Yeah, participants and then move it down to the corner. So, just keep an eye if anybody pops in, you can admit them. So it's um 6:30. This is our monthly city
council meeting. It's August 19th, 2025. Do call to order. Mayor Ior >> here. Council Pedigrass >> here. >> Councelor Phillips >> here. Council Risor >> here. Councelor Spring here. >> And then we've got Joe Palin present, myself, Dean, and Rachel.
>> On the participants, anybody? >> I didn't see anyone. >> Oh, no. >> All right. We have um roll call taken. So, we'll talk about our agenda. I have just a couple minor editorial
comments. Um, on item XVI, new business, it's the ornal flood repair request letter and in the letter itself, it talks about a motion to accept uh
bids. So, there will be a motion uh regarding the flood repair bids. enrichment. X I I is >> XV I I sorry >> oh XV and 16 >> letter V I
got a couple >> and there's also a motion needed with the public works assistant job description job posting there will be a motion there also is that one. Um,
>> X, >> page three, >> page two, public works, a couple editorial things. >> H3 page three, the XVI.
>> Yeah. >> X I under B under repair. the agenda. >> I don't have that. >> Hey, I've got one. I'd like to kind of review the memo from August 11th. And
I'm going to put that under planning and zoning. >> So, it would be under XI. >> And what was under PL? Um, it's going to be the the memo that we got from August 11th. All of us got it,
but that'll come up with the discussion of what's going on with planning and zoning. And then >> copies of it wasn't in our pack. >> Yeah. Well, we've all got it, but yes, I do have copies for the same. Everybody got it, but it's
Yeah. Right. Uh then I also have for the other one employee relations committee on page 85 on the consent agenda.
>> Do we need to pull a consent agenda? That's a discussion. >> Well, we last time when I went into the consent agenda, it was said that I had a mention of before it got to the consent agenda. So, um, I did some reviewing of the consent agenda, and it's okay. We
can pull those out, but rather than talk about the amendments on the overall agenda, when we get to the consent agenda, we'll make a motion to accept the consent agenda and then you can pull those items out. >> Okay? >> And then we will discuss those three items. >> That's great.
>> Well, yeah, >> we'll pass rest of the consent agenda and then talk about those individuals. >> Oh, that makes sense. I mean, I was just going by what you said last time. So, >> yeah, I you're right. That's what I said last time. >> We just passed the whole We just passed the whole consent agenda once the discussion's taking place. You should
take a motion, a second, and then discussion, and then the vote. >> Well, no, the items out. >> There's not two votes. The consent agenda, one >> Well, there's We'll pull the votes out, individual items, and then we'll approve the consent agenda except for those
three items. Then we'll take each item one by one. Discussion motion if needed. Motion if >> so at that time we can pull anything out of it the consent agenda at that time. >> Yeah. Yes. Good. >> Okay. Yeah. Which is fine. So all the rest of them fit under the consent
agenda. So >> what part of that um employer relations are you pulling out? >> Uh we have to do that. We'll wait till we get to that part of it and discussing that. Oh, not section two.
>> Okay. So, I make a motion we accept the agenda uh with the amendments of adding a motion to item X. A motion to XVI business repair bids motion.
And then under XI planning and zoning, add a memo of August 9th. discussion, I guess. >> What's the motion under X? What's that about? >> That's the one that you get for for a motion to the flood repair bills.
>> And there's a motion on the public works job description. >> It's another motion is in the letter, but it's not on the agenda as such. >> Just a technicality, but so there's no confusion. When we get to that and
somebody makes a motion, well, it's not a It's here, but we want to make it part of the agenda. >> That all those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. Second. >> Um, no. Second.
>> I'll do a second. >> Thank you, Jason. >> Okay. Next item is our public forum. three minute time limit per person. City council welcomes and encourages participation from community members. Please keep in mind that your comments
must be pertinent to city business and must adhere to data privacy rules. No employees names may be you please do not expect action from the council this evening regarding your concerns. To address the city council during public forum, please step up to the podium,
state your name, address, and fill out the white form that's provided. Uh speakers will be recognized only once. You will be timed beginning speaking when the green card is raised by Rachel, our city clerk. A yellow indicates you have 30 seconds left and a red card
indicates you have reached your three minute time limit and must stop. So with that, we'll open public forum at 6:36 p.m. >> Giler can ask uh questions be asked or strictly comments? >> I'm sorry.
>> Can questions be asked during the public forum? Can can a city member ask questions or simply make comments? >> It's maybe from the public forum. >> It could be questions can be answered. >> You can ask questions. >> You can ask questions. Yeah. >> You won't answer them. >> They won't answer them. No. So, it's it's meant to be mostly just comments,
>> but you can ask questions. They just you won't get any answers. >> So, >> okay. >> But we but we would >> Don't you like to know what the questions are? Okay. So much time anybody for speaking. >> No, I think it's great when people
speak. I think it's wonderful. Uh my name is Adam. I live at 740 River Park Place Southeast. Um and I I just learned yesterday about the sale of the land inside of River Park. And so I had questions about the land. Uh is there already a person identified that's going
to purchase it? Is it going to be I would assume cut up into lots that are threequarter acres similar to one that are there now and sold and um so I don't really know what the plan is. So it's kind of working backwards from what's what's on here. Um so I guess the only input I would add is that um my hope
would be that it's lots that are similar to what is there now and it seems sensible use uh to do so right if the land isn't isn't going to be as a drain field anymore. It doesn't make sense for the city to hold the land. So, I'm an advocate of developing the land into residential lots, but I just hope that it is residential lots and not, you
know, a townhouse development or something that's not fitting into the current uh covenants and restrictions. And then furthermore, um I would like I think it would be beneficial to the city to sell the lots individually through the MLS database in an area where uh my
day job is real estate and and I think that it's anybody selling land or house should if they're working towards maximizing the highest proceeds put the house or the land in this case on the market for any buyers to buy. I think you'll get the most proceeds by listing it for sale as opposed to selling it to
a developer. My concern about selling it directly to a developer and letting them chop up the land themselves is is we don't get to, you know, I think it'd be more sensible for us to pay for a survey, subdivide it, and then sell the lands individually as opposed to or the lots individually as opposed to uh selling it just to a developer and
letting them run with it. Um, in our same subdivision, when there was, I think, four or five lots left, they were sold from the developer to developers sibling, I believe, to develop the final lots. And I understand there were some headaches with some of the lots that were built on by that developer. It was
more of a speck home situation, quick put up, lesser quality materials, etc. And so I think if uh customuilt homes were put into space, it would be more consistent with the neighborhood. So that's all the comments that I have to share. Thank you.
>> Uh second call for public forum. Let's speak. Anybody online? Online thing is gone. Participants. Anybody on Zoom would like to speak at public forum?
Third and final call for public forum. Young will close public forum at 6:40. Right. Um, next item is our uh the sheriff's monthly report. Sergeant Red, do you have anything to share?
