into this that, like, we've we've already increased those rates and that rate increase is going to, be where we where where where some of the funding for this or the funding for the water treatment plant or I'm sorry. The water tower will come from this. What however, what I'm what I'm not totally sure on is with the water treatment plant not happening, what does what does the impact on those water rates look like and and how
does that, I guess, how does the water tower play into that? And especially for people in the public who are nervous about, oh, we're gonna spend 3,000,000 on this. Like, where is that money already accounted for in the rates that we've already approved, or how does that play out? There's a lot of context in there. Hopefully, that that made it a little more clear. Yeah. Thank you for the question. So for the water rates themselves, yes. So it was the 28% increase this past year for the water rate or water specifically. We wouldn't anticipate that we would be able to cover this through the water fund,
for this $3,000,000 in the project. I think the last number I had seen was somewhere around 7 and a half million dollars in reserves for the water fund. So we do have reserves for that, for the tower. As far as rates go for water treatment plant or anything like that going forward, I think that'll be a discussion come budget cycle and how we want to move forward and with the water treatment plant long term, and if we want to start anticipating rate increases to offset some of that long
term cost for the plant when we actually do want to ultimately bid that project out again. So, yeah, I would say the rates themselves should be able to cover this project. Mister Bearkat? Justin, off the top of the the road extension and the raw waterline extensions to serve our future plant, that's that's 7 to 10,000,000. Right? Correct. Yeah. So we have this $3,000,000 plus the 7,000,000 or the 10,000,000, you know. So we I think the 28%, I think we really would probably update our rate study and then have a discussion
with council. Are we planning for a plant, water plant in the future? Do you wanna continue to increase rates, or do you just want us to look at, you know, what would come on with this project and whatever else is in the capital plan related to other water infrastructure projects and our distribution system. So I think that's a thing that would be going through in the upcoming budget cycle. Mister Marchig, and then we'll get to you, councilor Donald. Thank you, mayor, members of the council. We are adding a we have a budget calendar process item scheduled for the first meeting in April. And I'd say tentatively right now,
we'll have a budget meeting in May that's primarily a summary of what the operating budgets and capital plans were where we left them at the end of last year. And then June's work session will be heavy on capital improvement planning. So these items that staff is talking about, we'd be starting to get deep into some of the here's some options we brought you related to rates and projects related to that for kind of an initial discussion with the council. So not far around the corner on those greater details, but I would agree with everything that was said that between cash and rates and
our current five year plan, even if you rates and our current five year plan, even if you chose to really keep the rates where they were as a worst case scenario, they're funding for the local match on that piece. Thank you. Councillor Dolan? Quick question. Justin, you mentioned Faribault, and that's the Water Tower 35 that we all see. Correct. That's the new one. How much was it? Do you know? I do not know the cost. I know it was bid out about, close to four or five years ago now, so it's quite a bit, older on cost estimates.
Counselor Soca. Just to confirm, is this the only other project you can see these federal funds being used for? And if if so if that was not if it did not the motion did not pass, that money would just be lost and go back to I think if the motion did not pass, we would probably work with the army corps to see if there would be another viable option, and we'd have to work with counsel to see if there would be a different option for us to use funds, for,
I would say. We've looked through a lot of different options and discussed a lot of stuff with them. There's not a single project that would be, other than this one, that would be very easy to manage where it might turn into a multiple projects where they would be doing work, in many different locations or smaller updates or a portion of the funds being used where I think this project actually could be the entire funds that were allocated. Councilor Beamer? This excuse me.
This might be maybe more for mister Bennett, maybe you, Justin. Would would you guys think that this is a crucial step to moving forward with that that Northwest Industrial area? Is it something that, you know, we pretty much have to do to get to get moving in there? Development, I know there's talk about, single fan or about, residential development up up there in that area as well. I'm assuming this is something that we would need to help move forward with those.
Yeah. I can answer that. So currently, if so if we would look to upsize our booster station kind of as a first alternate, that's kind of what we had presented, I believe last fall on that Northwest area. We would get between 718 gallons a minute. A lot of industry just for fire suppression needs around 2,500 gallons a minute. So this water tower really gets us up closer to that 3,500 gallons a minute, for flow up in that area. So, yes, this water tower itself would help,
get us ready for industry in that Northwest area. Other questions from council? Alright. Any public comment on this item? Okay. Seeing none, I'm looking for a motion, and I'm going to go to Councillor Dahl, and he sent something specific. Yes. With the help of assistance of Administrator Martig, I would like to move this motion. You have it, right? B? This is B1, right? The City Council of Northfield, Minnesota supports staff to request the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers in redirecting the $3,945,000
for fiscal year twenty twenty four to the construction of the Northwest Area Water Tower and further direct staff to prepare an outline of the costs and scope for design and engineering of the Northwest Water Tower. That's my motion. Great. Thank you. Does anyone want it read back before they second we get a second? I could read it back, but it's, I assume it has the support of the gentleman to my left on the staff. I think Mayor, right? Yes, sorry. Mr. Martig. Oh, just a couple of things. The, city clerk does have the motion.
We actually I reviewed and, as mister Dowlin said, he did give a courtesy check-in with staff, so I did consult, mister Wagner. I didn't get a chance to check-in with David, but we proposed some minor modifications back, which was included in this motion. So city clerk can answer that, and then, the staff did have the opportunity to review it and support it. I would say kind of at a high level, staff's belief that both the staff recommendation and the and the motion presented by counselor Dolan ultimately achieves the same process that we were suggesting to.
