Oh, because the meeting starts. [clears throat] Let's call the meeting to order. Roll call. Mayor Ree here. Council member Osk here. Nelson here. Gilbertson here. Gardner
here. Agger Lee here. Davis here. Butterfield here. And here present. Zero absent. Please stand for the pledge. I aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic
for which it stands. One nation indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Any proposed additions or deletions to the agenda? Mary. Yes. Audrey,
I would like to add a um to schedule a special meeting for a non-anual evaluation of performance of the city of Wilmer city under city administrator under Minnesota statute
section 13D05 3A. I don't care where it is. If it's at the the last Do you have a date to propose or That's what I think we would do at the when we get to that agenda item. Okay.
[snorts] And that's under the added as as what? Added as n. I got so many pages. and [snorts] make a motion to approve the amended agenda. Second.
Got a motion and a second. Discussion. Roll call. Council member Oz. I. Nelson. I. Gilbertson. Hi. Gardner. I Baggerly I Davis I Butterfield I should
I eight eyes zero no nos. That motion passes. Next is a proclamation from Rotary International World Polio Day. It reads, "Whereas Rotary is a global
network of neighbors, friends, leaders, and problem solvers who unite and take action to create lasting change in communities across the globe. And whereas the Rotary motto service above all inspires members to approve to
provide humanitarian humanitarian service follow high ethical standards and promote goodwill and peace in the world. And whereas Rotary in 1985 launched Polio Plus and in 1988 helped
establish the Global Polio Eradication Initiative which today includes the World Health Organization's US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, [cough and clears throat] UNICEF and the Bill and Melinda Gates
Foundation and Gavei the Vaccine Alliance to imunize the children of of the world against polio. And whereas polio cases have dropped 99.9% since 1988. And the world stands on the threshold of
eradicating the disease. And whereas to date, Rotary has contributed more than 2.2 billion and countless volunteer hours protecting nearly three billion children in 120 in 122 countries. And
whereas Rotary is working to raise an additional $50 million per year, which would be leveraged for maximum impact by an additional 100 million annually from the Bill and Gl Melinda Gates Foundation. And whereas these efforts
are providing much needed operational support, medical staff, laboratory equipment, and educational materials for health workers and parents. And whereas in addition, Rotary has played a major
role in decisions by donor governments to contribute more than 10 billion to the 10 billion dollars to the effort. And whereas there are over 1.2 2 million Rotary
members in 36,000 clubs throughout the world that sponsor service projects to address such critical issues as poverty, disease, hunger, lit illiteracy, and environment in their local communities
and abroad. Therefore, I, Douglas Ree, mayor of the city of Wilmer, Minnesota, do hereby proclaim November 7th, 2025, World Polio Day in Wilmer, Minnesota, and encourage all citizens to join me
and Rotary International in the fight for a polioorefree world. After all that, I I think Rotary does so much in our community and and around. We've got some Rotary members. Kyle, are you
Thomas? We got anybody else here? Yeah, just Well, thank you for being a part of this. All right. Consent items. I'll call on our city
clerk, Renee Larson. [clears throat] Mayor Reese, council members tonight. For your approval, I have the city council minutes of October 20th, 2025. The special council minutes of October 30th, 2025. The council work session minutes of October 13, 25. The Board of
Zoning Appeals minutes from October 14th, 2025 is a draft. The planning commission minutes of October 22nd, 2025 is a draft. The Wilmer Municipal Utilities Commission minutes of October 13, 2025. The accept and final project
number 258 seal code improvements. And the accounts payable report from 10:15 of 25 through 1029 of 25. Move to approve. Second. We got a motion and a second to approve. Any discussion?
Seeing and hearing none. Roll call. Council member Nelson. I. Gilbertson. Hi. Gardner. I. Baggerly. Hi. Davis. I. Butterfield. I. Schultz. I. And Osc. I.
Eight eyes. Zero nos. Motion passes. We have no one for the open forum. The next is a public hearing on [snorts] the sanitary sewer system environmental specialist. Sarah seats
and yes, good evening, mayor and council members. Uh, so tonight we're holding the public hearing to amend ordinance chapter 16, article 3, which um covers the sanitary sewer system. So I first approached you all with this need on
September 15th. Um, I we formally introduced this on October 6th and at that meeting we also set the public hearing for tonight. So again, just a brief review. The overall intent of these ordinance amendments uh is to prevent the clear water, what we
commonly call inflow and infiltration from reaching our sanitary sewer mains, our lift stations, and ultimately our wastewater treatment plant. Um that happens a lot through broken or deteriorated private sewer laterals. the city. Um on our side, we continue to
assess the condition of our sanitary sewer mains and our manholes and then complete repairs uh or replacement on that portion of the system. Also, so we're now adding these service lines as part of the comprehensive solution to that inflow and infiltration problem.
