Call the meeting to order. All rise for the pledge of >> allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and the to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and
justice for all. Roll call. All members are present. Approval of the agenda. We have one change. Uh we will be taking 7H off of the agenda.
Is there any other changes? Council have anything? Okay. Do I have a motion to approve the agenda with that change? >> Motion to approve. I'll second >> motion by Joe, second by Heidi. >> Call the question. All those in favor
signify by saying I. >> I. Opposed. Motion carries. Five in favor, none against. Approval of the minutes of the March 18th, 2026 regular meeting. You all receive them in your packet. Is there any corrections or
changes needed to within those minutes? I just had one verification. There was the discussion and I'm trying to find it here quick in regards to the author's edition plot two and I had in my notes Joe and you correct me if I'm
wrong but did you abstain or did you he opposition >> yeah typically abstain from >> okay I I don't know I had written down oppose so that was my only question >> oh perfect >> that's all I had
>> I think I even reversed That's >> Yeah, you abstained. >> Okay. >> Any other questions or concerns? Hearing nothing. Do I have a motion to approve the minutes of March 18th? >> So move.
>> Motion by Brad. Do I have a second? >> Second. >> Second by Scott. >> Call the question. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. Opposed. Motion carries. Five in favor, none against. This brings us to our public open forum. Is there anyone
here that would like to speak to the council? Is there anyone here that would like to speak to the council? Is there anyone here that would like to speak to the council? Our public open forum is now closed. We
have no public hearings. We'll move on to reports and presentations. EDA report. Vicki. So the EDA met today regular session uh at noon. Uh they had very few items on their agenda. They did receive the report from the chamber of commerce and
sock center opportunities. Uh they passed on a counter offer for author's edition lot sale. That is why it was taken off the agenda for tonight. What that was was we received an offer and we countered it and then they countered us back. So uh and so then they they
decided not to not to take that and then also they reviewed the progress on author's second edition and also they discussed we were requested to ask act as a fiduciary for the community center committee and the EDA passed on acting as a fiduciary as well on that. So so no
action items from them tonight. >> Okay, questions. Okay, then we will move on to the feasibility report. Trunk Highway 71 phase improvements. >> Okay. Good evening, mayor and council.
Um, switch our graphics here. All right. Good. Uh, so this is the the public hearing for the first phase of our Tranquay 71 project. Not the public hearing. This is for you. Presentation for you. Um, so we've gone through this
uh a lot of a number of times already, looked at a number of these projects, specific portions of these projects. Um, so everything is pretty much what we've discussed in the past. I don't think there's anything new that will be in here. You've all had uh received the the reports, got all the detailed figures in
there. uh I can maybe in the interest of respecting your time how how much detail you'd like me to get into in the in the presentation with this we can we can make it a little bit quicker if you'd like. If you have some specific areas you want to stop and talk about we could
do that kind of as well. So just so that you're uh so that you know anyway this is the feasibility report presentation. This is our project area as you can see here is uh quite you know spread out. It's not like our one of our normal projects where we might have uh
everything sort of congruent to each other, but there's little pieces all over as evidence by this. It is sitting sideways, so north is to the to the left in this particular picture here. I'll go through on on we have each of
the segments is shown here. We have C street, nine and a half street shown here. Basically, there's new sewer and water on Cass Street uh all the way up uh the one side water goes all the way from from Getty Street to Maine. Sewer doesn't quite go all the way because the
last lot on is connected to Getty. Uh we do have a little bit of storm sewer at the intersection. Now, some of those are some details yet um that as we get into plans if we decide to move forward, such as that storm sewer, right, that's right there. It's possible we might pull that
out and leave that actually part of the of the trunk 71 phase two portion of the project. Kind of depends on how we can connect things up. It's right at the intersection. So, they could make those connections, but so we'll have to make some final determinations as to what
phase this may end up going in. The cost necessarily wouldn't change. It's a question of kind of what it would be done uh when it makes the most sense for things to be done. But I do have it shown in through here. Um we do have as I've talked about by splitting these we'll have to make temporary connections
as example here the sewer and the water will have to be connected to the existing sewer and water main street and then once the uh once the phase two comes through uh if you can see take this with it's better if I point I can
use laser but I'm it sort of disappears on these things. So the future is this over here as an example on C street for this for the sanitary sewer. So we'll be connecting here now but in the future this would be the run where it would connect to. So there'd be a connection
and then with the phase two we'd pick that up and tear the manual out and continue on with it. So those kind of how similar things with water we'll have to connect to the water future we'll be connecting again to the new water as it goes through. So that's pretty much the same on all of them at the connections
of Maine. So I won't continue to go through that, but that's what'll have to happen on all through all of those. Nine and a half street. Once again, we come down all the way from 71 in the future. This is uh where the sewer comes down through here and comes this direction.