Some of it was probably more implied in kind of the next steps in the process of the memo and things. So the the provision does have probably a little more explicit language related to, some of the direction in it. So staff staff is supportive of that motion. I'd be happy to read it back if there's any questions. I think can we hear it one more time before okay. Before we seek a second. Yeah. Okay. The motion as stated by, council member Dolan, the city council of Northfield, Minnesota supports staff to request the US Army Corps of Engineers in redirecting the 3,945,000
for fiscal year twenty twenty four to the construction of the Northwest Area Water Tower and further direct staff to prepare an outline of the costs and scope for design and engineering of the Northwest Water Tower. Is there a second for that motion? Councilor Beamer? I'll second. Okay. Thank you. Alright. Council discussion on the motion. Councilor soak up. Can I just ask a question? Of course. Can maybe councilor Dolan, can you talk about what the difference between those two thing or why, the reasoning for the different motion and and what it entails?
Well, I actually consider it to be identical. So I think it's more Mr. Martig's read of it than mine. I would say they're identical. So you can talk more about that. Maybe I Would you like to clarify? And then print out the motion. In general, I would say the some of the language specifically asking for the scoping and the cost of the engineering and design work, Because that contract will have to come back to you per our purchasing policy, the original staff motion didn't have that in there.
So sometimes it's kind of a matter of how much detail should the staff put a motion into, and then sometimes gets a little technical on the details of, like, oh, yeah. That's gonna already happen because it's gonna the agreement comes back to you versus if it was a lower threshold, it might not come back to you and things. So I think one of the primary pieces in the motion was it is the language related to the scoping and the design work that it expressly says that will happen. That's going to come back to you in that agreement. Staff will clarify the scope and the cost for those services that will be in
that contract, so we will meet that obligation to you. That's included in this, alternative motion. I guess my point is staff would have done that anyway, but it is more explicit by being in there. So I'm comfortable with it being in there because we would do it anyway. I would say a little bit of this is, like, just it's in the kind of the detail of, like, understanding that where I get it that if, you know, you know, with respect to councilor Dahlen, whether you're a new council member or an existing one, sometimes understanding, oh, that is coming back, I think are reasonable questions and it got maybe clarified in a little bit of
our back and forth communication that we had. So staff's completely comfortable with this motion and, if that helps with some clarity being explicit in there, we're comfortable with that being in there. So I'd say that's probably the main piece of the motion that I think stuck out to me when I reviewed it. Alright. Councilor Peterson White. Thank you. I appreciate staff, bringing us this solution. I I think that my I I think it's a decent solution. I I would like to also say that I I strongly prefer the alternative option outlined in the memo by staff, in which the council could direct staff to award the water treatment plant project through
Magne's project extension, which they've offered. And, I I just want to reiterate that I think removing the manganese from our water so that our drinking water is safe for all residents continues to be the top and most urgent priority for our city's water system. That has not changed. And I will just take this one additional chance to encourage any of my colleagues who voted against awarding those bids, to consider now that it's abundantly clear that those votes had the effect of effectively killing that project, to to take this opportunity to, to change course here,
and go back to that project that staff have worked so diligently on that's been so thoughtfully developed and that our community, I think I think you've all heard there's a our community wants and needs it. I won't stand in the way of this alternative path because we obviously don't want to let those federal funds go. That would be foolish. But, I think it is more foolish to not move forward with the water treatment facility at this time when the pieces are essentially in place for that. And there is no rabbit coming out of the hat that will be a cheaper solution to that problem in the future.
Thank you. And anyone else want to Councilor Holmes? I'll just, second what, Councilor Peterson White shared. I'm not gonna stand in the way of this. I appreciate the work that you do. I know, that our staff is very capable and, and, trust the work that's that's gone into this. Trust the work that went into the water treatment plant as well. And yeah. I just also feel like that's a just so it's clear to everyone because I'm not sure that it has been because we continue to get emails from people about voting no on the water treatment plant. The water treatment plant has is dead
unless someone changes. I was I was shocked to see that the the bid had been held and that there was an alternative, option in in this project because to me it it died a long time ago. I don't anticipate anyone's changing their votes tonight even though we will never build a water treatment plant that does as much as this one would for cheaper than we could get it for the price that we could get it now. Just looking at the ice arena, looking at the high school, in five years those those projects doubled in price.
So, I think that that we are kicking the can as is the Northfield way to do things. And, I guess let's not kick the can on this water tower and we can do something and and use that federal funding. So I will support this project, but I'm still displeased. So but it has nothing to do with staff or the work that you've put into this, so we're making the best we can with what we have. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Counselor Soukup? Yeah. I'll just say thanks to staff for finding something useful to use this money for.