The six events that will trigger an inspection um under the proposed ordinance are at the point of sale or upon transfer of property, when a new or previous unconnected structure is connected to an existing private sewer lateral, as a condition of approval of
any major building remodel project with a project estimated by the city to cost $50,000 or more. as a condition of approval of any building remodel project that involves any new plumbing system or parts of the existing plumbing system that will be altered, extended, or
repaired. When a sewer overflow from a private sewer lateral has reached public property, or when a sewer overflow from a private sewer lateral presents a public health threat. Um so the property owners will be responsible for procuring
a contractor to perform the um in the televising of the lateral in its entirety from the building's foundation all the way to the sewer main and then city staff will then review the footage and determine compliance. Any repairs or replacement would then be the
responsibility of the building owners. So I'll let you do your part now. [laughter] All right. Thank you, Sarah. I'll open the public hearing for anybody that wants to speak. And if you do want to speak, you come up
to the podium and give us your name and the address. Anybody want to speak? Anybody wants to speak? Okay, I'll close the hearing and call for a motion.
So moved. Second. Got a motion to adopt the ordinance amending chapter 15 article 3 sanitary sewer system. Discussion. Tom sir, just one question on you
brought up [clears throat] about if any plumbing needs to be done that it's going to be mandated. see somebody's sink, they're replacing the guts underneath their their sink because that couldn't trigger it. No. So, um we've talked with So, we pulled some of this language from the
state building code and we've talked to our um building inspectors and the intent is not if you're just replacing a stool or a vanity or a sink, if you're adding a dishwasher, none of that rem or involves actually altering or extending the home's plumbing. So essentially, if
it's behind the walls or under the floor, that would be what's going to be altered or extended. So if you're adding a bathroom in your basement because it wasn't finished before, or if you're doing a significant remodel of your kitchen, moving everything around, those things might trigger. If you're adding
on a bedroom and a bathroom, situations like that would be what would trigger it for that plumbing event. So just general maintenance of your current plumbing will not trigger it. No. And the only way that we will know
that somebody is doing that plumbing is because there are permits required for certain plumbing construction activities. So then our building department would notify us. We would make that contact with the homeowner and the contractor to let them know that an inspection of the private sewer ladder
also needs to be done. So, our wastewater department um would take on [clears throat] all of that communication, working with the homeowner, helping them figure out who the contractor is going to be, getting the inspection done, all of that. Okay.
Any other discussion, Tom? uh question whether if a homeowner owns the uh insurance that covers that line and it is then determined that they need to replace it, would that insurance
cover that or no? So my understanding of that service line warranties um by homes serve is yes for if if it was determined that your sewer is if you figured out that it was backed
up and you needed to have it replaced. If the city is the one who said it was not in compliance um because again root intrusion because it was deteriorated because it's clay tile whatever it might be. um if your line needs to be repaired
or replaced. I believe the coverage is up to $8,500 for sewer line replacements. So, yes, that will be another thing. I know the company does um mailings and and gets this information out in the community, I believe twice a year. Um but that's also
something we would work on sharing. Uh it's obviously not something the city is selling, but it's a private company. I think our residents should know that um it is a reputable company. I think something like 278 residents in min or in Wilmer already
have those policies. Um they've paid out some claims already within the city also. So if we can help share that that's a resource for people um under $10 a month that I think that's definitely a good option for them to look into.
Thank you. Yes. Thank you, Mayor Reese. Um, what about some of our larger businesses in town? Like how is this policy going to affect like say Geneo or out on Midwest, Bethesda? I mean, these are businesses that are probably doing, you
know, projects, you know, that are going to be over $50,000 on a pretty regular basis, right? So um we've discussed that exact scenario and uh the way that we anticipate and have tried to craft the
language in the ordinance is that um so for instance Min West if a repair or remodel was being done on one building that exceeded the $50,000 um estimated cost the private sewer lateral for that building would need to be inspected. not
every private sewer lateral on the entire campus. Um, similar to Geno, they have different buildings. It would be the same thing. Whatever building is affected by that repair remodel project would be the one we would work with. Um, once that
private lateral has been inspected, um, then if it's if nothing is found not in compliance, then they wouldn't have to do another inspection for three years. if it's brand new construction. Um, and so that that line is brand new
regardless of when they were doing a remodel project or an addition. Um, if the line is less than 10 years old, they wouldn't need to have it inspected. If they replace an entire line, one that's, you know, old, deteriorated, whatever the reason was, again, they wouldn't need to have it inspected for 10 years,
regardless of how many times they did additions or remodels or things like that. Okay. Thank you. Any other questions? If not, roll call. Council member Gilbertson. Hi. Gardner. Hi. Baggerly.
