Evening and welcome to the regular city council meeting for the city of St. Peter, Minnesota. It is Monday, February 9th, 2026 at 7:01 p.m. We are called to order. Would all please rise for the pledge.
I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Um, everybody should have received a
copy of the agenda in our packet. Are there any revisions or corrections to the agenda? Hearing none, is there a motion to approve the agenda as distributed? >> Second. All those in favor of approval say I. I. Any opposed? The agenda is approved. Uh, next up, approval of the
minutes. The minutes appear on pages six through nine of the packet. Are there any revisions or corrections to the minutes? Hearing none, is there a motion to approve the minutes as distributed? >> All those in favor of approval say I. >> I. Any opposed? The minutes are
approved. As always, we have time on our agenda for visitor comments. Um, are there any visitors tonight who'd like to address the comment the council on any agenda item? Hearing none, we also have general
visitor comments. Is there any guest who'd like to address the council on items not on the agenda? Hearing none, we will move on to the approval of the consent agenda. The consent agenda begins with a memo on page 10 of the packet and concludes with
the resolution that appears on page uh 14. The consent agenda tonight includes um let's see a temporary 32 on sale beer license for the Knights of Columbus at the location and date listed within the
packet. The following purchase will be approved. Hoffman and Magnamera of Hastings, Minnesota for a variety of trees at the price and funding source listed within the packet as well as the schedule of dispersements for January 23rd, 2026 through February 5th, 2026.
Is there any discussion of any item on the consent agenda? >> Hearing no discussion, is there a motion to approve the resolution? >> Second. >> We have a motion and a second. Call the role, please. >> Council member Devos, >> I. >> Mayor Noel, >> I.
>> Council member Pettis, >> I. >> Council member Ram, >> I. >> Council member Weisenfeld, >> I. >> Council member Sharstrom, >> I. >> The resolution is approved. We have no items of unfinished business tonight. So, we will move on to our first item of new business, which is the descertification of TA tax increment
financing district 1-15 and 1-22. >> Mayor members, this is one memo and information that was put together by your financial adviser through David Drownen Associates, Shannon Sweeney. You're familiar with Shannon. He's helped us on numerous issues of this type and for bond issuances. Um, this
includes really two resolutions, separate resolutions for two tax increment districts that we're recommending that be certified or descertified. The first one is -15. And most folks would know that as the Washington Terrace subdivision. And so
by descertification, which is required under the rules, any excess dollars that were accumulated by the district then get distributed back to the county and redistributed to the appropriate taxing jurisdictions by the county auditor. Um the same thing we're looking for for -12
and that's um for folks that might be newer to the community, that is what we commonly call the Mary's Flowers Tax Increment District. And so that is the location that was really on Highway 169 and Elm Street in that area. Um, so that's the district that was included
there. I'm happy to answer any questions that you might have. This is part of the requirements related to tax increment law within the state of Minnesota when we either reach the end of the timeline that's provided for as a part of the tiff agreement in the state statute or the funding mechanism is completed. In
this instance, both of these have the funding mechanisms are completed. In other words, enough tax has been paid to cover the increments that were promised as a part of the overall agreement which was issued in some instances about 15 and in one instance a little bit over 20 years ago. The first item um or
resolution is included in your packet on page 17 and that's for 1-15 which is that Washington terrace district. >> Uh Darl, >> with these parcels basically coming back onto the tax roles again, I realize they've been paying taxes and everything. What will that do for our
levy? >> Well, so um it won't technically do anything for your levy. However, it will change your tax rate in the future. >> And so this puts essentially more property on the overall tax role. So generally it will decrease the tax rate
that you have by increasing the tax capacity. And so that would be the case for both of these. any dollars that are in excess, as I mentioned earlier, um are then put back into the county and they redistribute to the appropriate taxing jurisdiction. So, there'll be some cash that comes in to the city and the county and the school district. It
goes well as a part of these. >> Thank you. >> Any additional questions? >> I liked the throwback reference to Mary's Flowers. That was great for those of us who >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Mary hasn't been there for a while, but yeah, at the time that it was
set up, that's Yeah, that was a prominent business on the corner there. >> Sure was. >> Uh, hearing no further discussion, we're going to consider um a motion to approve the resolution approving the descertification of tax increment financing district number 1-15 of the
city of St. Peter that appears on page 17 of the packet. Is there a motion to approve? >> Second. >> We have a motion and a second. Call the role, please. >> Mayor Noel, >> I. Council member Pettis. >> Hi. >> Council member Ramp. >> Hi. >> Council member Weisenfeld. >> Hi. >> Council member Sharstrom.
>> Hi. >> Council member DVOS. >> Hi. >> The resolution is approved. Any discussion before we move on to the next resolution on page 18. The resolution approving the descertification of tax increment financing district number 1-22 of the city of St. Peter. Is there a
motion to approve? >> Second. >> We have a motion and a second. Call the RO, please. >> Council member Pettis. >> I. >> Council member Ram. I, >> Council Member Wisenfeld. >> Hi, >> Council Member Sharstrom. >> I, >> Council Member Devos, >> I, >> Mayor Noel.