Two words chattering. just talked to one of the deputies who um spoke to a couple of people about traffic complaints speeding and they talked about a speed limit sign andor radar sign. So I would encourage whoever he spoke to was speaking about our speed
trailer to have that brought up here or if you guys were going to invest in another sign like you have down on Minnesota Avenue. Does anybody know chance? >> Uh we haven't talked about a type of speed trailer. I know something the public works has talked about but we
haven't really brought it to council or anything like that or budget for. >> And then the only other thing was we had a um padded going through the city last week I want to say um received a complaint that I took when I'm spoke to the complainant and actually made contact with a gentleman advised him he
had to get a permit through the city if he was going to do that. He actually was told by a city uh worker that he was supposed to have a permit and then I got a call later about him. So, I don't know if you guys have heard about any other complaints about Vivian being up here and trying to sell their services or not, but I spoke directly to him and to
the complainant. Hopefully, it was resolved after that, but I haven't heard anything since. So, I don't know if you guys have heard anything or not. So, >> anybody speak to the comment? >> I I've had pedlers come to my house. I always ask them for their permits and
they usually scram pretty quickly. >> So, >> all right, that's both all the pass on. How should we handle those in the future? They're usually not a safety concern, but >> usually not. Usually they're trying to sell without a permit, you know, which
doesn't cost a lot, but it's a requirement by the city up here. So, I just ask them, can I see your permit, you know, just to verify legitimacy and that they're they are who they say they are, stuff like that. Um, I wouldn't necessarily be rude or anything. Call our office. we can come up here, contact you, and hopefully get in contact with them so that they're aware of the
requirements, you know, and it's in your guys' ordinances that they need to have a permit. So, as long as those ordinances meet state statute requirements, we can sign up for it. Ultimately, we had to. I don't know if it would necessarily unless they continue to be a problem. So, >> basically, it's just know who they are. >> Yeah.
>> And and what I've normally done is I ask him, "Have you come down to city hall and got a permit?" >> I just had a lot. >> And so, that's what I usually do is I ask the corners. So, it's good to know what they can do. >> Best thing just call our office and we can deal with it. You know, usually they're not a problem. They're not
criminals, you know, per se. It's usually somebody's trying to sell legitimate services, but they just need to have the permanent accord of the city requirements. So, >> thank you. >> Thank you. [Music] >> Water and sewer is our next item.
And um the packet was a closeout letter, final draft. they request and people service report. So Joe, would you want to speak to your thoseel letter and final payment? >> Yeah. So, uh, we've been working with
Stop Construction since the fall of 2021 to construct the wastewater treatment facility. That's contract one. And we've come to a point where they've uh achieved substantial and final completion. and wave uh actually will continue to be in the
warranty period. Actually, the 2-year warranty period starts at substantial completion. And the letter kind of documents the fact that we really have two different sets of substantial completion date dates. Uh one when we actually started operation of the wastewater treatment facility and then
the second after the uh switch gear that was essentially on back order was furnished and installed. So, I document that those two dates within the letter and then the 2-year warranty extends beyond that. Um, kind of talk about the fact that, you
know, the contract was completed basically at the bid construction uh price plus the five change orders that was were executed. The five change orders uh equate to about 1% of the total contract amount.
uh we had budgeted about two and a half% contingencies for the construction contact. So, you know, we're less than half of u or we we required less than half of the contingency amount to construct the
project. Um so, this final pay request is for $20,000. Basically, that's paying out the retainage. we continue within the warranty period and the letter kind of establishes all that informality and then of course uh there's a pay request
attached to this that I've reviewed and the contractor is reviewed and signed uh ultimately gets submitted to MPCA and PFA for uh the final documentation. So, assuming the council approves that, Jason will need a signed copy of this
for my file as well as more importantly the contractor's file and then it goes to their bonding company and all that other type of stuff. So, >> any questions on the letter, the final pay request, uh the construction project as a whole? Uh this is just again for
STOs. it doesn't reflect contract two and three for um Fitzgerald that that uh hopefully late this fall after we get through the restoration. >> I make a motion we approve the uh pay
request number 35 and final payment of $20,000. >> I'll second that. >> That's all these continuation sheets too. >> Yeah, that their documentation that their subs were paid. uh IC134 forms. Um we want to make sure that the contractor
is getting paid. He's paying their subs. They have to send us the documentation indicating that they're paying their subs. And that's what that is. It really didn't probably need to be in the packet, but I have that. Jason has that information. And now you have to kind of keep the subs from being able to
put a lean on the city. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Any other questions? See none. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I oppose. Same sign. That's approved. Your packet is the people's service
monthly report. It's still good results or nitrogen phosphorus. [Music] >> How's the flow? Flow looking good. >> Uh flow's pretty stable. Uh, you know, we're in inching up just a little bit uh
as more connections happen. Uh, mayor mentioned one thing I think is really impressive is the phosphorus numbers. I mean, you're down at like a 0.1. The limit's point4. Rochester's limit, for example, in many other communities is 1.0. I mean, you're at 10% of the
phosphorus discharge that most cities are, which is pretty impressive. I think that's outstanding. Excellent. Um, okay. I think that's all we have then for sewer. As a side note, John Sto uh
committee person resigned. So, he was with us for a little over a year, but his work schedule doesn't allow. So, we have one opening our water and sewer committee. >> He wasn't there too long, was he? What's that? >> I said he wasn't there too long.
>> No, a little over a year. >> Easy guy. Hey, next item is a public works. Your packet is a job description, position description for a public works assistant. Very typical of the other ones we've
had. Then there's a a memo in there from the city administrator with the vacancy itself, the pay range of 2550 to 2950
and the sequence of events of posting it. ERC reviewing applicants making a recommendation to council around October 3rd and bring it to the October 14th council for approval.
Anything else? I think that came to that >> Jason did really well on the on all of so >> so I make a motion we approve the uh job public works assistant job description and the position opening and the
recommended starting salary. >> Second it. >> Thank you. I was under the impression the previous employee that filled that had wanted to retract his resignation.
That would save us having to repost this. >> All your commentary the previous employee that that resigned has to pull back his resignation the next day. My understanding is and
refused to take it. So say don't see why we desire him back if he >> I would say he's more than willing to apply for it and go through the interview process. >> I mean that's that's possibility. I mean there's no way he resigned. He wasn't
terminated. So be in the he be in the same pool with the other candidates. So we'll see. All right. Any other comments? None. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> I. >> I. Post.
>> I had three days. Two. >> Two days. Okay. That's approved. Um, next item was a planning and zoning all added. Yeah, I mean I wanted to talk a little
bit about planning and zoning as well. Last night, uh, we turned around and had WSB. Let me give a little bit of what they've come up with so far on the final draft of what the new code is. Um, so we had a
full house >> quite a bit. Quite a bit. >> So the only thing I see in planning and zoning was this August 11th memo. >> Well, yeah, but I mean we're going over because we didn't have time to do minutes that there were from last night. I thought it would be good to to explain what's what happened because normally
>> Well, normally you ask about planning and zoning and we turn around to it. That's okay. I have no problem with doing that. So I just said >> ultimately WSB project is postponed another month PNC. >> Yeah. But I mean we had some really good
comments which I think are are important for what there is for council to know what the comments are and >> it's available on the video to watch. Yes. I think >> fine with me. No problem. going to in the process of and we'll go
back to the August 11th uh letter that there is um one of the things that's that's of concern is the I works because we use that I works at planning and zoning all the time I works has already been approved by council for
council to have that access so it can't be pulled back since the council has already approved that and that was done during the Tom Weiner meetings that we had when we got CMS approved just to bring your memory back. And the reason
why we need to have that cross check that there is in there is our prior administrator turned around and approved a single wide mobile home uh to be put inside which does not meet our our code at all that was done. So that's
that was one of them. uh the DJ market we weren't aware of with that and so that's also one Glenn's motor coach was the same. So with all the things that had happened the eyeworks became available to us for all the council to
be able to do that and again approve by council. So I need to have that put back on and me to be active and anybody else that wants to be active. What do you do with it? >> So my works is is really important.