Hi. Davis. Hi. Butterfield. Hi. Shoulders. Hi. O. I. And Nelson. I. Eight [clears throat] eyes. Zero nos. Motion passes. Next is a motion to publish the
ordinance by summary. So move. Second. We got a motion and a second discussion. Mayor, yes, Tom. Just real quick, um [clears throat] maybe pertaining to the previous conversation, but uh my understanding is
that if a home sells in Wilmer on December 31st, it does not need to be inspected, but if it sells on January 1st, 2026, it would. Is that my understanding? Yes. So, just for the
public's information. So that's it. Yes, that is correct. And um staff's prepared to start doing some of that communication with the realators and the abstract companies and all of those as soon as probably next week so that they
have plenty of time and they can um schedule that so that closing dates are not going to be affected. Is that it, Tom? That's it. Okay. Anybody [snorts] else? Roll call. Council member Gardner. Hi Vaggerly. Hi
Davis. Hi Butterfield. Hi. Shis. Hi. Os. Hi. Nelson. Hi. And Gilbertson. Hi. Eight eyes. Zero nos. Thank you sir. Thank you so much. That passes.
Next is bike pedestrian trail plan. Call on recreation director Rob G Bombgard. Good evening here. Let me just get set up here quick. [clears throat] All right. Uh, mayor, member of the council, tonight before you is to adopt the resolution accepting the bike and
pedestrian trail plan. Back in May of 2024, the city council approved city staff in Bolton and Mink to work on developing a bike and ped and trail plan for the city of Warmer. Um the funding came from the 2024 CIP plan and the cost
of the plan was $47,500. Um we met with several community uh members and had quite a bit of engagement um to look over this plan um and with a lot of the stakeholders that we had and it was a great idea to have these groups together and get their input regarding this plan. Um this plan
will also be an appendix to the comprehension plan that was approved earlier this year. So let me go through the slides a little bit. [snorts] Okay. The purpose of having the bike plan um [clears throat] is to provide
the framework for the improvements of the current system that we currently have and to promote more active transportation um and address the gaps in the systems and um have priorities on what their improvements should be and have and that
would have the greatest impact on our community. So then we got some goals and objectives of what we want to accomplish with this plan is wanted to provide uh convenient bicycle and pedestrian facilities to our community and our destination similar to
what we have done with the trail head. That has been a great addition to our trail system. That thing is extremely busy and it's still busy today when it's decent weather. People are still using it. So it's been a great addition. And then we need to uh build on the work
that we have already done. We have great infrastructure already established but we need to identify critical intersections for the pedestrians and bicyclists for the safety of them. Um identify the gaps and links in the existing trail and the sidewalk system
and recommend the priorities of those improvements. And then part of the plan was is to provide concepts and estimates and phasing project of of the project and potential funding sources. So a lot of this was for us to be able to get
this excuse us for us to get this developed so we can go out for grants and write grants for it. So when we look at our current system again we have really good infrastructure already in place um great foundation to work with. We have roughly about 22
miles of paved trails, but we need to again work on what we can do to connect the trails and how we can improve the safety aspects of it. And this is where we worked really close with the safe streets for all group as well. So, a lot of this talked together about making sure that we're on the same plan
together. So, when we look at the next map, you can see some of the gaps that we have have. Um, a lot of it's going to be on some intersections. Um when we talked with the Wilmer Bikes group, their first one that they would really like to see
us have improvements on is with the um one by the golf c golf course and 71 um when you can cross over to the Midwest campus. They would really like to see a new trail get developed on the side of the lake. So then it can go basically
around the golf course and then connect around the lake and then you can get down to Robins Island. And another connection that they would really like to see too is on County Road 5 going north and south right by the highway 12. That's a tricky intersection because of
the railroad crossing everything. And so then that um kind of road 5 goes all the way down into Swanson. You can get to it from there. So the whole big thing about with this type of a plan is we want to get a big loop around the city. then we can start really working on the north
and south, east and west, so we can get everyone to where they need to get to and provide active transportation that way. But when we talk about bikes, paths, we got to kind of know what some of those are like. So, there are several
different ones that Mindot um is recommending. The one that we usually probably see mostly because that's what's around here are is the shared use path. So, similar to what's at Robins Island or on County Road 5, it's the dual path where it's a 10-ft
path. You have people be able to go both ways and everything. Um, and then we have another one that what's going to get replaced here shortly is the one on Lakeland. It's the shared bike lane where it's painted on the road. Um, so with I believe that there's going to be
a new path that's going to be um going from Highway 12 um on Lakeland all the way up to Civic Center Drive. So that will be really nice and that will be a shared path that will be off the road and that's our goal is to get for safety reasons is to get things off the road or
have a vertical curb similar to that's around the golf course just for the protection of bicyclist walkers. So when cars are going by Lakeland Drive that's on the that' be on the east side. Yes.