>> I, the resolution is approved. Next up, tax increment financing district 1-10, parcel removal of excess increments. >> So, mayor and members, this is what we would commonly know would be commonly known as the Nicollet Meadows Tax Increment Financing District. And this
is slightly different than the first two actions we recommended. This is removing parcels from that district. So if you think about it like a map, it's kind of taken shrinking the map a little bit related to the number of parcels that continue to be in the district. While it's not based on boundaries, it's based
on finances. Those parcels that are no longer contributing to the district are being removed from the district and going back on the tax roles as they would normally be. So again, all these properties are paying taxes just like everyone else is, but some of those dollars are sequestered for certain
uses, including development of infrastructure and other things. This is reducing the number of parcels that is in there because they no longer financially contribute to the district. They are maxed out so to speak. Um so the resolution here is included on your packet and that's why you see all those
parcel numbers on page 20 um within the resolution. So it's a number of parcels. Um this district has really worked in the way that it should and you should expect that within a few years we'll be back for a descertification of the entire district.
>> Any questions for Todd? Brad, uh, >> do you just have a ballpark figure uh, of uh, how much is actually going back onto the, uh, onto the regular tax base >> from this one? >> Well, this one or the other two? Any idea what the, you know, the overall just
>> give me just a second. Let me think here. So, this um removing these parcels on this district, which is the Niclip Meadows District, really pushes probably between 75 and $95,000 back onto the tax roles.
>> No, I Sorry, sorry, I meant the market value of whether you had an idea of what the market value >> Oh. Um, >> just curious. If you don't, that's fine. >> Drop a drop a rate basically. So, oh, drop drop the tax rate. So, I would expect this will drop the tax rate by at
least a half a percent. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. That well, that's what I was getting at is is, you know, we've got we've got quite a bit here that's, you know, coming off a tiff and going back onto the >> So, if your tax rate is approximately 51 point something, it would go down to
50ish point something just based on this one alone. um with the others you should expect a bigger impact because of the values that are associated there. >> That's kind of what I was looking at with this was that we were looking at fairly large. >> Well, and that kind of leads into the question I was going to ask Todd for
people who are watching at home and don't know what TIFF is. Can you do a quick overview of TIF for people? >> Yeah. So, um let's assume that this is a parcel of land and right now it's taxed at about $1,000. When we build something on it, now it's
taxed at about $11,000 because the increase of value and certainly the recorder is worth a lot more money than just the land is. So now it's taxed at $11,000. The increment is the 10. Under state law, there are certain conditions and scenarios that you can really
sequester that increment for very specific uses. Um there are three or four different kinds of tax increment finance districts. So they vary by the type of of district related to how long it can be in place and what it's allowed to be used for. But generally it's allowed to be used by the city and by
developers to build infrastructure or parking lot or put in a water man or do those types of things. Um so that's really how it fits together. Um we watch these very carefully. The state requires reporting on a yearly basis. And so this is the the actions really tonight are
based on the findings as a part of those yearly reports and ensuring that we're in compliance with the rules >> and tax increment financing. It's for a limited term for not in perpetuity. Yeah. >> Yep. It's for a limited time or a limited dollar amount, whichever comes
first. >> All right. I'm not seeing any hands come up. So, the resolution removing parcels from tax increment financing district number 1-10 of the city of St. Peter is on pages 20 through 21 of the packet. Is there a motion to approve? >> So moved. >> Second.
>> We have a motion and a second to call the role, please. >> Council member Ram. >> I. >> Council member Weisenfeld. >> I. >> Council member Sharstrom. >> Hi. >> Council member DVOS. >> Hi. >> Mayor Noel. >> I. >> Council member Pettis. >> I. >> The resolution is approved. Next up,
Minnesota Department of Health Source Water Protection Grant. And Pete is here to talk to us about that. >> Madame Mayor and City Council, your water superintendent, Curtis Thompson, has been very busy trying to obtain grant funding to keep up our
nitrate reduction strategy, uh, improve our sustainability within our drinking water supply management area. Most of this area is agricultural land that is west of St. Peter. Um, as you guys know, we've talked about this multiple times. I know Daryl and Curtis are actively
involved with one watershed, one plan. That's another attempt for us to try to reduce nitrates and volumes of water. Uh, this source grant uh became available uh as we met with both the Minnesota Department of Health and Minnesota Rural Water. Uh they're very
aware of the sensitivity of our area west of St. Peter where we recharge our Jordan aquifer and uh they have made available $15,000 so that we can use best management practices within that area. Uh Nichollet County Board of Soil
and Water would uh administer the grant for us. They have our they are partners that have the connections with the farming community. Uh they're trusted from that point. Uh it's not that Curtis isn't trusted. It's just that it would take him a long time to establish the
relationships that uh Kevin and uh Mr. Hanishloagger have for us. And so what we're asking you tonight is to accept the grant from the Minnesota Department of Health in the amount of $15,000. >> Any questions or discussion or anything Todd would like to add?