I'm gonna note vote no in a last ditch effort that it fails, and then we can move to, go with the alternative motion, which is to build the water treatment plant as proposed. But that doesn't mean, my no vote is just to do that. Not to say that, sure, let's use funding we get from the federal government somehow. I do support that. So that's all I have to say. Thank you. Other comments? I'll just say I I appreciate the pivot, by staff. I appreciate, some of the positive outcomes of this pivot are the redundancy to the hospital water
supply and support for economic development in the Northwest area. So I think those are, some good things that come out of this. Alright. If there's no more discussion, I will call for a vote. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Those opposed? No. Do we need a roll call? Alright. Roll call, please. Councilor Silke? No. Councilor Beamer? Yes. Councilor Dahlin? Yes. Councilor Holmes? Yes. Councilor Ness? Yes. Councilor Peterson White? Yes. Count Mayor Zweifel? Yes. Thank you, everyone. All right. Our next item is to consider a resolution approving an orderly annexation agreement with Northfield
Township, and that is, administrator Martech. Thank you, mayor. Member of city council. So I am plugged in to my computer with the PowerPoint presentation for the IT in the back to see if that works. If it doesn't work, maybe we could recess and I could get it set up at the podium or something. Oh, looks like we're good. Alright. For you this evening, there is a consideration of an orderly annexation agreement with the City of Northfield and Northfield Township. This agreement negotiation has been a few years in the works when the prior agreement was expiring.
Process wise, the city of Northfield, knowing some of the complexities of the annexation agreement terms, did create a council committee of three representatives to kind of serve as a negotiating kind of council representation from the city side. So former Mayor Paunell and then existing Councillors Ness and Peterson White served on that committee. Process probably took a lot longer than maybe it could or should have due to other priorities that were kind of coming and going through that.
But in the end, I think we have a good agreement that's brought forward with you. Of those three representatives, two of the values that they brought to the table is the three of them was to have unanimous agreement amongst the three of them on all of the parameters. There was a couple of areas that there was some good discussion with the group that we kind of worked through, but in the end all three supported that and all of the provisions that are included in the agreement tonight met those negotiating parameters. The presentation I have is kind of at a high level. I'm happy to dive into any detailed provisions if any of you wanna talk about
some of those, but we're not required under state law to have orderly annexation agreements, but it is an option under state statutes. And basically, it's a way for, kind of in basic terms, working with surrounding townships and cities. You can create create agreements basically on how growth, and annexations into cities for properties that need municipal services that we have to provide, particularly sanitary sewer treatment, drinking water systems and potentially other public utilities depending on the property.
The alternative to and if you choose to go down that path, there are provisions within the agreement that must be identified in those. The agreement that you have, I don't call all of that all of that out as background, but, this agreement has all of those kind of primary provisions of that, and it goes to a state agency for review and approval, related to that, those final terms and conditions so that it's clear. The alternative is you do annexation by ordinance as it's called, and there's a process that cities can pursue annexations, through an ordinance action,
which still can be accomplished, but there but it's not as much of a pre negotiated kind of agreement with the surrounding townships. The city of Northfield has, technically only one active orderly annexation agreement that's in effect, Bridgewater Township. Northfield Township, we've actually been doing extensions during this negotiation for both townships. And at the end of last year, the Northfield Township was coming to an end, and we both mutually agreed. We're acting in good faith. We're almost done with the agreement negotiations. And the boundary adjustments agency that reviews this frankly kind of frowns upon the short
term extensions, and we knew we were probably months away from having an agreement. So we just said, hey. We're operating in good faith. You know, Northfield is not gonna initiate some annexations. You have my word and the counselors that were representing the council as well. So we just plowed ahead with that. I would say one of the one of the issues that took quite a while on this too was is the existing agreements in both of the cases. The starting point from the city was we appreciated the long term agreement but felt that there was just a lot of foundational pieces of the legal agreement that we
weren't gonna be able to agree to. So, we basically said we're gonna need to do a rewrite on the legal foundational components, and instead started with more of the policy side and then brought the attorneys in late in the process after we had kind of agreed to primary components. Robert Scott with Flarity and Hood is an expert in this area and still counsel the city on the policy discussions, but the actual writing of the language came later, as part of that. Which kind of gets to a point that I wanted to just cover early on the background foundation for the city,
approaching negotiations of the agreement. I would say there are two foundational foundational documents that drove our policy direction as we approached the townships. One is the comprehensive plan that outlines future growth and planning goals. So we used that existing document and sought counsel from the community development department, the planner and the director throughout the process. Had some transitioning within the department. I probably would normally actually delegate this type of negotiation to them. But due to turnover and other priorities, I agreed to kind of be the lead.
I would say thank you to Sarah Hoffman, the deputy city clerk and executive assistant who helped with keeping us in order, but also helped me with just keeping organized from meeting to meeting on some of the detail of this and then working with kind of this intermediary with the attorney. The second document I would say was the annexation policy agreement that we had attached to you. We actually recently merged two separate ones into one, but it's a little more detailed related to kind of those values. So to the earlier testimony of the resident from Northfield Township who spoke, we spent a lot of the time actually talking about our values.
When we kicked off this process, we talked about what the comprehensive plan said from the city side, what we're trying to achieve and why. We shared these annexation agreement proposals to say, you know, we do value the urban or the agricultural kind of component of that. So we spent a lot of time just talking about what we're trying to achieve. So we understood as we negotiated where we were trying to get build trust. So some of the benefit of the time was I think it build trust and and benefits. Mister Peterson, was gonna be here tonight. Doesn't look like he's here at least yet from Northfield Township. He's been serving on it. He's actually a property owner and also in one of the growth areas.