Going through Trentwood and everything like that. So, okay. So, how do we implement all this? Um, so what the plan is is it did is it it categorized our our 39 obstacles is
what I would say and they categorize them from five to one. Five being the greatest need and the biggest community impact. So like if this one's the costly one is doing first street. So the price takes goes anything from $26 million
down to $4,000. So those are the the level ones or are the ones that we can take care of ourselves that we have right now if it's doing some painting over by the library or extending our paths. So that's how they are categorized as far as being five to one, five being the highest one for
improvements again. So we have 39 areas that the plan has dictated to where we can have some um improvements at with the intersections and for safety reasons. So um [clears throat] securing funding will be critical to implement this plan. So we're going to have to be
able to collaborate with um the county or if when if we have street projects, how can we incorporate these trails into these [clears throat] projects that we have? And again, the other big part of it is that now when we want to go out and seek some funding for grants that we have this plan in place, that kind of
puts us above everyone else that we have a bike and pet plan. So, that's a big goal of ours is to be able to make sure that we can go out to get some of that grant funding from either if it's connecting people to the outdoors grants, legacy grants. Um, there's an there's a lot of grants out there that
we can go for and that type of stuff, but having a plan like this really helps us out from. So, some thank yous that are part of this because it was a little bit of a lengthy process. um the public works department, the planning department, the
park and recon staff, um Beth at the CVB was very helpful. Wumber bikes, they're very pleased with what the plan is because we just met with them last week and they were very happy about this plan being able to be brought forth today. So, Wilmer public schools, Candy High,
um Renville and the ship um group um Bolton Mink and of course the Wilmer community for giving us their input on this plan. So, with that, I'll answer any questions. [snorts] I got a question, and it's probably for
either you or your chief. Um, I came down [snorts] 9inth Street East the other day, and this uh electric bicycle passed me on the sidewalk on the east side of Ninth Street.
Okay. He's He was illegal, I hope. He was flying. He passed me. Well, those ebikes can um if they're like the DNR has it that I believe it they need to be under 30 m hour and or
not to be on a DNR trail. So, it's 20 miles an hour. 20 that they can really zoom now. So, um ebikes are going to be a challenging thing to to mandate. That's dangerous. Yeah, they can they can go faster than
20, but the the motor has a governor or whatever would be on [snorts] an electric bike that if you're pedaling, it'll go faster than 20, but if it's just bike power, it'll it'll level off at 20 miles an hour. I must have been driving less [cough]
because [clears throat] he went fast. The ebikes are going to change the game of how people be active. And I don't have anything against them. I thought about buying one myself. Some people consider that cheating. So,
any other qu Audrey, thank you. Thanks, Rob. Um, I know that um we do not have a complete streets ordinance and I see it listed in here, but it's a priority of three. um where there are other things that are
higher than that right now, but um there are funding that's only available if you do have a complete streets ordinance. Am I not correct? Is that something that we should be working on? I think it's something that we
definitely need to explore to see what really what the grant will require us to have, but I think it's probably something that we should probably explore. Yeah, because it's it's my understanding that it's simply a requirement to look at each street to see what you can do. Doesn't re
necessarily require you have to do, but that you evaluate and do what's best for all modes of transportation. Am I correct? Yes. Is that Yep. All right. So, that's something that I'd like to see us Yeah. We'll work work on and I don't know who who gets that one.
Do you get that one? Well, it will be a group effort. Okay. We'll work with you. All right. Thank you. Um, thank you, Mayor Reese. Um, looking at these priorities, I was very surprised to see a lot of the
push to bring all of our hightraic areas and trails together in the same location. Seems to me like it would make more sense not to have high-speed traffic and bikes in the same place. And so I was
surprised to see First Street, Wilmer Avenue, Trot Avenue, Business 71 to all be high priorities number fives. And so I was curious how they came up with those selections. I think it would be wiser to create
paths where there are bikers and walkers and then there's other places where cars and things that are lethal are traveling. Uh, as our mayor pointed out earlier, it's not safe to have those those bikes and the cars in the same place.
I believe that a lot of it was because if we start working on our safe streets for all that this is going to incorporate that into it. So, um, and that's going to get everyone to get to where they need to be, especially because First Street's a main vein in town. So, um, that's how I feel like
it's going to be. Now, we can set the priority of what we would like it to to look at, but I think a lot of it was how it's all get connected with the safe streets for all uh program as well cuz then we can incorporate them both together. And so, I agree it's high traffic, high dollar.
So, is there some low lowerhanging fruit ones that we can go after to have different type of connections? But I think these are the ones because of the main veins in town. Yeah, I guess my my priority would be to get bikes off of First Street and off of the main thorough affairs where they can have
their own safe spot to travel and it's just them because a lot of them will have the turnabouts in them. So, they were going to work with it very similar to what's up in start the Sartell area. Okay. Anybody else? Otherwise, I'm looking for a motion to
adopt the resolution accepting bike and pedestrian and trail plan. So moved. Second. Got a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Roll call. Council member Faggerly.
Hi. Davis. Hi. Butterfield. Hi. Childz. Hi. Osk. Hi. Nelson. Hi. Gilbertson. Hi. and Gardner I. Eight eyes's zero nos. Thank you.