>> I have no >> All right. Hearing no discussion, the resolution accepting a source water protection grant from the Minnesota Department of Health in the amount of $15,000 appears on page 24 of the packet. Is there a motion to approve? >> So moved. Second. >> We have a motion and a second. Call the
role, please. >> Council member Weisenfeld. >> I. >> Council member Sharstrom. >> Hi. >> Council member DVOS. >> I. >> Mayor Noel. >> I. >> Council member Pettis. >> Hi. >> Council member Ram. >> I. >> The resolution is approved. Uh, moving on. acceptance of a state grant and
purchase of solar array. >> Madam mayor and city council, um you probably have heard a little bit about this. I just wanted to get this on record and have you accept the funds from the Minnesota Solar on Public
Buildings Grant. uh and also work with um staff to apply for a 30% tax rebate and also have uh authorized installation of a 39.9 KW solar array at the new city
hall location. Um we've talked about it, Jason Lee, uh your electric superintendent has been very active pursuing this grant. One of our sustainability goals was to install renewables along the line whenever we have the opportunity since we have
purchased the city hall property. Uh some area came open that would uh indicate that we want to participate with renewables. How this process works is that um we made application to the state um which paid for or allows for
70% of the funds of the project to be covered by the grant. The remaining 30% would be covered by us applying to the federal government for a rebate of the additional 30% funds. And those are broken down in the memo. Uh you can see
in the second paragraph there. Um the goal then would be that we have 100% funding for $144,180. Um with that, what we would propose to do then is work with Solar Connections. They are the company that built our
facility at the wastewater facility. Um they have been the lowest responsible quoter from that point that supplies information related to our goals and how we're doing things. And uh they are willing to make things happen and get things going this year with the idea that we would meet the eligibility
requirements and be able to submit for reimbursement for all of those funds by the end of 2026. Um, there's a resolution on page 27 that takes care of all of those issues and I'm open for questions.
>> Questions for Pete? Brad. >> Um, I think this project actually is a great example of a having plans uh ready to go and then also uh council participation and other organizations. Um the city there staff were already had
a plan in place to put a solar array up at the city at the new city hall and we were still going to get the 30% credit or 70% was going to be out of pocket. Um and then with uh council participation in uh the climate cities coalition we became aware we we became aware of the
solar and public buildings going outside the Excel area. So because we had those plan in place, staff was able to pivot quickly uh to apply for the grant which had to be they announced in not August and had to be applied for by November. So staff did a great job of pivoting to
take advantage of this opportunity. >> Thank you Brad. >> Any further discussion? This is a really exciting opportunity. So thanks so much Pete and staff for uh making this come together. Uh the
>> few items on the agenda all possible. >> Uh the resolution accepting grant funds from the state of Minnesota buildings solar program and authoriza and authorize the purchase of a 39.9 kilowatt solar array from solar connection incount $144,180
is on page 27 of the packet. Is there a motion to approve? >> So moved. >> Second. >> We have a motion and a second. Call the role, please. Council member Sharstrom. >> Hi. >> Council member DVOS. >> Hi. >> Mayor Noel. >> Hi. >> Council member Pettis. >> Hi. >> Council member Ram. >> Hi.
>> Council member Wisenfeld. >> Hi. >> The resolution is approved. And Pete's still here. He's hanging on. We're going to talk about a DNR outdoor recreation grant application. >> Madame Mayor and city council. Very similar to what we did last year. Uh
staff would like to apply for an outdoor recreation grant through the DNR. Uh we did so last year. council was gracious enough to authorize us to seek $250,000 um through the DNR. Uh this is a matching grant and as you know uh
council's already committed the funding for this and we have the $250,000 available to match any grant that we would receive through the DNR. Um our goal with this would be to get an application in by March 31st. uh Angie and Carrie would take the lead on this
and Angie's done very good at getting some of our grants for us. Uh we hope to be awarded the grant by the end of June, which coincides with construction of Gorman Park phase two, um which would be a big boost for us. Um, we do have some hurdles to jump through such as the
historic preservation office doing a review and then get contract signed and the supply information to get the grant funding by the end of the grant applica or the grant um ex expiration. Um, what I'm asking you to do tonight is to
approve the resolution on page 29, which would develop a a resolution that we could send to the DNR that says that the council and the city and the community are interested in uh uh using these grant funds and that we have committed proper monies to make this happen. >> All right. Any questions for Pete or
further discussion? >> Obviously, we've made it priority to get this Gorman Park project done and I appreciate every avenue city staff has looked into to try funding it. All right. Hearing nothing further, the resolution authorizing an application for the 2026 Department of Natural
Resources Outdoor Recreational Grant is on pages 29 through 30 of the packet. Is there a motion to approve? >> So move. Second. >> We have a motion and a second. Call the role, please. >> Council member Devos, >> I. >> Mayor Noel, >> I. >> Council member Pettis, >> I. >> Council member Ram,
>> I. >> Council member Weisenfeld, >> hi. >> Council member Sharstrom, >> I. The resolution is approved. Thanks, Pete. And next up, Southwest Min House Minnesota Housing uh project funds designation. Ben's here to talk to us
about that. >> All right. Thank you, Mayor Noel and members of the council. Um the city has established a housing fund. Um that housing fund supports housing goals including affordable housing, a mixture of housing options, new housing,
rehab, and maintenance. Um, back in June of 2023, um, the council pledged $145,000 towards the new CLT program or community land trust program in Traverse Green, uh, with our partners, Southwest Minnesota Housing Partnership. The
following year, um, the council pledged additional money, $242,000 extra towards that program. So on the bottom of page 31, what that gets uh the city is um five new CLT houses and two