He's served over I can't remember the number of years, but it's over twenty years. He served as a Northfield Township Representative. I just wanna say thank you to him and the Northfield Township for, I think, a good faith, effort even though maybe took longer than possibly it needed to be. But in the end, even those things like, that was testimony earlier is Northfield does value smart growth. We're very planful on it, and so there is some kind of give and take. I'll cover some of the kind of the high level areas, of the agreement. And like I said at the end, I'm happy to go into any specific provisions if you'd like to.
This shows a map of the areas that we're talking about. The red cross hatch is what in the agreement is referred to as area one. It's approximately well, it's exactly 850 acres, maybe rounded a little bit. And it really follows the existing orderly annexation agreement that had been in place for a very long time. So for the most part, this meets the urban growth areas within the comprehensive plan that had been in place for a long time. We had a couple of property owners who expressed some concerns about the area, but the township worked through those with them.
So that's ultimately similar to the the previous one. I'll talk a little bit on the next slide about some of the triggering events in that particularly in area one, but I'll kinda come back to that in a second. The yellow area is really new and was a it was really we spent a lot of time, on that issue. The secondary area goes basically out to the maximum area in our current comprehensive plan, but it's really more of an area that we identified from the city side as a goal to we don't expect in this
twenty year term is the agreement that that's currently drafted here for you, with this. We don't expect that it's likely that that area would develop because it the agreement really requires and prioritize area one to develop first before area 2 comes forward. Forward. But the purpose of that yellow area was more from the city side to really kind of, maintain what the county overlay ordinance has for growth boundaries within a city that prioritizes that what I would call suburbanized type type of growth wouldn't happen around Northfield in
those areas. So preserves more of the agricultural open spaces. So we basically want things happening there, like if a farmhouse needs to put an addition on or, if the agriculture wants to continue, it's it's all gonna continue as it is today. But what it would prohibit in that yellow area would, you wouldn't be able to do like cluster housing development out in the fringe of that area because someday that could become Northfield and our comprehensive plan talks about the importance of the urban edge and letting rural be rural and and urban be more urbanized.
So we're trying to basically create a way that there wouldn't be, you know, kind of like, cluster housing developments. Probably the most likely as we were talking in Northfield Township. They shared that value and did see that as an issue. So it was more kinda getting them to understand why in the boundaries of the area. We actually reference the county clauses that we're comfortable with that that's currently identified as an urban growth area. But the county commissioners could change some of that to open up and allow if we don't regulate ourselves by agreement. Some of these provisions, the county could change it that the city wouldn't have any authority over.
Commissioners have on again off again. I've heard some policy discussions that they might be open to some of those changes. So it just preserves it during in this agreement that the city would have a period of time to respond that if the county did change those growth provisions that we could have an opener clause to basically open the agreement up. We will have to be paying attention to this and trying to educate staff as they come and go and councils as they come and go that if if an ordinance change does happen, we kinda have to have our own due diligence to track that. But that's kind of the purpose of that second secondary area.
I would say too, that although I did not attend, the township did hold, multiple opportunities for their residents to hear about this. Since this is in the township property area, they're probably the ones that are gonna be more immediately concerned. So, they did take that feedback as part of their input as well. They have presented it, and this this agreement is pending for their next regular meeting to act upon. And I'll come back to that in the end. I'm gonna mainly focus on this area one because area two is really, really not intended to be a primary annexation,
area. It's just kind of more of that preservation zone in the future. These are the conditions and triggering events that would initiate annexation, which is one of the mandated things that has to be in an annexation agreement. It's kind of the bread and butter of the of the annexation agreements. But, the first item, it does require 100% petition from a property owner, and the city council would have to approve it. But the township, basically, by agreeing to this, can't stop it to be approved. They're basically saying, yep. If a petitioner approves it, it's in that red area. We can file with the state and it's basically it can't be appealed basically by
the township where if you just do it by annexation, by ordinance, the alternative is the township could appeal, the individual property owners could by so by having this agreement, it puts it in place. Alternatively, if you just go by ordinance, you don't have to have any petition from property owners. So, the city could initiate it on their own, even without the owner's consent. But our philosophy has been by this policy that the council's previously approved have said no, our value is that we want support of the petitioning owner. So it does, I would say empowers, the individual property rights, but also because both the township and the city city can weigh in.
Now is our opportunity to include that in there. One would be the second item. If the city actually owns property, we don't have anything contemplated or planned in that area now that we have a future water tower site or water treatment plant site that has been included in the property area. We don't have anything, but you never know. There could be something that comes up that could be so that it does have the ability that if it's owned by the city or federal or state and the council would approve that could be included in. Again, I'm not anticipating anything in that area. The area is completely surrounded by the city and the city council approved,
so that's a common piece that if you if the property is kind of an island within the surrounding area, there would be the ability to, in that case, to annex in property as well. And then there are cases, where some cities get into a situation. Mainly happens on these examples where I reference cluster developments. That if for some reason the property can't maintain a compliant independent, septic system as an example for their sewer treatment, they can be forced to basically either, to basically connect with the city if they've got it nearby. And I worked in another community where that was kind of an emerging issue that
this there was a cluster development out on kind of the fringe, and the state was contemplating not not having any solutions for them to have a system that could work. So they were in discussions with the city to potentially mandate that it go and get connected with the city. This is a provision that's in there that if we're mandated, it does allow allow that to happen. And then the last one would be annexation by the statute reference, which primarily would be this kind of a technical clause that I had to kinda get my head around with our attorney too. It's basically kind of tied to that yellow area that if there were a housing
subdivision that wasn't in compliance with the, county provisions of the cluster development that we had adopted during that time period, In effect, the city could initiate the annexation of that area, and I don't it's kind of a catch 22, so I'm not sure that that really would happen. But the township agreed to that clause, so that's another, kind of provision to it. So again, really outlining the process that it has to be in that growth area and, primarily, the owners need to be petitioning, for that. I'm gonna call it a couple of areas that kind of vary from our policy
that's adopted that our attorneys kind of warned. Do you really wanna do this annexation by ordinance because it's not following completely your policies? That's the inconsistency is primarily driven by the differences between the annexation by ordinance process versus the orderly annexation agreement. So acreage limits is an example. If you're looking purely at the city side of the equation and the greatest flexibility, state law allows each individual property owner that the city can annex 120 acres by owner every year unilaterally can pursue that with the boundary adjustments.