Okay. So you what do you use it for? >> I use it for planning and zoning on everything. Every meeting we have at planning and zoning we go over and take a look at I works. That's that's how we we work and keep track of what's going on. And it's a cross check as a safety check that there is that people, you
know, like administrators that there are just don't arbitrarily give permits for something that aren't to be permitted. So that's what it is and that's why that's in there. And again, council has already approved it. It's already done. >> Yeah. So I'm not as familiar with it. So you're looking at it in the committee.
You're logging in and making sure >> it's online and you're and it's for you, too. Anybody that's on council has access to the eyeworks. That's what was given. That's what we we worked with and that's why CMS is doing it was that was a part of it for us to get eye work. >> So you can view so you can view uh
projects. >> Are you looking at it in PNZ like the actual meeting or you're doing it when >> I'm watching as things go along but it's all a part of what's happening with PNZ. We do discuss um
permits that have been pulled um in PNZ and the information that we're given is very very minimal. Okay. >> Um the information that's in IO works is significantly more substantial. I personally haven't logged into it and
haven't used it. Um, but you you have a lot of the information when we have those meetings and there it's a good information to have. Um, and again, council's already approved
it. There's no discussing it if needs to be put back on again. So I think what's happened is that uh either it's lack of understanding of what the I work says
and u talking to developers um called out of chain of command but uh the point is I think it's been abused not fully understand what the symbols mean and I think it's caused some um uh
it's put the city in a bad light because of the miscommunication of how what person has or has not done a developer or builder. Um you know PNZ itself has a great function and that function is when
uh lot splits or any public hearing and variances uh CUP uh applications that come to the PNC that's their main function. uh monitoring building permits is not per code is not really a function of the
planning and zoning committee. >> Again, this was passed by city council and and it's not up for discussion >> or you want to bring it up again at a different point, you can. But since it's already been approved by council, it's got to be put on there. Period. End of
story. We discussed it at that time back at the beginning of last year. did it and I think it's fine, but I think it was abused and didn't serve its purpose. >> What happened? >> I'm not so certain your accusation of
saying it's abused. >> Give me an example. Let me finish you. >> I I can't see where you're saying it was abused because you showed no examples. You know, we have when it comes to the
public asking a council member something, >> you know, they put our phone numbers and email addresses online for them to contact us if they have a question. >> Sure. >> You're you're going to answer a question and you're going to answer it to best your
ability and refer refer to city hall when >> that's exactly what a person should do. Refer to city hall. >> Exactly. >> And that wasn't done. So, but but removing this without council action removing it is wrong because council approved it to put it on in the
>> and I and I'd like to know too because Joe and I went to one of them which was a developer that there was which was was Greens and I I called Joe. Uh there were two building permits that were already pulled for that facility that there was. He had a question on where there could
be a possible variance on on the back part for where the refrigeration units were going and the back patio. And then we went to discussion of what there was for drainage for what the parking lot was. And those permits were already pulled. I turned around and I brought
Joe in, you know, and and I let you do the talking. All I did was listen. Didn't do anything else that there was behind it. So for you saying it's abuse, I I don't see that being abusive at all. But trying to help, you know, Jeff Green
move his project along and if there was a variance that was going to be required, then we're ready to be able to do the variance. Otherwise, it was done and it was done directly with Joe being there. So, you know, I think
>> you just explained the reason why it was abused because it's not a council member's position to >> not a councilman. >> Not a councilman. It was planning and zoning. And anytime you go to planning and zoning and you're looking at a variance, it goes through planning and
zoning and that's the correct way to do it. So that's what the question was and that's the way we addressed it >> and actually Irv was there as well that heard everything that was going on >> by Jeff Green. >> So so the comment that everything you've
described you know having a building permit on a line said you have one doesn't mean it's complete. >> There's no there's no site plan. There's no storm management plan. Had that been done by the resident, that would have
been brought to the city council's not council to a city administrator and city clerk's attention to say, "Hey, we need this, this, and this." And we'll get back to him. But that never came to us. >> So you were kind of circumventing the system. >> No, not at all. Because I know that those things are required when he was
asking what he really needed before he was spending the money to do it. Am I right on that, Joe? that he was asking what what needed to be done. That's part of what there was if there was going to be a variance that was in there. I never once as a council member
>> offered any advice or or made any comments whatsoever what there was. >> You're you're absolutely right. You should have told Jeff, please contact city staff to find out what you need to do and we'll go through the process with everything submitted and working with
CMS and Joe. If I may, >> exactly what Paul said. You could take those discussions, but you always refer to city staff and it doesn't appear that you did, >> but I don't believe city staff has the right to remove that without council
permission. >> That's my point. >> Can't be done. >> Council can't be done. >> Just a second. >> Council council made the decision to give that that access to >> That's true. And it council council's
needs to remove it. The administrator can't remove that. >> May I ask when that decision was made? >> Yeah. First part of February last year. >> Yeah. However, because my recollection is it was requested and you had spoken to our staff after I had gotten hired and we talked to CMS to see if it was
possible. And as a courtesy, we allowed access to PNZ and council. There was never official vote on it. So, I'll have to go back and review February because that was before my time. Let's go back and look at the actual determination
request. >> And I think as council members and committee members, sometimes we get put in hard places um when we're being asked questions about a committee and it's which hat are
you wearing while you're answering that question. I think all of us who are on committees have run into that issue. I do think that I works um has some good tools for checks to make sure that that things aren't sneaking through the
cracks like Nim said with the single wide trailer that got put um in town here. Um I do think that everything has we have to respect the process as well. Um, and so we can't be
using that authority to circumvent the process. But I I think that I works is a could be a very powerful tool for PNZ just to be able to to to check on the stuff. Well, in in
addition to that, >> it's a we didn't know DG Market was going in until about 60 days before they >> or Glenn's Motor Coach either the same way. And and they had changed zoning codes on on Glenn's Motorcoach because, you know, a bus terminal is not
permitted inside the city and you changed that code to be highway commercial during that time, which allowed that to be done. And and that was done taken care of. And I like Glenn. I think Lens has done a great job, but that's the only way that that
they were able to go in there as being highway commercial. >> Who changed the code for that? >> Well, that otherwise you could not have put it in that location because a bus terminal is not allowed in city code.