Thank you. Next is uh introduction to codify the city of Wilmer zoning ordinance number 1060 and set a public hearing date. I'll call on planning development director Christopher Corbett.
Good evening Mr. Mayor, members of the council. The first thing I'd like to say is the next four agendas. I know we made up majority of the packet um but these are more so um just procedural so we don't have to go through every single page so I hope that as some relief uh so
the first one is 11B um I'm looking for two motions today what happens is as you all know we're working on the rewrite of our zoning code and the very first step of this is to codify our ordinance so our zoning ordinance lives in 1060 it's
just one um document with multiple amendments to it. And so we worked with our legal council to make sure that we can codify it, making it more of an organized document that will live in chapter 14 and be added to MUN code. So
codification is just the process of organizing and integrating ordinances into a structure and accessible format within a formal code such as our city code. Um it ensures consistency, clarity and ease of reference by placing related
regulations in a unified location, updating cross referencing cross references and correcting minor errors. There are still some errors and we're working through those. Um, and so what I'm looking for today is just a motion
to um, set a public hearing for December 15th at 6:30 p.m. here at the Health and Human Services Building. For reference, the codified zoning ordinance. Um, and this form is listed in your packet on
page starts at page 118 uh, to 273. I'll call for a motion to that. As Christopher explained, so moved. Second. We got a motion and a second. Any discussion? Tom,
during this process, will we be reviewing any of these ordinances that are in place and seeing if we are following them or not following them and taking them out or adding them? So, Council Person Gilbertson, uh, these are two separate processes. The first step
of it is just to take our existing zoning code and organize it. So that's this motion. Um the one that you're speaking about um any involvement with city council, it will happen during the rewrite and that's a six month six to nine month process and we'll we'll talk
about that uh next. Okay. Yep. Any further discussion? Roll call. Council member Davis. Hi. Butterfield. I should I
Nelson. I Gilbertson I Gardner I Baggerly I eight I's zero nos. That motion passes. I'll call for a motion to publish by summary. Some move. Second.
Motion and a second. Discussion. Roll call. Council member Butterfield. I should. O. I. Nelson. Hi. Gilbertson. Hi. Gardner I Baggerly I and Davis I
eight I's zero nos that motion passes next I'll call on Christopher once again in regards to an agreement with a consultant to rewrite the city of Wilmer's zoning ordinance. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So on
September 2nd at city council, you all approved us uh to move forward to release any an RFP for the rewrite of the zoning code. Happy to kind of say that we received eight proposals. Um most of the firms had already worked for zoning codes here in the state of
Minnesota. Uh we took a look at that internally and we narrowed it down to four. So, Bolton and Mink, TC2, SRF consulting, and Cardo um and plus studio form were the four that we interviewed
uh during the week of October 27th. Um based on our interviews and conversations, we feel comfortable recommending um to enter into agreement with TC2 um which is a firm out of Minneapolis.
their bid came in at um $87,000. Um and they were all competitive. All eight proposals were pretty competitive, but we feel very comfortable with moving forward with TC2. So, just for some more background, we released the RFP
September 3rd. Um we did our proposal was due October 10th. Um, like I said, we did do interviews during October 27th. Uh, in the council action request, you'll see that
we did a proposed timeline. So, to council member Gilbertson's point earlier, uh, city council will have the opportunity to chime in for the zoning code rewrite and we'll have a um an extensive public engagement part of this
uh rewrite as well. So that will run from all the way until summer of 2026. One thing that I shared at the September 2nd meeting was just um estimates from other municipalities that's done similar work. Uh so you'll see that there. And
so what we're requesting is a motion to enter an agreement uh and not to exceed 100,000. Uh even though the bid came in at 87,000 um we're being prudent just to make sure that if there's anything that comes up in between we have a contingency. Um
you'll see that in the packet also we have I listed the four or attached the four um proposals and Bolton and me came in at 112 and that's on page 308. Uh you have SRF that came
in at 93,000. That's at page 332. And Cardo came in at 99,500. And that can be found on 359. [snorts] We need a motion authorizing
the city of Wilmer to enter into an agreement with TC2 TC3. Make that motion. Second. Got a motion and a second. Discussion. Just um Yeah. I was just wondering if you
could explain to us who's who's the we. You talked a lot about like we did this, we did that. Is that you and some planning commission members? Is that just staff? Great [snorts] question. So, uh it was me and Chris Frank who is our city
planner. We did score uh the proposals administration Kyle Box and Leslie Valium both got received copies of all the proposals too. Um and then in the interviews it was Chris Frank, myself and Kyle Box. Okay. So no members of the planning
commission were involved in this then? Only the RFP part. Correct. And has this gone to the planning commission yet? No. Okay. Um they don't have to give us we don't have to seek approval to enter agreements with planning commission only
city council is this in this year's budget I do have some funding thanks for the question council person Nelson there is a budget um for that's left over for this year and that's around 53,000
uh and so with my request of 90,000 I believe for next year and that should be enough to um pay for this rewrite. [snorts] Any other questions? Rick. Thank Mr. Mayor. So, did Mid Minnesota
put in a bid? They did not. No. Is the project too big for them or We had no um conversations with men Minnesota about it, but it was it was publicly open and we opened it for about 45 days.
because they've done many of the small communities around surprising. Any other questions? Roll call. Council member Shelz. Hi. O. Hi. Nelson.