You could still be appealed or contested by owners, but that gives a lot of, obviously, acreage and ability for the city to annex properties in. However, this agreement suggests that we have a maximum total acre, it's not by person, but total per year, 100 acres annually and a maximum rolling every year, 300 acres over a five year rolling average. So, like, if you're in the fifth year, then then you move into the sixth year that whatever year that was, it would drop off, and then it would be the most current years that would be rolling forward. This is still a lot of housing development area.
This is primarily a housing development area currently in the comp plan and, any zoning in the area. So unless things change, it's not in the current draft agreement that's coming to you on the comp plan. It's probably going to be a residential growth area. So it's a lot of acreage that would develop over that period of time. I would note if something crazy happens and the market continues, the one thing is it would have to be agreed upon by both entities. But there is an opener clause. There is an ability to open up negotiation between both parties if something changes. But especially with that second area,
that would be a lot of growth and development opportunity with that. I did consult with staff about that. We even shared with council just like, okay, how many acres is this site and how much is that site? And I think it opened the eyes that this would be quite a bit of development opportunity that we'd have to work with. So acreage limits is one area. And again, sometimes when you're negotiating to try and find the common you know, agreements on something like an early annexation agreement, both parties might not get everything they want. So I think this was a provision that the council reps were comfortable recommending those
averages. And I did consult our community development staff who are comfortable with that as well based on what their projections might be on any kind of development that could occur. The other big position would be the, how much might be paid for as part of the annexation. So annexation by state statute by ordinance, not by agreed upon. If we were to pursue it that way, basically, the maximum that's contemplated would be eight years of the township tax amount that they currently are getting at the time of annexation. And so that's, that's kind of if you look at that alternative, you're just purely looking at the money transaction.
That's a pretty minor amount of dollars with that. The existing agreement that had previously been in place that expired had a very complicated formula that was based on how much actual development occurred, very hard to predict. And at the time that that annexation agreement was done, there was kind of a very hot housing market that all of a sudden stopped happening. So that caused a lot of like internal discussion about what ifs with that as well. But the variation in the cost that the city might have paid with those annexation options really was a very vast scenario.
Because there wasn't development, I did an internal exercise to determine if we did different assumptions of a housing development build out under that old agreement. What might the per acre cost be on that? And it varied somewhere from around $55 per acre to about $3,500 per acre. Sounds kinda strange, I know. But and it was very hard to even understand how the formula was done. And when I came here too, we had staff turnover that had occurred where they kind of lost track of where the because it roll it it was calculated every year.
It wasn't a lump sum up cost. So I think it this is what an example too when I came in on the negotiation. I said sometimes there's an argument for keep it simple. Right? Like, let's not overcomplicate things because this is gonna take this is gonna be over a twenty year period of people coming and going. Let's make it clear, simple, easy to understand. In the end of the compromise, negotiated amount was $750 per acre at the time it's annexed for a lump sum number of years is a is a cash amount that the city would pay upfront with that. And we went through scenarios internally. I didn't get into that detail with the council here,
but we showed that if a housing development were to build out over time, it's paid back pretty quickly on a property tax return on investment if you're purely looking at the expense the city would make on that. I can get into that in greater detail if you'd like to, but I think it was a reasonable compromise that we got to that took quite a bit of time on on the agreement with that. So as I mentioned, that's kind of a high level summary of some of the some of the areas I would say that are probably key components, but I could probably have called out about, I don't know, five, six different areas that if you wanted to go deeper into them,
I'd happy to try and answer that. I would say, when you get into the state statute requirements and you get into some of the details of the, prior agreements and comparing that and then the amount of time that went by, I would say it's probably very challenge I would imagine it would be very challenging from the council representatives who served on that when you'd have a gap of period of time and the complexity to kinda get your head around it. So we tried to focus it on some particular areas, and the same thing with staff. Even for me, sometimes month to month kinda looking at it. So even though it's a relatively short agreement, there's a lot of complexity, to that. And I think in the end,
I would expect that if you talk to the township people that were involved in the process, although they maybe would have liked to have seen it move quicker, I think that you would find that they felt that they were heard, that the city was transparent on the, what the goals they were trying to achieve and that we negotiated on both sides in good faith to come to an agreement. That would be my hope and expectation that if mister Peterson was here tonight or another town ship representative, they would say that. And I would also say from the Northfield, taxpayer standpoint, I also feel that, again, although we often look at our own best interest in trying to negotiate what's ultimately