This is in the alley through here. Couple of stubs here. It comes down and connects uh connects in down in through here at essentially this uh this driveway. what it really is here and water through here. New curb and gutter throughout through these uh a cast
street has um has sidewalk on the north side of the road with this one. Uh a street south and seventh street south. A street south is up here. There's just water on that one. There's also a storm sewer connection that would have to be done connected temporarily
and then once again connected throughout Seventh Street down here. There's once again there's new Santa sewer. This there's sanitary that goes up through the alley through here as well up to this location. This actually feeds this home right right here. Uh the dank parcel storm sewer comes up through here
as well and it goes all the way up to seventh uh sixth street. Actually crosses and goes a little bit into the alley on the other side, the north side of Sixth Street. This connection here would come out. There's nothing here to connect to it at the moment. We would end up temporarily having to come back and connect in the
storm sewer that comes through here. Eventually, that would be all be replaced and it would come back out through here because uh because we don't really want it come back through here anymore. This is actually deeper. This is one of the areas where we actually would have water that would sort of backfall in that in this uh storm sewer
system until phase two comes through. And there's really nothing. We'll look at it in more detail in design, but I don't think there's anything we can do about it in the two-phaseed approach, unfortunately. Um, okay. Oops, I forgot there's Oh, I'm sorry. This is the
Oh, sorry. That's nothing I need there. Uh, Sixth Street South, Fifth Street South, uh, Fifth Street South here on the bottom. It's just the new the street. This is the portion that we took out of the 2025 project. We have uh walk on both sides of the roadway. We do have
a kind of a split width street that we discussed here with a 40 foot street and through here and back to a 36ft street and through this other half. So that's what's in through through there. Sixth street south is uh a 36 foot wide street
and it goes between Main Street and Getty. We do have our water. We have storm excuse me sanitary that's half the block and this is that rest of that storm sewer that comes through the alley and to the north of uh north side of sixth street and we do have sidewalk on
the south side of six street south through here uh second street south this is the whole thing is second street south this is from the west end at oak street we do have that that wider struct se section through here which is in front of uh Frederick's uh auto through here or I
guess maybe it's a side street through there. It gets wider as we come from west to east. We do have I wouldn't necessarily call it sidewalk, but sort of walk that's it's all concrete through here. We do have walk that's in front of the uh the residence that's on the on the corner there at Oak. And we also
then have sidewalk on the north side. As you come across the uh 71 to the east side, we once again then come back to a 36 foot wide street. We have walk that's on both sides of the road through here from pine to birch. Same things all
reconstruct. Uh and we have uh sidewalk on both sides of the road. The red is the storm sewer that you can see through here. Uh the green is sanitary and water that's all replaced everything down to birch. And then continuing on,
this is just a patch where we'd be putting storm sewer through that comes all the way down and into ultimately a ponding area that's at the very end of Second Street South at the east end. This inlay shows if we we're going across the river now. So this is the
little segment of Lake Street North that has to be connected. It's got a little segment of sander, sewer, water, and a small um storm cons uh section as well. This is another one that potentially could get moved to phase two when we look at details and how it's going to
play in with the next phase of the project. Um Second Street North, Second Street North, uh we have Main Street on the on the east, excuse me, on the left side over here coming down to Pine. This once again is a reconstruct through here. We
have larger storm sewer that comes off of uh 71 through here. This is carrying 71 water as well. We have sanitary sewer. We have water. We have sidewalks on both sides. That is our standard 36 foot wide street through there. As we come past Pine, this is the rest of it
coming down to about halfway between Pine and Birch. Our storm sewer then comes down and comes into a ponding area which is on another section you'll see. And we also then disconnect and reconnect this storm sewer that's coming off of Birch back into excuse me into
that into that ponding area. And we'll have another slide of that ponding there in just a minute. Linton Lane going to the north. Uh this is the one where we have that 32 foot wide roadway. Um we just have water through through here and we moved it to to the north a little bit
as we discussed. We have that turnaround for emergency vehicles at the end. We don't have enough to do a like a hammerhead turnaround at the far end. So, this puts us this is city property. So, it's within our our property in order to do that. So, it fits out fits
uh quite well in through there. The bottom starts our our bypass roadway. This is from west end going to the east. Uh so, this is the water treatment plants driveway through here currently. So, we would turn it so it comes in more of a 90 degrees to to this roadway.
continues uh through here. This is a rural section through here. So, this is uh two driving lanes, a shoulder, and a little bit of gravel shoulder on each side as we come through. I'll continue on with that. Uh the next is this one up here. Kind of winds a little bit through
here. This is a lot of flood plane back in through this area. Uh we do have wetlands as well through here. This is tip of a wetland. We actually just kind of thread this road right through where we can go with staying out of the flood plane, staying out of the wetlands.
There is a storm sewer, fairly large storm sewer uh crossing uh right in this location. Connects back into morning view on the far I guess I'll call it the south and east end of the of the project. This is one that shows the storm surond
between First and Second Street North. What it would look like through here. We've got a little bit of a burm in the middle. That's where water would actually flow over that portion. And we actually have a water mane that comes through here still to the to the well that's on the south side of First Street, First Street South or First
Street North, sorry. New connection across First Street and new pipe that goes across and empties into that ditch that's along the south side of First Street North. This is goes back to that alley between seventh and sixth. So once again, this is that sanitary in that storm sur comes
all the way up through that alley and goes just a little bit north of Sixth Street south through there. Uh go to a street. A street is a full reconstruct all the way to the end. We are showing currently a full culde-sac on the end. That is something we'll
discuss. We've talked about whether we could do something smaller, maybe just a hammerhead turnaround, something on that end as a way maybe to reduce some costs and also reduce some of we would need some easements in this area from from property owners. This property owner as well as the school district owns a
couple of small parcels in here. So, this will be something we'll be having to discuss with them and perhaps we do something different as to what that turnaround really needs to be in that particular area. But uh for our purposes now and I wanted to sort of have the worst case scenario, we showed a larger
culde-sac. It would fit in here. So it could be it is doable if we want to go this route. The storm sewer, the red is a storm sewer. That's the connection for Ash Street at Ash Street where we just did the 2025. Continues on to the the east, comes up, connects in, actually
follows the existing line through here. So that's exactly what's there now. just a smaller much smaller pipe and an easement that comes through here. So water comes all the way to the end sewer through here. One thing to note is it's there isn't a lot of rightway through here. This is similar to a street on the
other side. We can get in a just get in a 33 foot roadway is all we can fit in there and that's what's shown through here. Um, so we can discuss as we get into design if we want to narrow that slightly, maybe a 32 or something, if we
want to have sidewalk or excuse me, parking perhaps only in one side of the road through here. But that's a that's something we'll have to have a little more discussion as we get into design as to what the council would like to see in this area. And it's just this block where we have that issue with with the
rightway. Everything else from East Street to the other side is is fine. We have our standard 66 foot rideway through there. So, um, that's what we have. We have sidewalk on the north side of the road on Ace, which is a a connection to what is on the other side of Ash Street. We do have a crossing
here as we connect in to go down for the school along through the school connects into their system over here. So, that's what's proposed for the sidewalk for those areas. And lastly is just the very end as it goes through the school and discharges into the flood plane on the
far east end. With that, I'm just showing a couple pictures. You've seen some of these before of what kind of water man this PUC would be paying for these things, what the utility looks like, what the what the water side and the sanitary sewer. Uh these are kind of typical of
what some of the sewer uh sew sewer and water services would look like for homes. uh what storm sewer construction kind of looks like through there. And this are street widths. We have a kind of some different things here. We have labeled all the streets up here.
Our existing widths vary from 30 to 45 ft wide throughout the project. The proposed widths are basically we have 36 foot face to face except which there's a fair number of exceptions. Nine and a half street is 32 feet which is about
what it is right now. Seventh Street is 28 feet on the west end. So that's like from the alley going to the west going up to Getty. And we talked about not having parking in there because we just don't have room. Uh fifth street is 36.