Hi. Gilbertson. Hi. Gardner. Hi. Faggerly. Hi. Davis. Hi. And Butterfield. I. Eight eyes's, zero nos. That motion passes.
Next, Christopher, you have a request to modify a Yes. Okay. So, this is now the second time that the board of zoning appeals has forward um an agenda item to city
council for a decision. This one we're looking at 3108 First Avenue Southwest. Uh the parcel is highlighted in yellow on the screen. That's parcel number 95835280 in ward 1. Uh the homeowner is looking
to build um the setback for an accessory structure is 5T and they want to go in 3T. So leave a twoft um room between the property line and the structure. I'm going to go through just a few things. In the red box is the
existing structure and the existing accessory structure which is the garage. And then the yellow rectangle is where they want to build um on their property. So attached to or fixed to the accessory use that they already have.
And from the street um view, you'll see that there is a short retaining wall between the two properties. uh you'll see that there's a trailer of some sort parked there. And so that the the structure or the addition that this
homeowner wants to per um build will be enough to cover the um the trailer that is being exposed right now. So typically what we do is look at the site selection. Uh we'll look at the
site plan, excuse me, and you'll see that neighboring lots around there are some bills or accessory um structures that are closer to their property line than will like [snorts] uh that than zoning
would allow it to. We did take a look to see if any other variances were granted for neighboring properties and we did not find any. Uh and so this request isn't out of line um completely. It fits into the context of
the surrounding parcels too. Christopher, could I get you go back to that other picture there? Yes. So the addition will be where the trailer is. Yes. I tried to highlight that in.
Yeah. I didn't understand that. Mhm. And so you'll see that this shed here on the neighboring property is already in impeding on that 5- foot setback. Their garage is fine. Um but I mean this can be moved to at any any
point. Um so this came to board of zoning appeals on October 14th. Uh we did send out it was a public hearing and we did send out u mailers to all their neighbors about a 35 foot radius of the
property. Heard no contestant for it. Um the problem is that we only have two members on the board of zoning appeals and I think that's something that we've talked about um in the past too. And so the
appeal member or the board member actually stated that he would approve it. Um but unfortunately we couldn't take approval from him because it's only one member. So Audrey, yeah, I I did drive by there today, too.
And it would appear that the driveway is already not meeting the setback. Um, this is gravel and there's a like a where you're pointing at there, there's a post in the ground.
Um, it appears that both properties um have not met setback requirements, which is disappointing that we are in this position to allow something that shouldn't have been allowed to begin with
in the first place. And um I uh I'm concerned about that. And um while this is unique in that when you look at the corner properties, it's not really
something that somebody has to look at right out their window like we have in another area town. Um but I I just am concerned that um these structures were built without
approval to begin with and now we are adding on to onto that structure. [clears throat] Anybody else? There was not a trailer there. There was an old vehicle that was sitting on the
side. There's also two more buildings behind this garage. Um, two more little sheds if I understand correctly. And so just curious about why we allow that many structures. Um, also,
well, we are operating from a 1994 zoning code. And so, um, when it comes to accessory structures, he would have to, this homeowner would have to get a variance in order to make an addition to that accessory structure. Any sheds or any um, smaller sheds can
be removed. And so, we would count that towards um, our zoning. So, he plans to remove the two sheds behind his garage if he adds on to the garage. I'm not able to speak about what u the homeowner is is possibly we could require him to move the two
sheds if he adds on to that. That's something that I personally would not want uh my department to do. What I would like to see is um perhaps us continuing monitoring and doing zoning code enforcement when the when there is a need. And so without all the all the
facts, council person um Nelson, respectfully, I wouldn't I wouldn't advise my team to go to [clears throat] move forward, have a conversation with him. I think he's back there. We won't we won't uh we won't discuss it here, but
you can discuss it with him. Thank you. Any [snorts] further Tom? Yeah, I've had uh Mr. gave me a call a few times on this and he asked me [clears throat] the proper channels to go through on this. I
told him you need to go through the zoning and appeals board asked him and I Nathan, if I'm correct, your neighbor on that side is totally fine with this. Yeah, all that and both of those would have to be removed with this project being done,
you know, and uh I think it's going to dress up property a little bit more than than what it is. He's going to be able to get his vehicle, camper, whatever is in there. It's going to be tucked away. It's not going to be seen. It's all going to be matching up. The house is a nice house. Garage is a nice garage.