acquisition rehab CLT houses. And then with that additional money, there was also money set aside for two regular uh affordable houses in the Traverse Green um development. Those last two houses um have been constructed along with three of the CLT
houses. And um we got a request from Southwest Minnesota Housing Partnership asking if we could be a little bit flexible with some of this money that was pledged in order to make those two non CLT houses a little bit more marketable and affordable. Um just with
today's construction costs, um they're trying to hit some price points that uh are would make it available for people to afford those. Um we had discussed this at our last workshop meeting. Um and we kind of came up with two options. Um so again, we wouldn't be pledging any
new monies. Uh what we'd be doing is um due to the unknown uh uh availability of some of the homes in um the market in the housing right now. Uh we're not quite sure if we'll be able to actually do the CLT acquisition rehab
houses. So potentially either taking one or two of those um and moving those over and or um there's two CLT houses that haven't been funded yet. um in Traverse Green. We could also use some of the monies from that to help these two non
CLT houses um become more affordable. Um again, this was discussed at our last workshop meeting. So, it would be staff's recommendation to approve the resolution that's attached. >> Are there any questions for Ben or further discussion? As Ben mentioned, we
did discuss that at our last workshop, so we've had a chance to ask questions. All right. Hearing nothing further, the resolution designating funds for upcoming housing projects by Southwest Minnesota Housing Partnership appears on pages 35 through 36 of the packet. Is
there a motion to approve? >> So moved. >> Second. >> We have a motion and a second. Call the role, please. >> Mayor Noel. >> I. >> Council member Pettis. >> I. >> Council member Ram. >> I. >> Council member Wisenfeld. >> I. >> Council member Sharstrom. >> I. >> Council member DVOS. >> I.
>> The resolution is approved. Moving on to the 2025 comprehensive plan consultant. >> Ben, >> thank you, Mayor Noel, and members of the council. Um, we've got an exciting year ahead of us. Um, in 2026, the council budgeted for uh basically a
year-long comprehensive plan process. So, we're excited to hear from our commissions and our residents and from the various boards and people around town and uh compile a a comp plan that will guide us into the future. Um, we're actually calling this comp plan the 2050 comp plan. That seems like a long ways
off, but it's not too far. Um, so it's it's typically best practices and recommended that a city, especially our size, um, every 10 years creates a comprehensive plan. It is not required in outstate Minnesota, in the seven county metro, it is required to do a comprehensive plan every 10 years, but
it um, it isn't. But the city of St. Peter is doing a great job by leading um and taking this on. Um in early January, the council authorized staff to advertise for the um consultant. Um and
we sent out four direct uh mailings to area firms and we also advertised it and put notice on our website. Um when the deadline came, we had two firms that submitted proposals. Um in reviewing reviewing both those proposals it was found that both for firms are very are
highly capable in providing the professional services that were requested by the RFP. Um because they were so competitive we put together a uh 10 category 100 point scoring system and went through the list. Um at the end of
scoring both firms um Bolton and Mink did score the highest and so it would be staff's recommendation to approve Bolton and Mink um to help us out guiding us the next oh year long could be could be 10 months it could be 14 months but
somewhere around a year uh long process. So um if you have any questions certainly be happy to answer those. questions for Ben. Josh, >> was MSA's bid and Bolton Mink's bid financially very similar? >> Yes. Yep. They were very similar and and
they both asked what our budget was and so it was no surprise that they came in pretty close to that. >> Yeah. >> Additional questions. Brad. >> Um, I'd just like to request in the future uh because we have this for other ones just from a transparency perspective would be to be able to see what the other bids were in in their
board as we have seen in other other memos here that we see all the bids across from >> it's just better from a people when they're looking from a transparency perspective. >> All right. Any additional questions? This is an exciting time for our city and as you referenced, I hope that
residents will take the opportunity to provide feedback because it will be an interactive process and there will be opportunities for um community engagement. So that said, the resolution accepting professional services proposal from
Bolton and Mink for the St. Peter 2050 comprehensive plan appears on pages 39 through 40 of the package. Is there a motion to approve? >> So moved. Second. We have a motion and a second. Call the role, please. >> Council member Pettis. >> I. >> Council member Ramp.
>> Hi. >> Council member Weisenfeld. >> I. >> Council member Sharstrom. >> I. >> Council member Devos. >> I. >> Mayor Noel. >> I. The resolution is approved. Thanks, Ben. >> Uh, next up, we have a new license. >> Remember, as you've known, new licenses
come to you as a separate action item. Renewals come to you on the consent agenda. happens to be a new tree workers license for Alex Hoff and his company is Alex the Tree Guy LLC. Um so that the appropriate background check was done and applications been filed and um so
the recommendation from staff is for you to approve um a tree workers license through April 30th of 2026. I'm happy to answer any questions that you might have about this. I think this is probably our 14th or 15th treeworker
license um that we have. that's a little bit higher than normal, but some of that is driven by your crews and the dollars that you've received, grant dollars in doing um some tree removals related to um emerald ashbor. Um so anyway, the
information is included in your packet and the resolution's on page 42. >> Well, it's a great reminder for residents as well that there's a list of licensed tree workers on the city website. So if you don't know where to go, we don't all get the yellow pages anymore. Go to the city website. It's a
great resource. Um, any questions or discussion on this one? Hearing nothing. The resolution approving a new license is on page 41. Is there a motion to approve? >> So move. >> Second. >> We have a motion then to second. Call the role, please.