And so when you looked at it where it was done, it was done as highway commercial. Okay. And that made it >> it's it came across to us as being a retail because they offer tour charges or tour >> and >> the bus >> they don't do maintenance
>> the bus terminal >> bus terminal >> it's a bus terminal but just these are >> the bus terminal is not going from route to route to route >> and then they go around to route to route but I'm just saying those are the things if there was a question about it
it should have come to P&Z decision would have been made and everything would have and would have come back to council and it would have been done. >> But those are the things that I'm saying that are important >> because things get through okay and people turn around and just do that. So
it's that's the reason why it was put in there and I think it's very valuable for everybody to have access to that's that's the purpose behind it. >> Well, I'd like to see the record when this decision was made before we continue the discussion. Well, I I think
with two of us being here that were on council during that time also voted on it. >> It's been voted on. >> It should be put on now if you wanted to vote it and come back in again later, but right now it should be put on. >> No, it's we'll wait and find out. >> Uh no, it's already been approved by
council. Ryland, >> I'd like to you were there. You remember that conversation we had with all that >> the discussion? Sure. I don't know if it was a request or a motion. That's what I don't remember. >> It was done during Shirley. So, you tell
me what was going on when Shirley was here as acting. Shirley was the one that was in charge of that at that time. He didn't do anything that wasn't right with Shirley. You know that >> our temporary administration >> you said. Okay, let's move on. What's
your Is that it? >> Yeah. >> Pretty big. Um, so next item is make motion >> employees uh relations committee. >> I'm going to make a motion to have that
put back on again. >> I'll second it. >> We're talking about employee relations. >> No, we're talking about eyeworks. I'm making a motion to have it put back on >> about that until we get a mo I make we're going to find out for sure and then we'll come back in the September
meeting. We'll follow up on the request. >> Is it going to be turned on till then? >> Uh, it won't be turned on until we have the discussion in September. >> But the council's already approved it. How come you're turning it on?
>> Council's moving on. >> Employee relations approved communication. >> We have actually one on parks and trails just for awareness. >> Oh, sure. Yes, >> I can speak to it. So, um, with parks and trails, we're going to put forward a
southern Minnesota, um, grant. It's about, uh, 10,000 with a match of 2500. It's due by August, um, 28th. And we're looking at purchasing some outdoor fitness equipment for the Orno Park. That would have again about three to
four different um, outdoor fitness equipment. with that that 2500 match. Um we do have it in the budget for 2026. If if we do get that, there's also potential to use some of the funds for
um salary that weren't used out of Jason's budget to match that if we do get it um notification by the end of the year. Otherwise, we're putting it forward into our 2026 budget as a request. So, just an awareness that we'll submit that grant
expecting decision >> for the end of the year and 26. >> It said do um decisions maybe by October. So we would I would assume February 2026 >> and um we received EDA received a grant.
It usually comes out in February 2026 is what it's >> Yeah. It didn't say when they released funds if it would be as soon as we were awarded or it didn't really say. >> We shouldn't make them um all of that to
make sure gets put in the budget for doing the budget prep stuff. >> Sure. Y I can do that. >> Do you want to go ahead and type the >> Yeah. Um, one thing to talk a little bit about, it's more probably a conversation, but I do think, you know,
coming into city council, I think there's been a opportunity um to think about how do we improve communication between not just our city council, but also city administrator and even our committee leaders. I think a lot of times there's there's siloed
conversations and I just want to make sure that nothing surprises us um as a collective group so that we can make the best decision for the city of Oronokco. So looking to think about ways to establish maybe a a more proactive way
to um share some of these things. I know Jason's done in the past kind of weekly memos with things that are going on. And I'd like to see that um be become maybe a habit um of of more um proactive communication even if there's not all
the details. Um but even continuing to share that with the committee leaders as well. I think one of these things as we talked with our f first responders and fire department when we had our um workshop with them. They want to know
what's going on in the city. maybe that doesn't relate to them, but they may want to ask some questions or know what it can be some implications. So, I think we need to try and broaden our circle a little bit when we're sharing some of these things. Obviously, we want to make sure that confidential things are shared
appropriately, but I do think there's probably an opportunity for us to think about how do we have some more structure um to create some trust not just um within ourselves, but also with our residents. So would like to think about
a way to to do that um and make sure that we're kind of holding each other accountable for that as well. >> So you're would you like to make a motion then to pursue that? >> Yeah. Um so I'm going to make a motion to approve the use of um maybe a
reoccurring update um from the city administrator out to city council as well as the committee leaders. um even if all the information is not fully baked, but making sure that we're doing that um and making sure that as we have conversations that we're trying to not
triangulate and have siloed conversations >> second. No, I think that's an excellent suggestion. I think that's maybe that can whatever this uh framework looks like you know I think that's possibility of of working not only with parks and
trails but also with PNC water and sewer the fire department first responders is in our overall um improvement of communications because you can never overcommunicate in my opinion. I think there's a process that could
help that and um I think it als it's also good from the standpoint of of like in the case of a building permit or zoning or variance or whatever I think it's it's good to know the process of how that's going through the system. I
think that's uh we could all benefit from that. So, >> so how will this ensure that the communication it's two ways? Because I think that's part of our our issue as well is Jason can send out memos but he
might not be getting information back. So, how can we um how can we make sure that the communication is happening both directions because I think that's just as important. Yep. Nope. I agree. Again,
I think that's on us individually as well as the city council and the committee leaders, right? If there's things where we need to connect dots, then we should be helping with those conversations. And when something maybe
isn't exactly how we thought would be going or we have some questions, I think that's where we need to make sure that we're having those dialogues. But I agree, I do think it's not a one-way communication. Um Jason shouldn't be sending these out and they just get put in an inbox somewhere. Like we should be reading them. We should be sharing them
when it makes sense. Um and making sure that we're following the process and we're we're having some of those conversations when maybe things aren't how we all want it to play out. But I think that's a great point, Daniel, that it needs to be both ways.
So, will this be a kind of living and evolving process here where we're going to start with Jason's administrator update and and then kind of work from there to get everything else pieced together.
>> Yeah. And I think it's more a framework. It's not just on Jason. Um I think it's also on us, right? So, I think that there's probably opportunities to continue to expand it. I know Jason and and the city staff do a lot to make sure that we're managing the city appropriately. So that's probably the
first easy way to start. But I do think there's even opportunities as us sitting on committees that we're sharing up and we're not just sharing minutes. Things get lost in minutes. Things maybe don't always translate in minutes. So we need to make sure that we're bringing those things forward, too.
One key uh another crucial piece of this is is how that communication is distributed. Um I know that sometimes I'm I struggle to find correct contacts for people
because they're either not using city email or not and they're using personal email. Um, and so that's something that I would like maybe to even add to this >> contact information >> making either DLS in Outlook if that's
something that we can do. Um, if I would prefer city email addresses used, but if for whatever reason that's not possible, those personal emails get added to those DLS as well.
um probably have to touch base on open meeting stuff with DLS, but I don't know how that all work, but I think that getting all that information >> I think even if you had a one place where all that contact information
lived, it would be a lot easier. >> Yep. >> Yep. That's a great point. The big thing with open meeting is making sure it's not then creating a communication like a so if we >> DL I'm not even sure if that's can you be CCL it's the the open communic the
open meeting law stuff refers more to once we start having conversation and start making decisions and talking about things >> so the the passing of information is not a problem but and this is there's some things in there too like it was referenced in uh your
request there for like a shared centralized platform. I think that's a a concern because it just allows for open communication back and forth that's not public. >> Yeah. >> Um >> I was thinking more like a like a folder somewhere where you're putting all your updates. So if people don't want it in
their inbox, they can go and pull your last one. But maybe a push is better. I don't know. >> Yeah. and and we can potentially expand this Otter AI into something like that because our all of our meeting minutes
should be compiled into that and you can ask Otter to summarize what's been talked about, you know, WSB project, what was talked about that and if anything was said in water and sewer about it, it would
populate through that. So we can look into that a little bit. >> The one issue with that would be like fire and first responder and fire relief. I think they over there. So they might have it >> and I don't know if they all have access to go in there and ask get questions too.