It varies from 36 to 40 ft. Uh second street south varies from the widest end is 44.67 feet and that's kind of from Oak to to Maine. Lynon is at 32 feet. We discussed 8th Street South is at 33 feet. we discussed between Ash and East
Street and as I mentioned the bypass is actually has a 30-foot total paved top which is two driving lanes 4 foot shoulders on either side so it's 22 feet of driving 111 4 foot and 4 foot on either side is paved and then there's additional two feet of gravel on either
side of that as well. So those are the street widths. Uh the cross-sections be our standards for most of it would be our eighth 8 inch aggregate base, 2inch base course, inch and a half a wearing course except second street from oak to pine uh which would be 3-inch aggregate
base and a 3-in base uh excuse me supposed to be 8 inch aggregate base. Sorry about that. 3-inch base course and an inch and a half of wearing course and through there. So, it's a little more stout for the traffic that we get through those those areas.
The assessments, it might be easier to see hopefully what you have in your what you have in your park your your packet, but total project costs are just a little over $7.2 million. Um, you can see we have streets are about 2.2
million, about 650 for the bypass roadway. There's about 670 in lateral center sewer. A little over 1 million in lateral water main sew services. Sewer services are about 103,000. Water services 108,000. Some water
service for a commercial is a little more expensive 5200. So there's only one of those. Uh storm sewer is 434,000. Commercial 302,000. Some storm sewer that is deferred that's actually related to phase two is what I have in there. So
that's 1.4 4 million. So the purpose of that is it's then not included in the assessments for these portions at this point. Uh and then the concrete walk is $232,000. So the assessment rates are listed over here. Uh services example are like 2,000
to $2,300 which is pretty close to what we've been seeing. They've been right around $2,000 generally for sewer and water. I think 2025 project was I want to say like maybe it was 1900 or 1,800. So there's a little it's gone up a
little bit from what what I'm estimating for these. Um concrete walk is about 11 bucks a square foot. So our total breakdown our percentages 55 and a half city 24% for PUC and assessments are
about 20% of this uh about so about $4 million for city costs 1.7 for PUC and about 1.5 uh for total assessments. There are 93 total parcels to be assessed with this project. So that's
where we're where we're at. So with that I'll end and I'll ask if there's any questions questions you go back to that assessment summary just that last slide you had the concrete walk the assessible percentage
at 35%. The individual um assessments for each one of these here you had it at 100% was assessed to the property owner. So, which one are we? >> Uh, yeah, that is that should be the the
walk. The walk we're doing 100% correct, Vicki, if I recall. I believe that's that that I think is just a error on my I noticed that discrepancy. So, I want clarification on that. >> Yep.
>> I think I was copying and pasting and I forgot to change it. So, apologize for that. Anyone else have any questions? >> I have a few questions. >> Y >> um in reference to the to the pricing and and to the project cost as a whole. I
know you broke it down in percentages and costs, but I'm going to the the back page where you actually have broken down the cost based on development, easements, design. It looks
like there's about $1.7 million that's outside of just construction. 1.2 million that is just administrative type of costs >> which is I think roughly 17% which is seems like a exuberant number.
And then there's also 560,000 or 557 of contingencies. Contingent for what? Those are for things at this especially at this stage of game if there's things that come up that that we're not anticipating at this particular moment. Normally I have those
in the 5 to 10% range. I've kept this on the higher side for this one. That doesn't mean those get if we don't use those that means the numbers come down obviously in terms of what's being assessed. But for now, I have those in there for contingencies as to things
that might be outside of what we've observed at this point in time. Something that comes up in design, something that could even come up in construction that we're not aware of at this point in time. So that's what the purpose of those. I understand that. But, excuse me. When you look at the
assessments, the estimated ones that are across the next 30 pages or whatever you got there, 20, those assessments on an average are 15 to $20,000 a lot. That's a lot of money. >> It it it is. Yes.
>> And I mean, I think I saw just a very handful that were less than $10,000. and the majority of them 16 to 20. I I'm just beside myself on what these
costs that we are anticipating on assessing to people for this project. I don't know how we're ever going to be able to sell that. That's just my opinion. >> Okay. Um you got more? No. >> Okay. I you keep on storm water. You
you're talking temporary hookups all the time. Now, if Highway 71 plan wasn't even in the books and we were going to do this, is there a difference between a permanent hookup or a temporary if there is no 71?
You know, that's what I'm trying to figure out. Is there a cost difference? >> We we'd still have to make Well, what would happen is we have to connect to it and then the next time around someone's got to make that connection again. They got to tear out that structure they're connecting to and then continue on.
There's always a cost for that removal and that connection. So there's going to be essentially an additional if it was all being done at one point in time, you wouldn't have that. You would only have the removal say of the pipe, removal of the structures one time as opposed to
doing it and then every time I connect to something, there's always a cost for that to make that connection. And we wouldn't have that if it was all part of one project. So every time we're doing a so I I'll be connecting to an example on
say a sanitary sewer. I'm connecting to the existing uh storm or excuse me the existing manhole is there. Well eventually that manhole is going to go away. You got to connect to that pipe. So, we're going to only pay for removing that manhole one time, which is fine, but we'll end up paying for connecting
to that manhole and then connecting to that pipe again in connect. The first time we'll connect to that manhole. The second time we'll have to connect to that pipe again to to to make it all one piece, if you will.
So, there's where there's extra. Every time you connect to something, touch something again, there's always a a cost for that. >> Okay. So, when they do 71 the following year, if we don't if we just hook it up as if they're not even part of this, the
storm storm sewer is going to be our cost. >> Storm sewer will be our cost. Yeah. And and >> water and sewer. I know about >> and in the storm we'll be paying as they we'll be paying for our percentage of that moving forward. We have haven't
shared with us their final design. They haven't shared with us those breakdowns. We should be paying a percentage of that. If they're going to make us pay for 100% of those those connects, I wouldn't think they would do that. I can't guarantee that at the moment. It
seems like we should be paying our share of all those costs. Whatever that cost is, we should pay our share, whatever percentage that might be. But >> okay, >> the other question I got is that stretch of storm sewer from Ash Street through
the school property all the way out to the river. >> Mhm. >> Do we need to actually do that with this now? Or is there too too much water going to be going through on that pipe for it to handle it until we decide
we want to do it five, six years from now? Well, that would be we won't have capacity. The question will be if how Mindot will look at their water discharge from 71 if
they don't have the capacity all the way. It it opens up a nice discussion with them obviously which >> the main reason why I asked that question is because everything we know where all the water's coming from on both sides of 71 now and we fixed pretty much any problem we are had underneath
the vioduct and up on Getty Street. So we know where all that water is coming from. So if it's handling it now why do we need to replace it from ash out to the river just because 71's coming through? I I don't think the water's going to be that much difference.