>> Council member Ramp. >> I. >> Council member Weisenfeld. >> I. >> Council member Sharstrom. >> I. >> Council member Devos. >> I. >> Mayor Noel. >> Hi. >> Council member Pettis. >> Hi. >> The resolution is approved. Last item of new business, a new city hall project
title bid acceptance. >> So, mayor and members, um, as you may >> I knew where you were going. >> I know. >> So, um, mayor and members, uh, this is one of the divisions that you rejected as a part of the original bids. And so all of those bids that were rejected,
whether it was because they might not have had their bid bond or it was way outside of the budget parameters or whatever it was, um, was rejected by the council and those were rebid. opening was done on the 5th, so just last week. Um, as a part of those five or six different categories, um, I asked your
construction manager to do the background work and really focus on this one as this is one that is really next up in your remodeling process. The rest can wait a little bit in timeline for when construction is actually going to occur. Um the information here is included in your packet, but the recommendation from staff and from your
construction manager is to um award the tile bids to Grizzini Brothers and Company in the amount of $56,340. You'll see the two bids there. Commercial flooring was the other bid, which was about $35,000 more dollars um
as compared to Grazini Brothers. Happy to answer questions. They meet all the criteria. The background check was appropriate. they had all their bid bonds recognized the addendums all of those things that we would expect um for the recommendation. Happy to answer any questions that you might have and do want to mention that I would expect in
your next council cycle the rest of those bids that were opened on the 5th would be coming back to you. >> Okay, question from Brad. >> How did the bids received for this compared to the ones that were received back on the original um the ones that were rejected? I guess >> so they were less by tens of thousands
of dollars. >> That's right. So we did so we did achieve cost savings by >> we did achieve cost savings but some of that is a slight change in the scope as well >> and so that's what precipitated the rebid at the time of the original bid there was discussion about alternates
and other activities that we would have and so this narrowed that scope better. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Oh all right. >> All right. You just bought it. >> All right. Hearing no further discussion
or questions, the resolution approving tile bid package 09-B for the new city hall project is on page 46 of the packet. Is there a motion to approve? >> So moved. >> Second. >> We have a motion and a second. Call the role, please. >> Council member Weisenfeld,
>> I. >> Council member Sharstrom, I. >> Council member Devos, >> I. >> Mayor Noel, I. >> Council member Pettis. Hi. >> Council member Ramp. >> Hi. The resolution is approved. We will move on to reports. Um I have no report tonight. Are there any council members
who'd like to make reports? >> Darl, >> uh last Thursday I had the opportunity to meet with the uh city engineers from the district here to discuss uh uh 2030 uh federal highway funding for uh city some city streets. Uh I'd like to thank
Jeff Dro for appearing at that meeting and giving a really nice presentation on our third street. He did a real nice job on it and we'll be getting results of that solicitation here in the next couple weeks. So, thanks Jeeoff. >> Thank you. >> Any other council member reports?
All right, we'll give our time to our city administrator. >> Mayor, members, um the first one that I have is the new city alert and notification system. And so, Corey is here who manages this for you. As you know, Corey is your sustainability and communications person. And so, her work is the work that you see as a part of
this. Corey, I don't want to steal your thunder, but we're getting rid of Nixl and we're doing something new. >> Right. Exactly. Uh, Mayor Wild City Council members, you might have seen some information going out in the last month to two months promoting a new alerts system. This was really done
because we wanted to have not only non-emergency notifications, but also um or emergency and non-emergency notifications, which Nixl didn't support. The other really great feature about this, especially on the emergency side of things, is this system
integrates with our website and social media pretty seamlessly. You go to one platform, you put in your message, and you send it out, and it can hit all those places at once. So, it really saves time. It's really efficient, especially in the case of an emergency. So, on the non-emergency side, there's a
few different categories that we've added. So, we have five total, one emergency, four non-emergency. And so with that, we really wanted to create a way for people to sign up and choose what they want to receive. And so the easiest way in my opinion would be online, which um
>> backy show people where they can find the whole thing. >> Yes. So you just go to our main website page and scroll down all the way to the bottom and then you will see a how to sign up. Um you click in here and it gives you step-by-step instructions to sign up online. The reason I would
recommend signing up online is because this is the way to customize your alerts and notifications the most. In here, you can sign up if you want to receive emails, if you want text messages, if you want phone calls, um as well as which categories you want. So, if you
just want public safety and um city service alerts, you can do that very easily here. The other options that we have are a text to sign up that is only public safety. Um, and then we do have a my alerts app and in that app you can get public safety and the community
notifications, but you cannot choose the categories. And so that's why I always tell residents when they call me and ask me about this, make your resident portal. That way you can truly customize it and only get the information that you need. And really that's one of the main benefits to this system and really why
we wanted to go this way is because we want to make sure that we're giving timely, accurate information to our residents, but also in a way that they want to receive it. And so that is why we went this way. Um, and this is a new how-to guide that I'm hoping will make the process really seamless and easy for