best for the Northfield taxpayer, we realize on these orderly annexation agreements, there is a little bit of compromise involved so that, both parties can have in effect an agreement about what area might be developed, how much development, how where it might go, so that there can be vertical certainty on a property owner who might wanna develop their property. So there's alignment in the in the township, in the city, and in the private owner's interest to move towards a development that everybody agrees upon in terms and conditions we can live with. So that's the benefit of it potentially versus creating conflict over just kinda doing it
every one off on an annexation that comes up. I'm not a proponent in every case that it makes sense that you have to have an orderly annexation in every circumstance. So I know we don't have it with some of our other townships, and I think that's okay. But I think if we're gonna do one, this is a good compromise. And it is I would say that if you look at our growth plans for the city, this area is really the primary residential growth areas for the city as you look at how development can occur in the comp plan and looking at our infrastructure. So although it's not maybe perfect, from just the taxpayer representative of Northfield, I think it's a reasonable compromise and I'm happy to get into any detail if
any of you would like it or if any of the reps maybe have anything to add. I'll turn it back to you, Mayor. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you for that presentation. Thank you to Councilor Ness and Councilor Peterson White for, serving on that. Would you like to add anything at this time? Like Mr. Marty said, we had some long discussions on a lot of those items. Why do we have to take that number? And, you know, it was the cost that they wanted compared to what we wanted to give and I think it reached a good happy medium. And again, there was a lot of little tiny issues that took a lot of time in
our meetings, but it's nice to see this whole document show up after negotiation with the township. So thank you for that, staff, whoever. Oh, hold on. Administrator Bartig, and then we'll go to councilor Peterson White. Sorry. I think I there was one thing I wanted to have as a disclaimer, which it might or might not come back to you is, the particularly the area two required we have we have included in here the legal descriptions of the property, which gets a little more complicated. So we actually had to hire a surveyor to come up with the descriptions because they didn't all follow the,
like, the township lines perfectly. The township actually is having their own own independent person go through and read it and follow a map to make sure it's accurate. Our attorneys have advised us that if there is a change after you act on it tonight, because this is a intergovernmental boundary adjustment agreement that goes to the state, they wanna make sure if they find anything that needs to be changed, that we come back to you. But my preference is that if you're comfortable with this document tonight to approve it, and should there be a change on the legal descriptions later, we'd probably come back to you. And if it's unanimous approval from you,
we maybe we put it on a consent agenda. I was going to mention that and I forgot it in my presentation that just a disclaimer. We are going through the map is has been on has been solidified for a very long time in negotiations. The legal descriptions were done late in the process and we're verifying that. So I just wanted to just have a disclaimer. So you aren't surprised if you end up acting on it tonight and it comes back. That is one last piece. The alternative was we did have some internal discussion about postponing it to act to vote on it. Frankly, if we can get it done, then there aren't any changes. I I would prefer that we kind of move ahead if we could.
So I consulted the mayor, and that was our approach for tonight. Sorry. I wanted to add that. Yes. Thank you. Alright. Councilor Peterson White. Yeah. Well, thanks to administrator Mardig for explaining all the details of this, I think, really effectively. I think I would just like to say there is no detail of this agreement that has not been gone over with a fine tooth comb. We're deeply familiar with every piece of it. We've been at it for a long time. And I think my only other comment would just be to kind of talk about the big picture for a minute. You know, I really believe that one of our roles as a local government is to be
collaborative in a regional way and that's what's best for our community and for the communities that surround us. I think we hear over and over again as we've been doing, you know, in our former comp plan, as we've been doing the new comp plan, we hear over and over that the the rural character and the green border on Northfield is so important to, people's idea of what Northfield is and what they want it to continue to be in the future. And orderly annexation agreements are a really important tool for ensuring that is is how we how the community kind of sees itself and is able to grow.
You know, I think we also hear that people don't want to live in a walled city or a gated community in Northfield. And that means we need to strike a balance between having room to grow, but I think it's also really healthy for a community to have some pressure to build as densely as we can for environmental reasons and cultural reasons and to have, you know, set up relationships with our neighboring townships that that are that are, as as administrator Mardig, I think, said, that are that are set up so that we're not we're not, you know, anticipating a lot of conflict in the future.
We've agreed on a shared vision of how things are gonna proceed. And, I just think that's really healthy, and it it means that it'll facilitate smart and healthy growth when that's the right thing for Northfield and for the township and for the property owners. And it'll create kind of the right kind of conditions for Northfield to continue to be how Northfield wants to be. And the township and and I think the same can be said for the townships. So, I think it's been really interesting to to work on this, and it's a very, very important document with a lot of tedious details in it.