It's just going to add to it. I'll be in favor of this. Anybody else? Audrey? Yeah, just a clarification on the driveway. Um and um obviously that's
been there for a while, but it is right up against the the property line. Also, we do require um some setback with the driveway too, do we not? Yes, you're correct. Um what we're showing here though is not a an unfixed
driveway to the property. It looks like the driveway ends right here in the um standard footprint of the original of the existing garage. There's a whole gravel driveway with posts that's holding the stuff up
that comes down in front of it. In my mind, there's a mailbox right there, too. So, right. But this is all um is all driveway where he would drive back to the shed.
We can take a look at that offline and we'll continue to monitor the monitor the property for any infractions. Robert, did you want to speak? Yeah. Thank you, mayor, members of the council. I did want to just point out
this is a type of action that doesn't typically come to the city council. This is one that usually is handled through the board of zoning appeals. This is a what is known as a quasi judicial due termination where the council instead of your normal role where you're in your
legislative capacity trying to decide what the rules should be, what policy should be, you're actually applying the uh rules that exist currently in the zoning ordinance. And there are specific criteria the council needs to follow to
grant a variance or to deny a variance. And I did want to just uh call to your attention that on starting on page 401 of your agenda packet, there's a template findings of fact form. There's seven findings the council needs to make
uh in order to support granting a variance. I'm not going to uh walk through each one of them. There's been sufficient discussion on a lot of them about uh the reasonleness of the proposed use um the compatibility of the
proposed use with the surrounding uses things like that. There is one that uh I do think warrants further consideration by the council and perhaps planning director Corbett can help too. Um, in order to grant a variance, there needs to be a finding that there's something
unique about the property that justifies the relief in the variance. So, some sort of physical characteristics of the property that would justify it. And I was just looking at the uh overheads [clears throat] and I don't know if there's a finding potentially that the property is narrower than its
surrounding parcels. Uh, but there should be some consideration of that criteria. The rest I think there's been discussion on Scott. I well I'll wait until this is over but I want to have a discussion or maybe some questions
in regards to our zoning appeals board. That is certainly an issue and I know I've been working with planning director Corbett. One of the items coming up on your agenda is to begin the process of essentially shifting the
duties and responsibilities of the uh board of zoning appeals into the planning commission which is authorized by state statute but we need a charter amendment in order to do that. So that's coming up for your consideration. Okay. All right. Thank you. It's a preview.
Anything else? I do I I don't have that we have a motion. Do we have a motion? No, we do not. I didn't hear a motion. Right. I'll call for a motion. Who wants to make a motion? I'll make the motion to grant the variance for
location 3108 1st Avenue Northwest parcel 95-835-280 for the 10-ft set setback variance. Do we have a second? A second. And we got a second discussion. [clears throat]
Christopher, is there enough room on the west side of the house so he can get into the backyard? [snorts] Is there enough room? I'm sorry. On the west side here? Well, no. You mean the east side?
Left side of the picture. Be the left side. Wouldn't that be the west side of the house? Yes. Is there enough room so he can get into the backyard? No, not there. Over over on the where the sea is on Just to the left of it in the shadow
in this area. Is that correct? You can still access the property. Are you referring to as like is there 10 ft or There is there's more than enough. So he can get into the backyard on that side. Yes.
Yes. Other questions, discussion? And the neighbor on the other side, his driveway looks like it the concrete is right up to the property. Correct.
That's not allowed anymore. [snorts] At this point, uh, we probably would need to investigate some more, but there seems to be, um, some properties that are impeding into their setbacks as they are standard now.
Okay. I remember I added an extra parking pad to my garage way back in the 80s. It's almost on the property line.
That was done according to Sony. How things change. Before in the county, you only could have one utility shed on your property. Now you can have two. That's true. [snorts]
Anybody else? Roll call. Council member O. I. [snorts] Nelson, no. Gilbertson, hi Gardner. Hi.
Hi. Davis, I Butterfield. I Spencelis, I. Seven eyes, one. No. Motion passes. Next is an amendment to the city charter
request to set a public hearing date. Christopher. Okay. So, this is the last one I do believe. So, I'm going to go through each one. Um, today we're looking for probably six motions. Uh, I'm going to separate them into three and then when
we come back for a public hearing, these will be separate actions and separate agenda items. So, the first one I am going to start off is the CIP um charter amendment which is section um 4.02 02 subdivision
4. [snorts] So for a few years now, the city council has been excuse me, planning commission has um approached city council to remove their review and their duty of reviewing the capital improvement plan. So every year the capital improvement plan comes to
planning commission and for the last two budget seasons um planning commissioners haven't given you a vote. um they have just basically provided a resolution stating that um we reviewed it. So there has been some arguments that it
was added into planning commission for transparency reasons. Uh and though I think historically um the transparency came up that it probably was needed because the capital improvement plan was mostly
managed under planning and development and that is not the case anymore. So capital improvement and our budgeting is managed by administration and our finance department. [snorts] And so we don't see that this is a role of planning commission anymore and therefore would need an amendment to the
city charter. We did change some language where we follow state statute to make sure that planning commissioners are taking a look at or reviewing the CIP with the context of our adopted comprehensive plan. And
so that state statute is 4 462.356 which requires the planning commission to submit a report of findings as compliance of the proposed improvements um with the comprehensive plan. So planning commissioners would not need to
review how many snow plows we need or um squad cars or any other things outside of the scope of the comprehensive plan. [snorts] So, with that being said, uh I'll answer any questions. Um but we do I am
requesting a motion um to introduce the ordinance and to set a public hearing for Monday, December 15th here at Health and Human Services starting at 6:30. So moved. We got a motion. Second.