residents to sign up. We do already have about 400 people on the platform, which is great for the first month of trying to just get that out there and get the word out. U, but we're hoping to continue to uh reach our residents in a new and better way. >> I signed up. I got my first alert. So,
works great. >> Any questions? questions for Corey. Anything you want to add, >> Corey, this is something we're going to continue to promote, and if people have questions, they can certainly call, but the step-by-step instructions here work pretty quick. I even got it figured out about a week ago or so. Um, so that's
fantastic. So, if I can do it, you can do it. And it is really, it can be really, really helpful in your day-to-day lives. What's going on? Where's a street being worked on? Where's there a water mane break? Um, where's their emergency situation? All those types of things are available here. Is this our system that pushes
>> like tornado alerts to your phone? >> So, this will also do that as well. So, that's another thing that is cap capable with this when you're creating your portal is you can also sign up for weather alerts. Again, the online um setup is the most comprehensive where you can even filter out even more of
like do you want air quality and things like that. The um the app is going to just be a more generic version of that, but it is the same. It's tied to the National Weather Service. Yes. Okay. So, that people don't need to sign up to have the emergency alert show up on
their phone if there's a tornado, >> right? They should still receive it through the National Weather Service on their cell phones. Um, but if there's people that say have land lines still or things like that where they want to get it in a different format, you can do that. Or if you want to instead get air quality or or something else, you can um
sign up through here as well and get that get them that way. I will note that this is also um we're not trying to bombard residents with a lot of information and so we are you know carefully choosing what we push out through this channel because we're not going to want to send you three five
text messages a day or anything like that. Um this is just another element to help support our communication that's going on the website that's in social media that we're doing in all those other places. It just gives residents another um chance to engage and get that information differently.
All right. Thanks, Corey. >> Thank you. >> Thanks, Corey. >> What's up, >> Still you? Yeah. >> Yeah. The next one that I have is federal agency impact reporting. This is something that started as part of a workshop about a month ago and so I wanted to give an update on these bullet
points that were discussed as the items that you'd like additional information on. Again, this may evolve over time or the format may change. Um, I stuck to the same format this time, but wanted to give a little bit of an update. We have had a few more interactions with local law enforcement. And so, again, we can't
tell you exactly how many times federal agents may or may not have been in town because we may not have had contact with them. Um but this would be about 10 to 12 requests for utility assistance um went up maybe a couple. Again, we can't
tell precisely why folks may have called in and looking for um utilization of the policies that you have or payments in cash and other things. Um but we can kind of discern that. And so we still believe that's between 8 and 10 residents that are doing that. I do want
to mention that there are a couple of other organizations within the community or within our region that are doing work related to helping families that are impacted by these federal agencies with their utility bills and with rent. And so it's great that those organizations are out there and to provide assistance.
Um economic development assistance program updates. We talked about a threepart public outreach primarily to businesses and I can tell you the documentation for that is going on and Ben and his team are strategizing how we make sure that we're contacting
everybody in a more personal way, not just putting it in a mailbox or stuffing it in their door. How can we do that? We have tried to work with some other local organizations that have data on businesses within the community. And so I'm still waiting for a final response from them on their assistance or whether
they want to partner with us. Um in all frankness, it's probably not the best for someone who is me or looks like me knocks on the door and say I'm from the government. I'm here to help. Um maybe it's better to have someone else that can help provide that information in a way um that's more approachable, more
digestible for folks. And so we're excited about that. And we have an intern that's done some work related to that and also has Spanish skills which is really helpful for some of this as well. So, we're really excited about the work that's going on there. Um, facility requests still zero. Um, collaboration
with other local units of government. Um, you've had cooperation with the county, county law enforcement, regional law enforcement. I know that this has been a discussion when we've had shared services committee meetings with the school district. >> Oh, yes. Uh just to make sure people are
clarifying when you talk about collaboration, it's the city's collaboration with other units of government, not federal agents collaborating with other units. >> Correct. This is the city with other local units of government or other organizations that we have within the community. >> Clear on what you >> Yeah. Thank you. Um so we've had bunches
of that and so all of you have participated in many forms of that through other meetings and activities and groups that you might u be a participant in. And so we're really proud of that. partnering has been something that's been uh a hallmark of some of the work that you've done in this area and so we continue to be
feeling very positive about that. Um data requests still continue to be zero and um update on additional community communications. Certainly over the last week and a half or so we've had a lot of media communication based on some of the issues that we've faced within the
community. And so we wanted to outline that just about every major regional news service and a number of national news services have contacted us. Wanted to mention that um we've received um requests for 911 information which of course now goes through Nicola County.