>> Well, I would say visually we've done so things are we're seeing it better. We're not seeing the the flooding like we've seen in the past. From an analysis perspective, from a 10-year storm event, it does we don't have that capacity to get from there out.
>> Yeah, >> that's what I would be looking at. I know that's what they will be looking at >> because right now whenever we have a heavy summer if any water's in the vioduct or anywhere else it's gone within a half hour to an hour. So it isn't like it's
even if we have that one in 50 year one you know >> to me it's the system we got is in place and can handle it. So I don't even know if it needs to be on the docket but that's I'm my opinion. Well, certainly
those are discussions that we can have with mind as we get into those designs, right? Um, but you know, I I I would have to say at this point in time, we'd have to assume we're going to do it at least for now. we could put that portion
sort of on pause and kind of see how the discussions play out and see if it is something that we could delay, >> you know, and not not not actively work on that portion of it. I mean, that could be something we certainly could do. Um, but we'll have to see. But, you
know, they'll, you know, I'm I'm quite sure their analysis is going to reflect what I'm saying as well, that we don't have the capacity going through there. Um, and yes, it's much better than what it was, but it's not going to meet their design
criteria. So, you know, it'll it'll it'll be a discussion. >> All right. >> Has we ever had water in the uh catch basin, so to speak, right there at that intersection behind Thompson's house. Have we ever had Thompson?
>> Yeah. Have you ever seen water in there? I guess I don't know that I've ever seen water in it, but >> it gets soft. it gets wet. >> But that's what that's designed to take on the right. >> And if we've I mean I'm kind of following what you're saying. I don't know that we have a major problem other
than I'm am concerned about our storm water going underneath a existing property up there on >> you know I mean on by ash but um because in following from what Warren's saying on page eight you made note on here that we will have uh we'll likely include a
backup of storm water in the interim due to the current elevations meaning we're likely to have problems. So we're talking event >> we're talking on seven at seventh street. So yeah, >> if if we had a significant event between the time it was installed and the time
it was ultimately connected in 2028, we could have some backup through there. I wouldn't anticipate anything serious from what we what we see now through there. But, you know, I just wanted to make sure that you were aware that it's not it wouldn't be designed to totally
flow out because of we just don't have elevations >> through there. So, it's it's kind of a temporary situation. >> The way I'm seeing this is it's basically is yeah, the system can handle it because there isn't going to be any more tar than there already is. Maybe a
little bit, but not to the point that it's going to blow manhole covers off and everything like that. is strictly an engineering design along with mind dot design that's pushing the issue. It isn't a problem we have.
>> Well, we used to design you way back. It's been 10 plus years now, but everything was designed for a fiveyear storm event. Now, it's a 10-year storm event. So, we don't, you know, we do the analysis. And to get back to the pond situation, the question, I personally
haven't seen water in there. I can tell you by doing the modeling, there's actually not a lot of water that goes in through there in the 100 year. And part of it is the way it's the way it's configured. It just it just doesn't I don't think it works quite maybe as it
was originally thought of. >> It used to until we went and put all the water down for into the fourth street storm sword when we fixed that up there and caught it before it got to the vioaduct. >> Yeah. probably when it built up a little bit more under under the under the
vioaduct that probably more of it went in there. But as it's designed as where things are going now, we don't it doesn't get that much. I think that thing I'm going from memory here, but I don't think it gets much more than like 2 feet deep in a 100redyear event through there. Isn't it isn't it isn't
great. >> Hasn't come close to that. So >> yeah, >> you know, >> and then if I could follow up, Warren had also he made comment about can we do it, you know, do we do certain pieces parts of it or or not? And the other
thing that I want to say is you're talking about how we have to pay to have it installed temporary and then as you mentioned Warren, pay it a second time. Are we kind of ahead of the game? would it? And and this sounds crazy, but why
would we not maybe wait and only do it one time after 71 is in and then use their costs and us connect to that rather than us do it first and then have to do it a second time. I'm just throwing it out there. I'm trying to >> It's the word temporary that bothers me
when we're talking street connections. I'm just trying to figure out when is the best timing to take on one seven more million dollars worth of cost, but also to um not add costs to a project if it's not 100% necessary. Some of these
projects have to be done. Don't get me wrong, we have we don't have anything over the the river at one point, but you know what I mean. There's parts of it that I can totally understand, but I'm just I'm questioning some of the double costing. >> Yeah. Yeah. Not that money means something.
Obviously, those connections are not a huge portion of the total dollars, but they are dollars. You know, there's probably 20 connections in there, several thousand dollars each, you know. So, we're talking probably at least 50 60ome
thousand dollars of costs that we wouldn't have if it was all done at once. The one the only thing situation to what Brad was saying is we could probably do it at the same time they're doing 71, but that say 6 million or
whatever is going to end up on what we we're going to pay for our share. So that whatever that number is, you're going to add that to it and so it's not going to go away. So, how much of this added all of these
added projects that we're doing? I mean, we've been, you know, creating this this tax fund for a long time. Um, and trying to hope we can do it even longer u if if our legislation allows it. But I mean,
are we able to take some of those costs and maybe this is a Vicki question. Are we going to be able to take some of those costs to help offset some of these assessments, some of these huge huge expenses? So, the if you look at the costs on
their the uh the city costs, a lot of those will be covered proposed to be covered by the sales tax dollars. The special assessments that you have in front of you are calculated by our current special assessment policy >> exactly how it's written today. If we
want to modify that policy, if we want to apply tax dollars to any of those, if we want to change percentages, that's that was something the city council can do. Um, we changed the policy recently from 50 to 35% to be assessed. And is
that still a good number? I don't know. uh is the council interested in establishing some type of cap based on value of property? You know, that's something we can look at. So, the assessments you see in front of you are just simply out of our special
assessment policy applied to this specific project and that's why you see that number. We didn't want to start putting out numbers and not have a justification or a base for it. um looking at the sales tax like that storm sewer and those kinds of things that
will cover a lot of those costs. So the goal is to not have to levy for this project. >> So I don't know this might be something that um you want to kick over to the finance committee during this process just to kind of look at what those
numbers would look like as applied to this process. And the same with the assessment policy and that's something certainly you have the option to do >> when you mentioned Warren that it in in the future then be be cost to the city that is also something that we could
maybe consider to ease the heartburn of these special assessments. >> Well I know there's a few cities out there I can't name think of one right now but they basically got rid of the assessment policies. it just automatically goes on their tax roles.