>> Yeah, that's something that we can work on though at least getting access to >> that could be part of it. >> Yeah, >> I just think there's a need. I mean again anytime there's there's silo conversation, right? it makes really hard to be informed and make a
collaborative decision for the for the city. So, I think this is probably going to be something that we'll just need to continue to talk about and what works and what doesn't work and what people are finding value in or it's just extra work and let's continue to iterate. I
don't think this is going to be a we did it, we checked the box and now everyone's informed. >> So, >> so would you see this being a bringing a proposal back to council and just kind of go into more detail of the details of what Daniel mentioned or anybody else
that may have to say the format. >> Okay. >> Y in process I guess. All right. Any other comments? None. All those in favor by saying I
vote on >> uh well she had a motion. Start start with that name. >> I >> those all apply by Okay, >> that's approved. >> Jim, we have some discussion.
Um, I guess if I may, not to prolong the the length of the meeting, but if we could keep the discussion fairly brief, but at the same time your questions as well. >> Yeah,
I was wondering if we could get a copy of the contract that was sent out to the first to uh uh or Oklahoma Township that there was with the first responders. We were talked about it. We've never seen it. So, I just wonder if we could get that. >> Yeah. And this was an initial contract
that was presented to them to start working on with them and if they had questions. So, I did print off copies. I'll give them to pass them around here so you guys can have that. Again, this was worked up with fire and perfect monitor group and Dan and Johan to get
the uh numbers and things kind of put in there and then with our lawyer. This was back a couple months after I started in 2024. Um, and then since then it just kind of sat until the beginning of the year when I met with the township and said, "Look
this over. Let's try to work things in here you like, you don't like, so we can have something that would be presentable um to both parties." You know, gave them time to look over. So that's where that Thank you very much for that. Was it any
of this confidential? No, >> the basic contract that was presented to them to kind of review and go over it. And in the front here, I think on the first page under like section one, fire medical services, this was put in here,
this was for them to them and our group to kind of like say these are what we would like to have. So Orco Township would go through and go, okay, we want these services type of thing. So that way we could really narrow the contract down further after we knew what exactly they were looking for.
>> This doesn't actually have a dollar amount because they haven't >> page on page two it >> page two number two and again this amount was uh given to me by our fire chief and training officer. I had met
with them, geez, probably back in April of last year, April, May, um, and had them gather numbers for me and and put in the numbers because obviously that's their world. They know their numbers, their costs, what they're doing, and especially being here only a month or two. Um, so that's what was put in there
based off the numbers they presented with a increase um, year to year. And that was again subject to change. it was just an estimated one that was put in there um versus like a flat rate. So just because depending on how the costs
fluctuate each year for medical supplies and services and whatnot. >> So the numbers here represent the estimated or the actual cost of supplies to provide the services that >> Yeah. So the first one you'll see is the
143. That was their original contract in 2024. Um and then in 2025 it was going to be 28,000 uh that was I think around the cost there um that we had spent on the township to provide services.
>> Yeah. >> Well in I think it was in 23. >> Okay. >> So >> but we were already in 24. So we weren't going to change anything in 24. >> And this is meant to have that conversation, right? >> Yeah. That was the the conversation
starter to see where they're at. >> All right. >> And just present it to them and go, "Okay, look at it, review it, get back to me, >> what you like, don't like." And their big thing was they wanted to, as they explained later on, see the breakdown of costs, and that's where it kind of fell
apart. >> Do you know when this was presented to them? Are they >> January, February time frame? >> Did you hear anything back from them? Yeah, they had wanted information for the breakdown of costs. Okay.
>> And that's when I gathered what I could and then attempted to get information from the fire first responder group and didn't get anything further. >> Okay. Thank you. >> At least not to things I got was already
stuff that was presented and it wasn't what they were asking for. So, Okay. Anything else on that? >> Yeah. Another one was uh I had just we had talked about actually a couple months ago was uh the followup on the
selling of the drain field in River Park and that was just you know as a follow. >> Yeah, we didn't talk about it. I I know we talked about waiting till I get the new con or the new zen codes too. >> Okay. >> Before we which is fine. I mean that that's >> kind of remembering what we did talk
about. >> Um so so a handful of your questions nothing's been decided. >> This is completely in its infancy of discussion. Um
this has pretty much been on the agenda every other month since >> yeah December or so. >> Yeah. Um, and this is about how the conversation has gone. >> We're just keeping it active that it's just >> it's on there as a placeholder so it
doesn't get put to side. So truly nothing has been discussed. There's been no developers that have come forward to stake a claim to it. There's been no official ask of work for our engineer to do this.