But it's a really important document for the future of Northfield that I think, you know, in many ways is an expression of kind of our our shared vision of what we what kind of future we want. And, I think this captures that effectively. And and it it was as admin as, counselor Ness at a lot of negotiation. And I think I I spent a lot of time in this process thinking about how this is exactly the right use case for negotiation. Each piece of this should be negotiated because there are two parties involved that have different interests and that is definitional. That and but we were able to really undertake all those negotiations in a really,
in a really focused and clear and transparent way. And I think the resulting document is excellent. So thanks for listening. Thank you. Questions from councilors. Councilor Holmes? It's not really a question, but more of additional context given the land use map that has just been updated recently as of last week. And I actually have a copy of it from the email that I mentioned that got sent out at 05:30 tonight. Just and and this too on top of the yeah. If you wanna go to the map that map. Perfect. The the comments that we heard from,
the township member tonight and that we've received emails on many occasions over the past several years. The area there in red, area 1, is fills that urban expansion area as set by Rice County. We also have priority growth areas defined in the comp plan. And when we looked at this comp plan and the land use map to councilor Peterson's white White's point about wanting to build more densely and not get to that sprawl, We've reduced the priority growth area so that it's not even taking up all of
that area one, knowing that there is it it it actually just kinda borders there along the edge of the Northfield, like where you can see Mayflower and Jefferson go out there on the East and then south of that. So even areas in that red area to the to the east, is not part of our priority growth plan. So not to say that we won't grow there, but that that's not where we anticipate anticipate growing, and it's even reduced further to the south, as well as north there above Wall Street that is identified as staying, park and open space right now.
And all of that area too on the current land use map, also park and open space. So in respect to that ag land and to keeping that into keeping those green edges around, around Northfield, that is something that has been very deeply considered by the planning commission as we've been going through the the, the comprehensive plan and, being very wise and smart about that. And you'll have the opportunity to see the land use map or I have it pulled up here so if you wanna see it too. But I think just to that point of this isn't about expanding and growing and
becoming a Lakeville or or any of those, other sprawling communities, but being very thoughtful about it and maintaining that green space open space as well. Thank you. Councilor Beamer. Thank you. Mister Marte, just for those more so for those who might not completely understand what we're all actually talking about, just to confirm, So people understand this this agreement isn't to physically annex this property right now. This agreement is an orderly agreement that we have with Northfield Township.
So in the event that we want to, just trying to put it in lay terms for people that might not necessarily be following exactly what we're trying to do. It's just an orderly agreement so that the opportunity arises. We have development opportunities. We have an orderly agreement with Northfield Township so that we could an exit. Is that correct? Thank you, mayor. I think that's correct. And I, yeah, I think that it it strikes that balance for the the township's property owners in the city to kinda have what the framework is.
But I I think you're right. I if there's anybody out there who is concerned that this looks like a lot of property, which it is, this is not suggesting that this is like, you know, likely to develop out, maybe even in our lifetimes. I don't know. So, but it does identify the area. And, just a side note to throw in also as a benefit of not there are some communities that annex that maybe don't do orderly annexation agreements. They annex large areas of, like, agricultural land just with the ability to grow someday to have the property.
So the benefit of of having kind of an identified long term area that you might grow to as a city, but not actually annexing it in too, also allows the owners of that ag land to not pay a higher property tax rate while they're using it for agricultural purposes, but have an agreement handshake agreement between both parties that should property ever develop it in the future that you can annex it in. There are even provisions in the agreement that I'm sure that you have all read and seen too that there are some provisions too that the city is committing that infrastructure will be provided to those areas within a certain period of time too.
And there's some things that happen if we don't. So I think it will also say to the point of the comprehensive plan and actually doing annexations, the city has to also consent even though you have the right to unilaterally do it. There are some times that you might wanna weigh. Does it make sense to do this property because we're gonna write a check for the property even if the development maybe isn't happening right away at $750 per acre, and we're gonna have to have infrastructure provided to it too. So, just because Northfield has identified that this is an area that they may, the council at the time will to make that decision with the advice of the
planning commission whether to pursue any particular annexation. So sorry I added on your simplified answer, but I think your answer is right. And I would say if there are individuals that are having a hard time or concerned that it might be doing something that it's not, staff would be happy to spend some time on them one on one talking it through or even having a township rep at the table, if that's helpful. Thank you. Other questions from the council? Alright. This is our moment for open public comment, and I welcome anyone who'd like to comment on this issue to come forward and fill out a yellow card. Alright.
Seeing, no one, well, I'm looking for a motion. Looking to our our representatives over there. Would they like to make the motion? Councilor Peterson White. I'll move the I'll move approval of the early annexation agreement with Nashville Township. Counselor Ness. Second. Thank you very much. Council discussion. We did such a great job with our questions and our deep dive from everybody who was involved. Alright. No dis I don't see any council discussion, so I'll move us to a vote. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Those opposed, same sign.
Motion passes. Thank you, everyone. That was, what, three years in the three years in the making? So I I love how there was, like, no discussion. You're just like, boom. Good job. Alright. That's how we know. Yeah. Okay. And what next up, is the city administrator's update. Thank you, mayor, members of the city council. I've been primarily kind of focusing on some agenda items tonight and then some other bigger items that I'm working on, so I don't have too much of a report. I did attend the legislative conference a couple of weeks ago. I've got some handouts and things that I'm gonna scan and send you some detail
on it because I think probably warrant some of the bills that I'm tracking based on some conversations and things, and I'll send you that. So I won't do that verbally tonight. I would say one thing though that maybe that I knew was kind of coming, but it hit me over the head a little bit more on one of the detailed breakout sessions. Excuse me. And that related to potentially seeking capital bonding for future local projects. So again, we are working on current bill related to Bridge Square. The prior council gave us some direction on trying to find fund about half of the project, on the Bridge Square project through some state bonding dollars so that it is in the process.