So whether you're if you're on the south end and we do one on the north end, you're going to be your taxes are going to go up. It's going to be a citywide tax increase. >> It's just a levy to service the bond debt for the
>> rather than assess the property owner so much. It goes on the tax roles and everybody pays for it. Whether you ever drive on that street in your life, it's you're going to pay for it. Well, that would have been what what would have happened had we not had this property or our local option sales tax increase,
right? >> The Well, that wouldn't affect the assessments, but >> bonded. Yeah. >> If we if we were to do a bond that had a levy component, yes. >> And if we got rid of assessments, that would just be a higher levy component.
>> Yeah. What what's the uh current cap and the proposed cap for this sales tax that we're going to have for legislation? Just refresh my memory. This was 10 million. We're going to go to 20, right? >> 10 million is where it's at right now. >> And then the proposal is for a $20 million cap with a new right
>> legislation that would go to vote. >> But that would be for both phase one and phase two. >> Correct. That'll pay for >> both costs. Do we have an estimate of what our cost would be for the phase 271 project at all? Any ball? I did some calculations based on the
most ones recent ones that Keith gave this project and that project and um the interest on the bond. I think we were going to be around 16 million at this point >> combined. >> Yeah. >> But we don't know yet whether we're
going to get that correct approval. >> Yeah. Plus, even if the legislature passes it, it has to go to the city vote in November. And if they say no, then >> and then stays a tenant. >> So, >> yeah, we got we're stuck and then we got
to figure out where the rest of that money's coming from if they vote it down. >> Then it's assessed and levied. >> Huh? >> Now it's assessed and levied, right? >> Well, that's about it. >> There's no other way. >> They're right. Yeah. They create their own destiny. So, um, any other
questions? >> No. >> Okay. Thank you, Keith. We'll move on to action items. 7A, approve, resolution 2026-21, receiving the physibility report and
calling for a public hearing on improvement of trunk highway 71 phase 1. She's getting everything shut off. >> Okay, this is the feasibility report based on what we just received tonight. Uh what what happens next is we would
call for a public hearing on the improvement and then we would have notices out to all of the residences that are in the affected area. after that public hearing then if they move to go forward then we would order those um
final plans and specs and then go out to bid after that. So what's before tonight is to receive the report and call the hearing on the improvement because of the advertising that we need to do for the hearing. We can't do it at the next meeting. So, I proposed either the May
May 6th meeting or what did I put the other one in there for the um >> April 29th? >> April 29th, the week before. >> So, basically, by taking this step, we are saying we're going to move forward with this phase one and continue on.
>> Means we're going to have a hearing with the public to decide if we're going to >> So, we're going to present to them the cost that we just reviewed basically. >> Right. Okay. Okay. Questions or comments? Otherwise, I'll look for a motion to approve resolution
2026-21. I'll make the motion to receive the report. Call for public hearing. Uh proposed date. I think we need to go with a special meeting because that be pretty uh >> yeah, if we did it in a regular meeting. >> So, the April 29th. proposed April 29th
>> at 5:30 >> at 5:30 for the special heating. >> Okay, we have a motion by Joe. Do I have a second? >> I'll second it. Any other discussion? I'll call the question. All those in
favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> I. Opposed. >> I. >> Motion carries. Four in favor, one against. 7B. approved direct voting agreement with Sterns County. >> So Sterns County has requested an
agreement with the city for providing early voting for both the primary and the general election in 2026. Citizens within the city limits can uh will be able to vote up to seven days before each election, not including Sunday. So they'll be able to come in on Saturday as well. The agreement outlines the
duties of the county, the duties of the city. In exchange providing the service, the city will be reimbursed $827.50 50 cents for each each election. And I did attach the agreement for your review. This is basically the same agreement that we did two years ago with the county. And so we're looking to
approve the agreement with Sterns County for early voting >> comments. Does that cover any of our costs? Really? >> $827. Just curious. >> Well, during the day we got someone in the office, but Saturday is Yeah, I don't know. Does that cover our cost
totally? Well, what we do is we all cover it with existing staff because their existing staff members are also election judges. And then Saturday I work because I'm on salary. So, >> so and then we'll have one other person work on Saturday as well. So,
>> I'm not a >> it's early morning. >> I guess >> they do have options to go elsewhere if we decide not to. >> Actually, the county just kind of volunt you know. We don't really get a choice. >> They just tell us. Yeah. >> So,
>> so if we deny it, they're going to make us do it anyway. >> This is just an agreement outlining it. But yeah, if uh if we don't approve it, they still as the county can tell us that we have to provide the service. It actually works out pretty good for people to be honest with you. So, and
the one thing that's going to change, I believe, not 100%, but I'm thinking now they have to they used to have to come in and fill out an absentee ballot application in order to early vote, and now they're changing it. So, we'll be able to just print out their sticker, put it on the form, and sign it and go.
So, that's that's what it sounds like it's >> I'm one that's always believed that election day is election day, not a week prior or two weeks prior and whenever it's convenient for you. So, >> well, we did get it from 15 days down to seven. >> Yeah.
>> So, better. >> I just don't like the idea that the countyy's telling us what we have to be open. It's It's kind of like, yeah, go ahead, do it, but if you don't, we're going to slap your hand.
So, what's the council's wishes? >> I'll make a motion to approve the agreement. I think it's a benefit to the community for those that use it, I guess. Not that I >> I'll second. >> Second by Joel.
>> Any other discussion? Call the question. And all those in favor signify by saying I. >> Opposed I. >> Motion carries. Three in favor, two against. >> Who was the two? I wasn't >> Scott and myself.