So >> you're not the only River Park person that has saw this and was like, "What's going on?" So >> um >> there's been nothing budgeted. >> Yeah. There's nothing >> to need to be budgeted for
>> utilities need in there in the survey and >> and the splitting is a lot wadding >> to kind of echo off that is you know if we were to split it and then Joe can kind of explain maybe to if I'm off but my understanding is we'd have to have
all that infrastructure cost into place which is why I think it was always talked about just selling it to a developer as a whole and then they would be responsible for that cuz we're not set for those infrastructure costs if we start selling them off individually to put in roads and the sewer and all that
extra additional stuff. So, and depending on how the development's laid out, I don't know. So, but I think that comes with the size of the lots and all that other stuff too. So, there's a lot >> basically be the timing of it. What I would like to have is a comments
from Joe because there's a lot of comments and statements being made about developer of River Parks and nothing will ever be done built on it. They can't build on it. And I'd like to have Joe just spend a few minutes and just
talk about to help um make a plane or or a clean playing field here exactly what we can or can't do with it. I'd like to have Joe just speak >> what's there, what we can do, and where we can't. >> Just a little bit of information. Uh
what was there was essentially uh waste waste treatment facility. Uh there was some tanks that collected solids. Uh one uh near the lift station 1A near Ryland's house. In fact, there was a solids tank that
collected solids there and some of the waste water was pumped over to the other site which also had tanks to collect solids and treat waters or treat water through through a process. Ultimately, uh the water was discharged to a drain
field. The drain fields, you know, just a series of drain tile that are extended through a grid pattern through much of that area. Um and the water is dispersed. So solids and uh um contaminants were addressed through
biological process. Solids were collected within the tanks uh and disposed of. When the project came along uh we pumped all the tanks uh removed all the waste water and the solids. Uh then the tanks were collapsed and filled
and buried. um the infrastructure within those tanks like pumps and electrical components uh any buildings on site, chemicals, all those things were removed and disposed at a landfill. Um the drain
fields themselves um were left in place with the exception of the access ports to the drain fields, uh cleanouts, those types of things were removed. Uh and so that's all in in accordance with MPCA guidelines on abandonment of those
facilities. So can the area be developed? Well, it can. Uh good example of houses being built where that has happened um in Cedar Woodlands 3, that condo development. Well, one of those
condos is going to be placed right on what used to be a mound system. Uh Riverbend is another example. that drain field system was on that outlot. >> The system was removed by the developer. The lot was split in two residential houses probably will be constructed in
there pretty shortly. >> They're starting already. >> Um so it can be done. Now there are some things that have to be dealt with within that process. Obviously there are drain tile systems in a grid pattern through a good chunk of it, not all of it. uh and
where those systems are encountered um they would have to be removed where any structures were built. I would recommend that um a geotechnical engineer come in just like they do with every house as they dig the foundations and prep the sites, take a look at the foundation
that the house goes on and approve it. And if there needs to be modifications to that, that that would have to be done. Would I expect there to be any? I really don't. um good sand material. I wouldn't be overly concerned about the
um water that was filtrating through that system. That's a pretty normal process uh that happens. Um we did construct a lift station on the corner of that facility. Uh and that lift station was funded by a clean water
revolving loan fund. And so when you go through that process, you have to do what's called a real property declaration. Uh which essentially places a deed restriction on that uh property. Uh the
deed restriction is important because the state and federal government are giving you money. They don't want you to spend their money on something like the lift station site and then turn around and sell it. Can't do that. Um, so with that in mind and knowing that it was
just a large outlot, we tailored that uh real property decoration and that deed restriction to be just a square at that lift station. I can't remember the dimensions, maybe like 150 foot square. The rest of it is free of the deed restriction and you can develop it. Um,
in terms of developing that property, you know, there are roads around the whole perimeter. There's sanitary sewer and water mane around most of the perimeter. Um the sewer and water services would have to be extended into the lots, you know, so there'd have to be some excavation of streets, but I
think a fairly modest amount. Um, you know, that's a pretty large area. You really should look at how that might be configured. You might even want a feasibility report to kind of lay out some different options and um ideas on how that would be served. Um, even if
you don't intend to sell it yourself, that information would be nice to hand over to the developer and say, "Here are some of the possibilities that we see as viable and what we think the costs are because we know the city's infrastructure better than the developer is going to." And there's concrete costs with that. And so then they can kind of
do the math and um, understand that. The other piece of the puzzle that's changed is storm water. Since the development was built, um, storm water regulations and requirements have ratcheted up quite a bit and, uh, the storm water
infrastructure that is probably in place now probably didn't contemplate houses in that area. It probably contemplated that it would be green space because that's what it has been for the last 25 years. Um so that said, you know, the old drainage ports reports would have to
be reviewed and the new um storm water ordinances and requirements governed by the city's code and the MPDS MPCA uh storm water permits would have to be reviewed. It's possible that um you know
there's some additional storm water enhancements that would be have to be incorporated within that area to address the additional impervious area that essentially would be constructed there through the construction of houses and driveways and things like that. So, you know, you can probably expect some sort
of storm water feature would have to go in there or perhaps smaller features, maybe rainwater gardens, maybe a small pond, maybe some underground storage, maybe a combination of a number of things, but there is going to be a cost associated with that that you have to
kind of contemplate. So, laying out those things at some point might be important. Um, it's certainly developable property. Um, you know, the only restriction really is we stay away from that, you know, that square where the lift station is. The
rest of it's pretty open and clean and easy to service. >> So, it's a pretty valuable property in my estimation. >> So, as far as he's referring to is in the southwest corner of the drain field where the two buildings used to be. That's where the tanks were at and everything. So, >> right where lift station one is is one.
>> Lift station's still there. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. The main lift station. Um >> well we built the big lift station that is lift station. We did not keep any of their existing lift stations. They are all gone. >> So the area you're talking about is the new lift station. The square that the
new lift station sits on. >> Yeah. It's kind of in the corner on the west part of that property. So generally speaking, do when these drain fields get decommissioned, do they stay within that current
development or does it becomes a whole brand new development? So would it be can still be considered river park or would it be a river park too? Like well it would have to be replatted, right? So right now it's an
outlot. Um can't develop an outlot. Um, so you can replplat it and then essentially parcel it out. So, you know, you could and and what you would name that subdivision, I think, is you could name it anything once it's replanted.
>> Referring to also is that because we all signed a River Park covenant when we bought our lots. >> That was 2005. It was a 10-year 10-year covenant to 2015. >> I'd have to look at the exact dates again. Do we have so that property is
that? >> So would that be that property be subject to the covenants is what you're trying >> that's what that's what I'm asking. Yeah, that's an interesting question because >> from what I remember it was due in 2020 2015 but the point and we tried to we
had a meeting 2015 2016 from um homeowners that lived there at the time of developing an HOA >> and that was voted down to have an HOA. So I don't know if that was Jack's plan is an HOA would take over that covenant.
So, usually covenants are recorded against the property. So, they apply to all the properties, right? >> And then the covenants are enforced by an HOA. Um, >> and we have >> that would be normal. So, I would be interested to see if covenants were recorded against that outlot.
>> Theoretically, outlaws aren't developed. So, there wouldn't be a reason to record it against that. >> Um, but it could have been could have been contemplated. I >> I was sitting on planning and zoning or something that was going on and uh check
with that stuff in there just to keep things uniform throughout the development. That was the big reason for any of it. >> Yeah. So, so doing an owners and encumbrance report on that outlot would would say if that was recorded against that
outlot and you know also looking at the covenants the covenants might say that the you know if you read the text it would maybe tell you what they were intended to apply to. Okay. So that's all part of our need to go back to look
at the the books on that we have here to see what we have documented from him when the development was created. >> Yeah. And and just going to the county and seeing what was recorded against property. >> Yeah, but it might have been
>> might might have been. Who knows? >> Is there other conversations about the other drain fields that have been decommissioned? What are we doing with those? I mean >> building a new project that there is which is the cedar woodlands the new one is in a drain field it's
>> there's one by on I mean it's by the park there's not >> yeah they're not going to do anything with that because it's you can't get into it you know >> yeah the ones in Cedar Woodlands were on private property the city had an easement over them so they're privately owned the ones in River Park or
Riverwood Hills are publicly owned they're part of the outlaws the city owns you know a lot of that is park but not all of it and I could see a scenario where at some point um somebody might want to develop a portion of that and
envisioning that we did tailor those real property de declaration to kind of exempt some of those potentially developable areas so that the city had some flexibility moving forward. So we were proactive in that
respect I think. Okay. So, um, Adam, for your questions and and Theresa and everybody lives in River Park, you know, this is some background that you could kind of help disseminate on Facebook to kind of help calm it down a little bit.