Um we've received requests for video not only from your buildings but from body cameras. Um and so there's been a lot of work that's gone on in that area over the last two weeks since I last reported to you. Um, and so I don't have the number of data requests, but I can tell
you the hours that we put in have been probably around a hundred hours across multiple departments and providing information. Um, so that's the the last one that I have on my list. >> Yeah, >> Madame Mayor, I'm happy to answer any questions or if you have other information um that you're seeking, I'm
happy to try and address that in the future as best I can. >> Sure. Questions for Todd? I guess I have a general question which is maybe puts you on the spot Todd, but when I think about all the hours of work
that city is spending on this and impact on our community, is St. Peter safer now than we were two months ago? You know, I would say that based on the data that I see, based on the number of
calls for service, based on the number of incidents that we see where police are called to scenes, those numbers have risen for maybe lots of different reasons. So, just based on that alone, it's difficult for me to say that the city is safer today than it was two or
three months ago. Um certainly the amount of activity that we see within the community, not only from a law enforcement standpoint or from a federal agency standpoint, but all the things that are affiliated with that data requests, all those things take time, energy, and resources. So to answer your
question directly, I don't know that we are safer. The data, at least from my perspective, would indicate that we have more calls for service, more challenges, not only on a local base basis, but with other jurisdictions outside of our local units of government. And so, um, it'd be tough for me to say that we are safer. I
think we are probably not. >> Ben, >> those data requests, who are they coming from? >> Um, so usually the most of it is from news outlets. Once in a while we have, um, who I would believe to be private individuals that are requesting
information, which is >> is a part of what's allowed under the Minnesota Data Practices Act. Um, I am unaware of any data requests that are related to any federal agencies. Um, I just don't know that there is any. All
those requests cycle through my office, so I would be aware. Um, that doesn't mean um, someone couldn't say their name was Todd Py, but they actually work for the Department of Agriculture and are asking for how many beans were harvested within the city of St. Peter, as an example. Um, but yeah.
>> Okay. Can you talk a little bit more about local law enforcement and their contact with federal agents? Have we had more ability or has there been any any instances now of police officers
showing up at the same time as any federal agencies? >> So, we have had calls through 911 and other sources on a couple of occasions. We'd had have had officers come across federal agencies that are located in certain neighborhoods like Mark Way or Green Valley or other neighborhoods. And
so, um, our practice is and our policy is that we observe, um, we work diligently and hope to provide additional resources and connections with other partners within the community for families that have been impacted by this. And so, that's that's really where
the most of that comes from. Um, if you have other I'm happy to answer more if you have more specific questions. Josh, >> I guess I I I know a question that's come from at least one resident relates to 911 versus our non-emergency number
and we did have a transition uh fairly recently from dispatching through our police department through the county. Can you just speak a little bit more about that for people who might have missed that transition? Yeah. So, let me talk about the nature of the question or at least my impression of the nature of the question. The nature of the question
doesn't specifically relate to what we see going on within St. Peter related to federal agencies having a presence. This really has to do with the change that you made in late 2025 to go to emergency dispatching with Nicollet County wholly.
So rather than your dispatch services located at your police department at 227 South Front Street, all emergency calls now continue to be routed or are routed through 911. So as we talked about that, um I think we had at least one person
that was confused about whether that meant that no phones were ever answered at the police department and every call went to the county. And that is not the case. It should be the case for emergency calls. 911, dial 911 if you
have an emergency and then your police department, your fire department, ambulance from your hospital are dispatched through that as is Nicola County Sheriff's Department. Um, and so your hours are generally 7:30 in the morning till 5:00 in the afternoon Monday through Thursday. And then 7:30
in the morning till noon on Friday for what we know if you've been in the community a long time has 507931-1550. That is still the business number for the police department. And so, um, one of the examples that might have been used is that, oh my gosh, it's 1:00 in
the morning and I'm sitting on my porch on a nice spring evening and I see a bunch of young people come along and they lift a manhole cover off the street off a manhole and they throw it on the boulevard and now there's a big hole in the middle of the street. Well, if I
call 1550, no one will answer. But I don't know that that's an emergency. I would say if there's a big hole this big in the middle of dial 911 and then we will respond. The PD will come out and take a look and then if necessary they will call folks from Pete's team to fix the bad hole if that's what's necessary
to happen. Um so it does require some changes maybe in how people might be used to um used to um interacting with law enforcement and for emergency services here in St. Peter. But I think by and large it's worked very well. That's the only question that I've
gotten as a part of this. But we want to make sure that we're setting that out. And again, that does not relate to anything that we've had going on with federal agencies. It just is a change in our world. >> More of a general question. And as people think about how they interact with local law enforcement, >> if you call the 931-1550
number, if you called it this evening, um you would get a answer that says something like, um, this is the St. Peter Police Department. If you have an emergency, please hang up and dial 911. If you would like to speak to, press one. If you would like to know about,
press two. If you would like to be in contact with, press three. Those are the kind of things that you can expect to hear on our 1550 number. And so those are picked up regularly and routing is done through sergeants and the chief and through your office service manager, Melinda.