>> 7 C approve appointment of seasonal employees, park and streets. >> So public works supervisor Ben Clink has requested the appointment of the following returning summer seasonal appointments along with the addition of Perry and Molly Engle to the campground. So we have Carter Klein Schmidt, Dwayne
Wletkco, and Patrick Gonzalez coming back to help in the parks and the streets department. And then Mark and Kathy Whitman, and Perry and Molly Angel will be in the campground. So that's our seasonal appointments for this year. The only one that's new is Polly or Perry and Molly Angel. We're looking to
approve the summer seasonal appointments as presented. >> Okay, questions, concerns? Otherwise, do I have a motion to approve the summer seasonal appointments? Motion to approve. >> Motion by Heidi. Do I have a second? >> Second.
>> Second by Joe. >> Any other discussion? Call the question. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. >> Opposed. Motion carries. Five in favor. None against. 7D. Approve resolution 2026-22
Minnesota flag. >> So the city has the option on whether or not to fly the Minnesota state flag. Uh the 1983 flag is continued to be flown at city hall and at other city locations. Uh the city council can formalize this practice by resolution. The attached resolution formalizes the
intent of the city council of sock center that it will not fly the official Minnesota flag which is the newer version adopted in 94. And I do have the language in front of you is resolution 2026-22 that says, "Buarring any unknown state of Minnesota statutory requirement, the
Stock Center City Council has decided until further notice of a statutory change or further a vote of the people of Minnesota on this matter that it will not be flying or displaying the official Minnesota state flag in the city offices or city council chamber, nor upon any of the flag polls controlled and maintained
by the city of Sock Center." So, as I said, that's resolution 2026-22. >> Questions, comments? >> There is no state law saying we got to fly the state flag at any time, no matter which one it is. >> No, there is not.
>> We've been flying the old one. >> So, >> has anybody had any community members reach out asking us why we're flying the old one versus the new one and stuff? and who's who's choice or who's making that decision. I've had somebody just one. That's the reason why I had this
brought up to because that way it's not putting the one that's on the mayor or the city administrator if we vote as a resolution whether to or not. That way people can't question who's making that decision. It's the council then.
>> So were they concerned we're flying the old flag versus the new flag or they want one versus the other? I've had more comments about the old one being good. Yeah, I have too. But I've had who I've had somebody and I'm not going to mention these, but >> who makes that decision of what flag we
fly >> and instead of putting the onus on an individual this way, it's a resolution and it's in the city record that it's the council's choice of which we're going to fly. So, is the decision we're going to continue to fly the old one and not the
new one, or we just fly fly a Minnesota flag at all? >> It's the most the resolution is opting not to fly the official Minnesota state flag, which in my opinion isn't official. >> Was never voted on. >> Never was voted on to be the official
anyway. >> So, >> it's kind of moot point to me because I'll come straight out and say it. We'll just won't fly that. We won't fly any safe flag if it goes the wrong direction on this vote.
>> You know, if we're not going to fly the the one that's up there now and and someone wants the goes that way, we just take it down. We won't fly it at all because we don't we're not required to.
Well, yeah, we're not required to, but >> would that be a decision then again the council would have to make together >> to not fly it? Because then by by doing that, you know, Scott's purpose of putting this on the agenda is to not put onestess on one person, but kind of just
said he'd like to own this discussion with that >> decision. >> He he didn't he didn't think that Vicki and I had broad enough shoulders to handle it. So that's the reason why it happened. But >> this is coming to a lot of council's discussions. So,
>> yeah. Right. But we also know where they're going with it. So, >> it's not with the new one. >> As of right now, I I mean, obviously, I don't co-pilot how much you can rely on that. There's 12 cities and four counties that have opted out, right,
>> is what it is. >> Yeah. >> Of the new one. I mean, the process was the process through a democratically elected legislature and they used their process to choose the new flag. I don't know if we're why we're making a controversial topic to the city that,
you know, now raises the issue that we really could have just avoided, >> but I specifically had somebody come up and ask me that question. That's the reason why I brought it up so that it is official. >> And that's our stance. You can vote against her. You can do whatever you want. I But I'm going to make a motion
that we approve res that resolution 202622 opting not to fly the official Minnesota state plague. Okay, we got a motion. Do we have a second? I'll second it.
Any other discussion? >> I will just I will just comment that the unspoken discussion piece of this is putting a partisan vote based on the public climate that this flag flies around. And I don't think that's fair to
a nonpartisan council. True. >> I guess I would also say if we are not flying the new flag, we're also not saying we're flying the old flag. What are we flying?
>> We don't need to. >> So, we're saying we're either flying nothing or we're flying the old flag. Is that what you're saying? >> Correct. I think that's >> pretty much what it is. Yep.
I don't have personally I don't have a problem with the old flag. Again, I just think that it's not something that should be attached to a partisan decision. >> And we're not forced today, right, to fly any flag, either flag either.
>> Is that correct? >> Correct. >> So, if we're not forced today, are we just creating our own problem? I'm just asking by posing the question. >> I don't know if it it's creating a
problem. The thing is is it's more like Heidi said, it's making it a partisan because if you vote one way, it's going to show which side you're on and if you vote the other way, it's going to show the other side or, you know,
>> I I wouldn't agree with that. >> I would agree with that. >> That's a it's a partisan thing. >> It's a partisan issue. Yes. But I don't think it's going to necessarily say which side of the aisle we file on. It just may just be you don't say, "Well, we're not going to take a position that says we're strictly not flying the new flag."
>> Right. >> Any other comments? Otherwise, we got a motion in a second. We'll go to a vote and call the question. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Opposed. I
>> abstensions I >> Heidi did you >> I did vote yes >> you did okay I didn't hear you I'm sorry so motion carries three in favor one against one abstension
approve resolution 2026-23 accepting DNR grant >> so the city through its fire department applied for a $2,500 matching grant through DNR assistance the firefighters program to assist with the purchase of pagers and radios. We've been notified the grant has been approved for funding.
So, what in front of you is resolution 2026-23 accepting the grant and authorizing execution of the grant documents. >> Questions, concerns? Do I have a motion to approve resolution 2026-23? >> So move.