However, if that gets funded or if it doesn't, in the end of this legislative session, cities, do have the ability to put in local project requests every year in this upcoming time period for in preparation of neck next session would be the formalized process where the state has implemented in the relative near future or recent history, a formal request process where you have to actually put it in writing. It goes to the governor's office. Ultimately, it's shown across the state all the local projects that are being sought. So those deadlines, I think are like August time period,
I think, is the deadline, which means as the budget discussions go, I had planned on packaging in with that, but I might need to accelerate some of those discussions with this council to kind of brainstorm a list of projects maybe in the five year plan that's current that maybe is or isn't, something that you could choose to give direction on for trying to get state funding for it. Again, the typical process would be you you can get the the most common process would be is you would have at least 50% match at the local level, but it doesn't mandate that. So, like,
you can't ask for a %. It just sometimes makes it a little more politically difficult. We also have some projects that I would say we've done some planning on that might not even be in the five year plan. Things like we did some analysis along the roadway of, Division 246, you know, for some safety improvements. The school is looking at building a new high school. Might you wanna, you know, time some of the safety intersection projects that's not in the school's budget with some of that. That's just one example. So, anyway, I'm gonna be working with the mayor on programming an agenda item probably a little bit a little bit earlier than I would want on the broader budget discussion in
order to give you time for some feedback on giving us direction if you wanna pursue any of those. Cities can pursue multiple requests, then you have to prioritize them. I'll get into more detail on you on that, but it's probably gonna come sooner than later on that, seeking that issue. Another item that I meant to mention the last time, that I failed to do that the mayor and I have been working on as well that it's a little bit fuzzy in my head, the details of it. But there was a as I understand it, in a prior budget biennium, there was bonding dollars that were, I believe,
were put in, to fund some skate park development for communities across the state, but it didn't end up getting materialized at the state level for various reasons. And so we've got some local advocacy that's been tracking that issue. And so we we have put in a exploration of potentially getting earmarked for some skateboard park enhancements that would be no local match that could a fund a % of, an expansion on the existing skateboard park. And we do have some older concept plans that were part of that.
So I'm still trying to understand exactly the legislative detail on what's going on, but we did give through the mayor's authorization kind of a letter of support to seek that funding. So I'm working on getting details to come back to you late later on it. But because there had been some concept plans that have been pretty heavily vetted, it would probably get updated if we were to get this funding. And there was no local match and probably not really much of a you know, not a big maintenance concern going forward. We thought it couldn't hurt to basically put it in in what I would consider a little less, have if there's no hard commitment since the council hasn't authorized it specifically.
But if we get more details on that, and it gets some legs under it, I'll be briefing you on that as as well. The mayor can maybe help me out if I'm missing any of that. But we're it's been a little bit of a puzzle because I'm not directly working on it, and I'm trying to understand exactly what bill was this in and what's the language they're seeking, but I I think we might we have a couple of senators, offices that are involved in it that I might be able to get some information on. I just haven't had a chance to do some follow back on that yet. So but I did wanna mention that one as well. Couple other just little things, and I know I sometimes,
our city clerk just asked me again today that there was training coming up on the league that you might be interested in, and you might all be signed up for some of those. But the city I did wanna call to your attention a couple of events coming up. The, so the League of Minnesota City's annual conference where they do it they kind of rotate in Greater Minnesota, typically. Duluth is on June is the, annual League of Minnesota Cities conference. If I don't know if any of the other peers have ever gone to those, but we do have dollars in your budget to go to the travel and training for that. If you're interested,
I think it gets some good basic, breakout sessions are usually good. I think it's an opportunity to talk to other elected officials across the state that if you wanna find out what's happening in other cities, you might find in some cases they're dealing with similar problems or, oh, I'm glad I don't have that problem. Or we've got this we've got this bad problem we're dealing with in Northfield. Can you help us? You know? So I do encourage you that if you're able to go, Lynette or Clerk or Sarah, can help help you navigate, like, how to register and all that kind of stuff if you're interested in going. We did get actually got contacted about an interest to see if I'd be willing
to be a presenter in a breakout session related to onboarding council. Somehow they caught wind that we did a little bit of onboarding with some of our current council people. So I I offered to be a presenter, so we're they're still vetting us for that process, but I'm we might have a breakout session on one of the days too that we are partnering with another community or two on some of that information. So, anyway, just a heads up on that. We do have also, I think, a date for our, love our city. Love our actually, it's rebranding it a little bit. Love our community, they're calling it now. It's basically kind of a spring volunteer event that kinda came up within our faith
communities a number of years ago. It's morphed a little bit, but it's basically where we've done some spring volunteer work with the public to do some landscape bed, you know, cleanups in some of our areas that are visible. I think we've done some tree planting in the past as well. So May 17 from Saturday, May 17 from 9AM to twelve noon is the date for that. Might be one to mark down in your calendars to, even if you don't feel like rolling up your sleeve and doing some landscaping work, maybe be seen and, out and about. We'll have more information coming that mister Bennett's working on as well.
So those are just a couple of little updates I have for you. And again, legislatively, I'll be sending you, more detail out, coming up soon. Thank you. Any questions for administrator Marte? You did leave a couple open ended comments there. No? We're good? Okay. Looking for a motion to adjourn. Councillor Ness. Move to adjourn. Thank you. Councillor Beamer. Second. All right. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Those opposed? Alright. Motion carries.