>> Sorry that >> what's going on. >> Oh, no. We were I thought you were getting up. >> Oh, I thought you guys >> Oh, no, no, no, no. Thought you were leaving. I was saying goodbye. Okay. Well, thanks Joe. >> Did that answer the majority of the
questions that you asked? Okay. >> A while. Yeah. >> Yeah. Oh, for sure. >> My comments are still stand though. I still think that it'd be in the city's best interest to pay the money for the survey, chop it up, and sell them individually publicly so that you can maximize your proteins. I think that's
what's best for the city and probably was better. It >> was advice. I think it'd be wise for the city to find a way to put it the budget to to survey that and plan it on. >> Yeah, I think that's my way to do it. >> Okay. What's your third item? >> The third item is just the update on the Friends of Got it that's been going on
since what January. I talked with Jason Nilson from my gosh, why am I drawing a blank on the company from the Friends of God Company. Um, they've got all the necessary stuff. Sounds like he's hopeful that they're going to have it done by the end of the month here and have a presentation for
September for council. Bill, >> that was all. I mean, just simple little follow-ups just to keep things going. >> New business. Yeah. of meeting topics. I think this was a letter that
uh Marie was working on or put together and shared with >> on the on um >> PM Oh, Wednesday. >> Yeah. I think the other thing that we talked a little bit about from an employee relations committee is just making sure that we're um having a
timeline for when things need to get done for Rachel and Jason and others who are trying to get everything put together for council packets as well as us having time to read them and and be able to ask some educated questions. So, I think when we started to work
backwards, the thought of having everything to Rachel by Wednesday before that meeting at 1:00 would give us enough time to get it all put together. Um, as well as giving us a couple days for us to actually look at it um, and be
able to ask additional questions if if need be. And I think if there's something that is coming forward that we need to vote on, I think then we'll need to either talk about holding it to the next meeting or having a special meeting for it. I know it's hard for me
personally to look at all the council packets when I don't get enough time to do it. Um, working a job and having kids. So, I think just making sure that we're giving Rachel the ability to enforce that timeline, I think is going to be really important for us to to have
those things. Um, I don't want to be rigid, but I also think that will help us. Making sure that we have all of our ducks in a row so we can make some decisions. >> Well, if you don't draw a line in the sand, it keeps moving. >> Yeah. Wednesday at one.
>> Exactly. Exactly. >> Exactly. >> So, I don't know. Does that is there any issues with minutes? >> So there will be issues with PNZ because generally I think it's nine out of 12
months the PNZ meets Thursday prior to so we wouldn't have any we would have to this point wait another month to present anything that was discussed the week
prior. Now, I I think that it's realistic to um what do we have left? A couple more months of this year. Um and then maybe when we go into assignments
um that PNZ re-evaluate their meeting time and move it forward by a week. I don't know that the skz's individual schedules will allow for a quick change like like in the next few
months to for that meeting. But I think it's something we can talk about again especially if if it's going to be next year, you know, start of next year. Um, and there will be there will just
there will always be um P&Z items um that are going to come in late on this and if they're time sensitive, they have to >> if we have a public hearing, those have got to come that same month what there is. And so those are the things that
that come forward that >> I would add that if it's something that you need to add to consent agenda like minutes from meetings. Yeah. >> It is just not a problem to get it >> sure >> after Wednesday at 100 p.m. anything with motions, anything with resolutions,
ordinances that need to be in and done. If it's just something thatformational that we put on consent, I I can work with you. I know in the past um I had sent Jason a message going, "Hey, I'm going to have something for the agenda
from PNZ, but I don't know what it is yet." So, we try and get it to him as fast as possible, but you know, things get uh delayed on my end and he couldn't get to some of that stuff. So, I think that that might be our only issue with
that, but I I would hope that the committee would be respectful of that, especially if we can delay that for until we can make our schedules work. >> The way you describe it, it's 75% of the time,
>> you know, nine out of 12 months. >> Yeah. I mean, so that's >> something that PNC should look at maybe maybe bumping their their meeting back to the first week of the month instead of >> that's what we're we're taking a look at doing, but it's just working with everybody's schedule to make sure we'll get there and we have a facility to go
to too >> trying to do it for next month or might be a little bit trickier even but I know that we will revisit all of that at the beginning of the year when we give out our assignments again. and we can talk about
it now so everybody's aware of it and figure out what their schedules are and what's going on. We might be able to move it earlier, but I I just foresee that being one of the only issues that I could see is
um if we can't move it this year with everybody else's schedules, we're already struggling to get enough >> volunteers. Do we have open spots for PNZ Adam if you wanted to apply? >> That's been an ongoing topic for several
years. >> Yeah. >> To move it back. >> Yeah. >> From our committee's decision, keep it there. So >> from our point from staff, I mean, yeah, forward or backwards, either one is going to be beneficial. There's nothing else on Thursday nights uh as far as the
city meetings are typically concerned. And we have in the past tried to accommodate the best we can. We know there's a public hearing or something, we try to put it there, but it really does put that strain on us on Friday to try and get things put on at the last
minute and then we end up with multiple versions of an agenda and there can cause confusion and we just want to eliminate that. So >> I totally respect that >> beneficial to change it. >> Absolutely. uh
being a part of B&Z, we've got the backstory, right? And so I guess it uh maybe we haven't appreciated the the time commitment that everybody else that's not on PNC is now having to review this
a lot faster than they should. So I think we'll we can discuss it. We'll bring it up. >> The stress I don't know, >> Daniel at the onset of the shared drive, it might be very useful, too, because as soon as your meeting's done, you can put it on and look at it even if I get a
taken step. >> Yeah. >> And maybe if there's timesensitive things, that's maybe where we can >> But I can I can at least um when we get our agenda, would it help be helpful to say, "Hey, we're having uh we're going to be having a motion here and here. Can
you hold a time or a spot on PNZ?" Would it be easier to remove it from the agenda? cancelled then. >> Okay. >> Yeah, because I think she did it on this one too because we had the two that were going to be on there, the three
>> and the two got cancelled, but you know, you knew it because you published it to be able to be done. So, you know, it's coming. >> So, we can we'll >> we will help out as best we can. Yeah. And I think that moving the time is ultimately the best solution.
>> All right. Uh, last item. A Paul had a comment. >> Yeah, I was kind of curious about the foyer request last fall, last December. See, Jason says it or that the
that the resident retracted it, but I but I haven't seen a letter on it. So, that's why I'd like to see a letter on it if I can. I can send you an email. >> Appreciate it.