>> Okay, thanks for that extra information. >> Hearing no further questions from Todd, we have a resolution calling for a closed session. Mayor, members, I'm asking for the resolution for close session for really what I would consider four items. Three of which are union
negotiations, which would include your parks union, um your electric line worker union, and what we commonly now call your utilities union, which is water, wastewater, storm water. In addition to that, we have some additional information and are talking about real estate transactions. And so,
um, also for real property, I would expect that we could return into open session on the union contracts again, parks, electric line workers, and the utilities group. Um, and then there would be likely adjournment. I do not expect to come back back into open
session related to any real estate negotiations at this point. >> Okay. Any questions for Todd? Hearing none, is there a motion to approve the resolution calling for a closed session? >> So moved. Second. >> We have a motion and a second. Call the roll, please.
>> Council member Sharstrom, >> I. >> Council member Devos, >> I. >> Mayor Noel, >> I. >> Council member Pettis, >> I. >> Council member Ran, >> I. >> Council member Weisenfeld, >> I. >> The resolution is approved and we will adjourn to close session at 7:49 p.m. >> So for any folks that are interested
when we will be in close session here. And so if you want to hang out in the lobby um when we go back before we go back into open session, we'll come down and get you and tell you you're sure welcome to come back and see the excitement for the last part of the meeting. >> All right, it is 8:41 p.m. and we are
returning to open session. Uh we have several um I would say three resolutions in for in front of us and I'll let Todd take it away. Madame Mayor, the first one that I have for you relates to union negotiations with your parks union, AFL
CIO, local 70 related to parks. Um the memo and the resolution provide for you to enter into a contract that they have already signed. The three most salient issues related to this contract include it's a two-year contract. It's a 3% wage increase for all members of the group,
all positions for each of those years. So a three and three. and then technical changes related to separation and non-related articles, dates and typos. Mayor, members, if you have other questions, I'm happy to answer the resolution. The contract is included and the resolution is included in your
packet. Again, um the the union has voted and has signed the contract and um the recommendation is to approve the contract. >> All right, any questions or discussion? Hearing none, we have a resolution approving contract by and between the
city of St. Peter and AFL CIO local 70 parks for 2026. Is there a motion to approve? >> So move. >> Second. >> We have a motion and a second. Call the role, please. >> Council member Devos, >> I. >> Mayor Noel, >> I. >> Council member Pettis. >> Hi. >> Council member Ram. >> Hi. >> Council member Weisenfeld.
>> Hi. >> Council member Sharstrom. >> I. >> The resolution is approved. Next resolution um before us regarding the union of operating engineers. Electric linemen. >> Electric linemen. Electric line workers. Um, this is the most salient points
related to that contract. It would be a one-year agreement for the 2026 year. It's an increase of 3% plus $1 per hour across the board for all um positions included in this group. It would also be an on call increase from 325 per week to
350 per week. And then any technical changes or typos or non-related articles, those types of things. A couple of name changes because a steward name changes are included in the contract. Information is on your packet is on your desk including the contract
which they have voted on and signed. The staff recommendation is to approve the contract with uh with the electric line workers. >> Questions or discussion for Todd? Hearing nothing. We have a resolution approving contract buy and between the
city of St. Peter and AFL CIO local 70 line workers for 2026. Is there a motion to approve? >> So move second. >> We have a motion and a second. Call the role, please. >> Mayor Noel. >> I. >> Council member Pettis. >> I. >> Council member Ram. >> I. >> Council member Weisenfeld. >> I.
>> Council member Sharstrom. >> I. >> Council member Devos. >> I. >> The resol resolution is approved. Last resolution tonight. International Union of Operating Engineers Local 70 Utilities. um water, wastewater, storm water. >> Mayor and members, um the union has voted and approved their side of a
contract for one year for 2026. It would include a 3% across the board increase. It would in it was also change applicability for boilers license certification and provide that all members who have a license would receive an additional 10 cents per hour um I'm
sorry, 15 cents per hour stipen. Um, also for crossover licensing, which is as an example, if you are work in wastewater and have a wastewater license, but you also then have a water license, you would receive an additional stipen or crossover, and that would be
for 10 cents per hour. All of those have value in the work that your crew does amongst and with each other. And so, you've done this type of thing before. This is increasing it slightly. And then there are some technical changes related to non-related articles, dates, typos,
and a couple of names as well. Um, the recommendation is to approve the contract. >> Questions or discussion? >> Hearing none, we have a resolution approving contract by between the city of St. Peter and AFL CIO70 water,
wastewater, storm water for 2026. Is there a motion to approve? >> So moved. Second. >> We have a motion and a second. Call the role, please. >> Council member Pettis. >> I. Council member Ram >> I. >> Council member Weisenfeld >> I. >> Council member Sharstrom. >> Hi. >> Council member DVOS. >> I. >> Mayor Noel.
>> I. The resolution is approved. >> Mayor members, not to rain on our parade while we are rolling along, but I do want to mention you still do have one bargaining unit left to be completed. My hope would be is that that would come back to you at your um next council meeting. At least that's my hope. If you
have fingers to cross, please do that for me. I would appreciate the assistance. >> All right. Thank you. >> All right. Uh there's no more business before us. Is there a motion to adjurnn? Second. >> Uh all those in favor of adjournment say I. I. >> Any opposed? We are ajourned. Thank you.
>> Thanks everyone for your time and it was a long one tonight. >> I apologize.