>> Motion by Brad. Do I have a second? >> I'll second. >> Second by Heidi. Call the question. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> I. Opposed. Abstensions. >> I. >> Motion carries. Three in favor. None
against. Two abstensions. 7F. Approve Arbor Day declaration. So, Arbor Day 2026 falls on Friday, April 24th. As part of the tree city initiative and to maintain tree city status, the mayor shall annually
proclaim that date as Arbor Day and it encourages residents to celebrate Arbor Day to protect trees and woodlands and to plant a tree on this date. So, I do have the official proclamation in your packet for our Tree City USA. And I'm requesting that the city approve that Arbor Day proclamation for April 24th,
2026. questions, concerns. Do I have a motion to approve Arbor Day? >> Motion to approve. >> Motion by Scott, seconded by Joe. Is that okay? >> Yep, that's fine. >> Call the question. All those in favor,
75 is saying I >> I opposed. Extensions. Motion carries. Five in favor, none against. 7G. Next steps, Old Mill Apartments. >> So, the time has passed. that was granted to the owner of the Old Mill Apartments to provide the city with a
plan for the apartments to make the necessary repairs to restore it for human habitation. He has not come forward with a plan and as if as but as of this date but he has been offering it for sale. I have tried to reach out to him. He has not called me back. His voicemail is full. So I'm not sure what
his intention is at this point. Uh there's some options that the city has. You can grant the owner more time. You can move forward with condemnation. We can purchase the property and demolish it. I also called the county on the tax forfeite. If we allowed it just to sit and go tax forfeit, it would forfeit in
29. We offered for sale in 2030. Uh and in the meantime, the county would, you know, once they get it in 29, they would secure the building, of course. But they said likely not demolish it. They would try to sell it as it is. So, um that's a fourth option that you have on your list. So, I'm just looking to see which
direction you want to point me into so I can I can kind of get your get your feeling of what you want to do. I could come back with some more costs on what some of these things might cost, but I didn't want to go too far without having that conversation with you about what
you want me to do next. >> Okay. Questions, concerns? Would the second second option of moving forward with the con condemnation proceedings, would that eventually lead to or just prolong that
tax forfeite process? >> It wouldn't it wouldn't uh do anything about the tax forfeite because it's likely he would not pay his taxes, >> right? >> Uh moving forward with condemnation would be the legal fees through the court system to get the court to order that he demolish the building. >> Okay?
>> And then whether he does it or not, you know, or if we have to step in and do it and then put it on his t Usually what happens in that is the city then hires the contractor, pays for the work and then assesses it to taxes and then it goes tax forfeit. >> So, you know, we're kind of either way
probably going to have some >> outlay. >> Okay. >> But I could come back with more timing and cost attributable to each of these. Um maybe I can I I'll still try to get hold of him via certified mail at this point and see what
>> But if we go along with the condemnation proceedings, any cost to the city can be applied to the property. Right. >> Right. >> Okay. Because the first option granting more time I think that's not even he's
had plenty of time. Um and purchase the prop property and demolish it. I don't think we're want to get into that mess yet. They all done unless the EDA's got a lot of money that I don't know. But they can do it or get a development
grant or whatever like that. But um my I'm leaning toward just moving with the condemnation proceedings and put him on notice and start passing the bills on to him for any of it.
I would feel that's our best position personally as well. I think >> I concur. >> Okay. >> Potentially is, but I think we still need to know what those costs are. And so, well, we're laying out for legal costs and you know, if we end up getting it paying for the demolition, I mean, and we're in the same boat and if it
goes to forfeiter, yeah, we can assess it, but if it forfeits to the county and the county can't sell it for what our costs are, we're not going to recoup those. Correct. I mean, we can't assume, you know, pass those on to the next property owner who buys it from the county forfeite or anything, right?
>> What what will happen is um the county when they get it back, then within six months, they have to offer it for sale, but they have to first offer it for sale for the assessed property value according to the county assessor. And then if it doesn't sell, then 30 days later, then they can start
offering it for sale for the balance of back taxes. And I I believe that includes the assessments as well. And then if it doesn't sell, then they would likely sell it for less, but their starting point is to pay everybody off.
>> So they can't pass sell pay it off. And so let's just say we got 150 on it. Somebody who's willing to pay 100 later, we we're out 50 grand then, right? >> Yeah. So, I think we need to know what those numbers are because at that point, you know, before we pay legal fees, this
same demolition cost, whether we condemn it and pay those legal fees and stuff or he sells it to us for a buck and we demolish it, we come out ahead the other way. Think we need numbers. >> True. But the cost can
the cost to for us for let's say we do end up uh moving forward condemnation. We get it. You just mentioned it and uh then we have to tear it down obviously or do something with it um or require him to tear it down and
then it comes back to the county. The county then has the responsibility to pay for those costs before the city would have to pay for those costs >> for tearing it down. >> Yeah, >> I talked to the county and they said they would likely not tear it down right away. >> They let it let it sit >> no matter what.
>> They just they said they would secure the building to keep people from going into it. >> But that's more a forefeer standpoint if we didn't condemn and demolish it, right? >> Because otherwise it just goes there and ends up there in 2030. >> Because when we did when we condemned those what is it six houses? Yeah,
>> you know, all the cost of demolition went against the the lot, right? Yes. >> I know this is a lot larger building and the price is going to be a lot more, but we had absolutely no issues selling those lots once that house was gone
that I remember. >> Didn't the county like they forfeited it back to the city and so the cost was on us, but then we got to recoup the ex by by selling those lots, >> right? We we actually are the ones that tore down the houses. >> Yes. We got the owners all signed
waiverss. So they owned the property. We tore the house down. So basically fronted the money tearing the house down, put it on the taxes, got reimbursed over years of special assessments from those lots is how that worked. So
>> So we they ended up with six houses that needed to be gone and we came out even pretty much. >> Yeah. Yeah, we we got our money back on this. >> We got our money back, but it took some time to do it. It doesn't hurt to get the cost. I'm certain right >> I'll just lay out the various scenarios
and how much it would each cost that, >> you know, I just didn't want to do all that if I came in and you absolutely were not going to do this one or that one. >> So, okay, I can do that. And things might change because after this meeting gets publicized and he finds out we grab what we're
leaning at, he might change his mind and come with a different offer. So okay and 7H was scratched. We will now move on to unfinished business. Senate sales tax committee. So the the tax K
committee confir convened on Thursday March 26th and at its hearing they reviewed the request for an amendment to the sock center local tax. I went down and provided testimony on behalf of the city at the hearing. So once they vote on this this this committee of the senate and the passage of a com
companion bill in the house which we haven't had that committee meeting yet then the bill will go before both chambers for approval followed by signature of the governor. So once passed, then a question would be placed on our ballot in November of 2026 for approval of the citizens. And if that passes, then we'll pass an ordinance
enacting the tax and amending the tax at the state revenue department. So what's in front of us right now is we have $10 million that we are allowed to collect. And this bill um puts it at $20 million up to up to $20 million. If it's the 16
or the 15 or the 14, whatever we that would be the cap, but it's just up to that amount. And so that's kind of where we are right now. Um when I went down there, um Alexandria, the city of Alexandria and Douglas County also had local tax proposals. So there was three
of us and Tory Westerm was there that we all had that discussion. So uh it's I think there's 30 in the entire state that are requesting either a new tax or an amendment to an existing tax. So that's kind of where kind of how we balance. I think when we enacted it
there was 26 cities that were requesting. It's kind of similar. There's been a there's been a mortorium for a couple years. I really expected more but there wasn't. So, it's justformational at this point. I'll let you know whenever the house convenes their committee and go back down there
again and give it another shot and then we'll see what happens. >> Mickey, how much have we collected so far on the 10? >> We're just about four million. >> Four. Okay. And we just started spending it down by paying for the the projects that we're working on phase one and
phase two. >> I know the main reason why we even did that was because of the pure fact. That way anybody that visits sock center is paying for that role rather than just the taxpayers of sock center. >> That's right. >> So that's the reason why I said they create their own destiny. if it makes it
to where it goes on the ballot and they vote it down. Well, >> they're just >> then don't complain about the taxes being skyhigh. >> Um, author's second edition infrastructure timeline. >> Just kind of we're looking at the EDA.