I personally >> right. Uh, next item is a flood repair. Um, Joe has a letter and quotes and touch base handles. Joe, >> yeah, we opened bids for the uh 2024
flood damage uh repairs on August 8th. If you remember, those flood damage repairs uh address three areas. uh one underneath the uh access road under to Lake Shady from under the West Front Road in front I 52. We had some flood
damage there. And then immediately downstream of the uh northbound TH52 bridge, we had some um riverbank erosion between two riffle structures and adjacent to the driveway access that we think is pretty critical to protect. Uh
and then in Alice Park, we've got some washing of a uh uh of the portage way or the the pedestrian access down there that we wanted to correct that were uh caused by the flood. And those three areas we
think need attention by a contractor. So, we kind of combined those. Uh we solicited or prepared construction plans, specifications, and bidding documents and solicited bids. Uh we opened bids on August 8th. We received or we solicited bids from um eight
contractors. We don't have to publicly advertise this because it's a small project under $175,000. So we solicited quotes from people that do this work in our area. Uh we got two responses. Uh the low bidder was
excavating with a total bid of $32,383. [Music] Um, the second bidder was Griffin Construction. They were about $355 higher. Um, and if you look at the cost,
um, the low bidder was about $1,500 underneath my estimate. So, excellent bids, I thought. Um, and, uh, the recommendation is to award it to Excavating again for that $32,383. Uh, note that these are unit price
contracts. It's not a lump sum contract. So, if they use more or less quantity than we're estimating, they get paid for it. Um, I don't typically see big swings in those costs though, maybe 5 10% at most. Um, and I would also note that
this cost uh is 75% reimburseable through uh Minnesota HM uh because it was uh you know through the state disaster recovery account. So, um, we do this work, we get reimbursed
for that work in addition to the work that Kane and and his group put in to repair, you know, River River Park and Orno Park and and Garden Park and some of the other areas in town along with the materials that they purchased to do
that. So, once this work is done, we'll combine that into one uh reimbursement request. Kane and I will with Jason's help and submit that and we should get funding reimbursement hopefully by the end of the year or so.
>> How long is it going to take for him to do? >> Well, right now we are waiting for a DNR permit. The DNR permit uh hopefully will go out on public comment for 10 days. So that means that we'll probably get the permit in about midepptember.
Uh and then he will do the work. Um the permit's only for the area three, I think. So he can do the other two areas >> restoration. >> Yeah. >> The other areas um he can he'll do pretty quickly. I I expect all the work will be done by
>> um Thanksgiving. >> This one we have to make payment on first before we get the we give the one. Okay. So you briefly touched on the overages are potential in here, but those are reimburseable as well. Correct.
>> Yeah, it's an actual cost thing that you know we'll submit the actual cost. We'll prepare a pay request just like we do with all these projects and you will see what every item cost, >> right? >> Uh and more importantly, uh the state will see that too and then they'll write
the check. uh and and in the past we've had to have gone through this process three times I think in the past uh and it's been sometimes with FEMA and the state but it's been they're they're fair to work with
>> better with HSM versus FEMA >> for sure >> for sure. So I make a motion we approve the bid from Otman excavating. >> I'll second it. >> Uh and that the 25%
city fee or the city portion that be paid through parks and trails which is account 100-45120. And there's a couple accounts that we can divvy up the difference within the parks and trails budget.
Paul seconded. Yeah. And that'll be reimbursed back to parks and trail. That'll be reimbursed back to parks and trails then. >> No, you're so we $8,000,000 $95 is what we have to pay. >> 25%.
>> Okay. >> Any other comments? All in favor signify by saying I. >> I approve. Um so consent agenda of the city administer report
consent agenda. >> Do I make a motion we approve the consent agenda? >> Uh I've got a couple that I want to put in. >> I'll second it. uh which is the employee relations committee and >> identify the number
>> page 85 whatever I think >> age 80 >> 85 >> um it's under age comes out >> yeah
and then the other one uh I have with um uh for League of Associates LMC and that's on page 103 and that would be under M's financials. >> Let's um pull out pull out LMC
worker. >> Yeah, >> let's just pull that item out. Thanks. >> I'd like to pull up item number three on the employee relations committee. >> Uh a little description.
>> Is that in H as well? >> H >> I think that's covered in H. >> H that's on the minutes. >> So we just pulled the whole thing out. The other question that I have that was normally in our consent agenda is a revenue and expense report that we used
to get every month that went back into the committees. So, we had a way to look back and see what what each individual department was spending and where it is for budget for the year. >> Yeah, we put that in there. I had it submitted here. We will I'll get that sent out. I don't know why it's not in
here, but it was one that was it was in there in the practice. There's Yeah, we'll get it sent out. Okay. >> Yeah. I just I think that that's good that we missed a few months on that. We have no way to know what's going on, but thank you for that. >> All I have
and League of Minnesota is this. >> That's the one I just Okay. >> That's the one I want. Y >> I might sneak out if I need a good night. >> Thanks, guys. Night.
>> All right. So, um we have a motion to accept or approve consent agenda with the exception of H items H and LMC works comp under M. All in favor signify by saying I >> I
>> post approved. So let's go back and h want to do a couple things relations committee. >> Yeah. I just was looking with with um
>> number 83 um on the when you had the last meeting that there was you made under number three or C uh you had turned around and and made some changes in there especially with um
uh 1.03 scope language. Uh if we'd approved this with the the policy book, that should come back to council, I think, to make the changes that there are with council. >> Okay. >> We're still working on it. We're actually having conversations with LMC
about what is constituted as a volunteer. So, um we've made the changes, but it hasn't been implemented. The policy still stands as written, originally approved. So we have more work to figure out what is constitutes a
volunteer and what part of those personnel policies they need to adhere to. Well, there's still more work. >> Okay. No, that was Thank you for that. I do appreciate that. So I guess one thing I see on page 83,
we'd uh change the personnel policy from having one having uh the day after Thanksgiving off to uh change it to indigenous people's day by we already approved the policy but how can the how can staff
actually come and change the policy? without council approval. >> We can bring it forward. >> That hasn't happened. So, we can bring it forward. >> Yeah, let's bring it forward. >> Well, and one of and one of my points of changing that holiday is
that that holiday is a 4-hour holiday. If I change it back to a Monday, that'd be an eight hour holiday. >> Well, again, I think we need to bring it back and vote on it. So, >> that was shipped. That's my >> Yeah, the other one that there was I was
just wondering why we were having past dues back into the next one which is for um the workman's comp for us to be again pass by 14,799 >> page on 108 or 103. I know we were asked to on some credit
cards and a bunch of other stuff too. >> So your question is what do and have a notice of cancellation. I mean, that's it shouldn't get to that point. I don't think >> his expiration date that effective date
was 5:25 and we're now at at 89. >> Date of mailing was the 28th. That's of this one. If you look at the effective date when it took effect for this one was on 525 of 2025. So you're looking at the date of this,
but you're not looking at the date of when we should have probably originally first paid for it, which would have been in May. >> Well, no, it wouldn't have been in May. payment due 20 days after 725, >> but this is after you get the notice of
the past due from the way I was looking at it. Okay. So, the original, if you look at the date where it says the effective date, okay, >> is 5:25. So, we probably should have had a bill that was was sent to us to be due at
that time to be on the effective date. >> Yeah. So this would have been during the switchover transition time of when we would have gotten the bill would have been during a switchover transition time of our financial systems. So we've been but in constant communication with them. They're well aware of what was happening
and what's going on >> and they were fine with that. So >> has been asking question. This is something this goes back to. If these questions arise before, feel free to reach out and communicate with us. We
get these answered. >> Was there any penalty fee at all? >> Um, is that it? Okay. Super. Hope everybody like that process a little bit better. Um, motion to second. I didn't think you were going to ask.
>> Don't knock me out one for the door. >> Last one. All >> in favor signify by saying I >> I need meeting at 8:00 p.m. 8.0000. figure out why
you get on