We had had the design work is being done. It's underway. It could potentially be available for review by the council next meeting on April 15th. So, that's up to Keith to see how quickly he can get that finished. If that project moves forward, build bidding could occur in May. would allow completion over the summer months. So
later in the depending on the contractor when they can fit it in this kind of a small project for contractors and it's a wide open wide open field. There's no other infrastructure or temporary services or anything they need to happen. So we're pretty confident we'll be able to get a contractor in here to to put it put it together. Um they kind
of looked through through some funding and how we could make it make it work, but until I have actual numbers, you know, it's kind of hard to say for sure. So hopefully we'll have a design here for approval to uh go out for bid. No public hearing required because it's
assessing ourselves. >> Any questions on that? Otherwise, we'll move into new business. Uh park shared exterior quotes. >> Yes, I have just 9 is all different public works quotes that were in
project. you know, during the budget process and the capital improvement process, we just went through and I said, I just want to update you to make sure that you're aware that these are going on, we had the roof siding, uh the park shed, which is in the campground at the entrance to the campground. That's been on the schedule to get basically reskinned. Um the bulk fueling system,
which is between the city and the PUC, we talked about that at budget, so we get fuel down at there. Um the tool cat in the capital improvement plan, we talked about the Suck Center parking lot, so we're kind of getting some estimates about what that would cost. And then also the ephus on the side of the building around city hall. You know
how it's all coming off and peeling off. Um we did have a contractor out and he looked at it and he said, "I see hail all over this thing." So I turned it into insurance and see what happened. So we'll see where that goes. So just kind of some some quotes and bids you'll be seeing coming up in the next meetings to consider.
>> Is the toolkat in bad shape? Um it's at the point of ours where it's starting to see some wear and but it's still valuable enough we get a really good trade. So I I had Ben uh tell them to get get the quote and the government discount and the trade so we get that
before us to see what it really would look like. >> It's kind of like a nickel and dime thing that's dinging us under budget too. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Any other questions about those
items? Okay, we'll move on to our consent agenda. You received a new one on your t on the table in front of you. Schedule of claims, unpaid claims of $95,61625, paid claims of $1,120
for a total of $96,736.25. Uh, we have resolution 2026-25 accepting contributions of $16855 from the men's card playing group to be allocated to the senior center, $900 from the Cold Spring Fire Department to
be allocated to fire our fire department and $100 from the Sock Center CVB to be allocated to the fire department. And on behalf of the city and the council, I want to thank those groups for their contributions. Is there any questions
about the consent calendar as presented? >> Do I have a motion to approve the consent calendar? >> So move. >> Motion by Brad. Do I have a second? >> A second. >> Second by Heidi. Last minute discussion.
Call a question. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I oppose. Abstensions. Motion carries. Five in favor, none against. Informationational items. >> A couple things. Weather and awareness week is coming up. Monday, April 13th is
about weather alerts and warnings. Tuesday the 14th, severe storms, lightning, and hail. Wednesday the 15th, floods. Thursday the 16th, tornadoes. And the sirens will go off at 1:45 and 6:45, so people are aware of that. And Friday is extreme heat. And if you go on
to the Minnesota Department of Public Safety website, there's all kinds of tools. A lot of people use it for their children in schools and even just with public information to make people aware of the weather awareness. A reminder, local board of equalization is Monday, April 6th at 1 p.m. here at city hall.
Uh do you have your Spectrum channel lineup, which didn't get in the packet, I guess. And then also the citywide cleanup day is May 13th. the p the you do have the flyer in for the hazardous part. That's what Sterns County comes in and takes all the paints and poisons, but then we'll also have the metal bring
your dishwashers and things like that at the same time. And uh we're still working on that on what they can all pick up and take away. There's a couple other options people talked about. Do we take mattresses? Do we take tires? Do we take e-waste? So those are all things we try to work out, but we also want an outlet without cost. So we'll see how
that goes. But in the meantime, this is the uh they'll do another one in the fall. I think they would do it in August, but this is the spring one for Wednesday, May 13th. >> Okay. Questions about any of those? I just have one. Uh I take it Monday.
Who's going to be? We need a We need a quorum. >> I will be here. I will not be able to make it. >> Okay. And I will be >> I should be here. >> You're going to be >> I am not sure if I'm going to be in this order yet, but I should know tomorrow. >> Okay. All right. I just as long as we got a quorum. Yep. >> Because if we don't have a quorum, then
it goes to the county and we lose our right to have it. So, >> y >> I would make it work if I had to. >> Okay, sounds good. >> That brings us to the end of our agenda. Do I have a motion to adjurnn? >> Motion to adjurnn. >> Motion by Heidi. Do I have a second? >> Second.
>> Second by Scott. >> Call the question. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. >> I. Opposed. Motion carries. Five in favor, none against. Meeting adjourned.