We got a second. discussion. So, you don't want to count snow plows and squad cars anymore? This is a request of our planning commissioners, of our volunteers. So, roll call. Oh, I'm sorry.
I have been a proponent of someone reviewing it, and I understand that you don't want to um to do that. Um but I really do think that another set of eyes to look at the CIP is very important. Um
I understand the context of land use, etc. those types of things. However, I um am a proponent of someone else looking at that and tracking with the five-year plan and some of those types of things. And so if you aren't going to
do it, then I think in the budgeting process we need someone else to do that. But I'm probably a no on changing it. So I'm sorry. Don't be sorry. [snorts] I you know it is our volunteers um for planning commissions that want to uh utilize their time more valuable and give real
input to physical improvements of the city. Uh we've laid out all their roles and responsibilities and we're trying to streamline those processes. Um, but that could be a conversation with the administration and our department of finance on process improvement.
Any other questions, discussion? Roll call. Council member Nelson, no. Gilbertson, hi. Gardner, hi. Baggerly, hi. Davis, hi Butterfield.
Hi, Schultz. Hi, and O. I seven eyes's one no. The motion passes. Okay, Christopher. Go ahead. All right. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So, the
next one is section 4.02 subdivision 8. And this amendment would modify section the section of the charter to require planning commission to review proposed purchases and sales within the context of a compliance with the comprehensive plan. Uh this language is similar to
Minnesota state statute which requires the planning commission to submit a report um of the findings and propose acquisitions and depositions of the comprehensive plan. So again this is a more procedure procedural um request.
Right now the city charter we the way that it works is in city council you will set a price for any purchase agreement that we enter with the um potential buyer and then without any negotiation um planning commissioners
are required to review the purchase agreement and so that adds another layer of um I guess it extends the public process but it lives here any purchases that we do um lives here with city council as you all are setting the
price, negotiating and approving the sale and not um commissioners they don't have a say in it. So we were requesting to change language u that is more in line with state statute that acquire requires planning commission to
take a look at anything that is um within our wheelhouse of our planning department. So, purchasing and um disposing of uh land as we see fit for the comprehensive plan or to support the comprehensive plan. Audrey,
can you give me an example of what you wouldn't want to do or what you I'm still struggling a little bit. So, uh if you remember earlier this year, I do believe uh the sale of our property in Redwood Falls. Um am I
saying that right? Redwood Falls came to planning commission and they had to review it. Another one would be uh if we sold any of our um let's say
we sold any of our um property, public works garage for example, and we sold it. it didn't it doesn't necessarily need to come back through planning commission because we're not proposing a development there that's attached to that purchase agreement but it's just a transaction and so we're moving away
from those transactions and we're looking for like more of a holistic um agreement so a developer will come back with a site plan they will come back with um perhaps a rendering look at any reasonzoning that would need to take
place and not these one-off transactions Is there an asset that the development board or commission would be interested in reviewing? Council member Gilbertson, if your question is is the planning commissioners what their appetite would
be to review. Is that what I'm hearing? Yes. So I I just I'd like to look at it through the lens of a development versus planning. So um if I'm hearing your question correctly, it would be more so of uh if
the city is annexing, right? Uh if we are that's in the comprehensive plan and we can point to the comprehensive plan that the city is looking to enter an agreement to annex property. If the um if we wanted to purchase property and
[snorts] partner with the developer for development then that is something that will come through um planning commission with the caveat that we're looking to reszone. We're looking for variances and things like that. So, more of a a
development package, if you will, and not just the transaction itself. I'm gonna lean on attorney Scott, too, just in case if you can clarify anything for you. Call on it. Thank you, Mayor, members of the council. I just want to maybe back up a
step here. The [clears throat] impetus for this charter amendment as well as the previous one on the comprehens on the capital improvement plan is really to uh clarify the scope of the planning commission review not as I understand it
to uh prevent these issues from being presented to the planning commission at all. um state statute, the municipal planning act uh talks about these issues and talks about the role of the planning commission being the entity that the
body that is kind of most directly responsible for paying attention to the comprehensive plan and advising the city council on its actions that have some relevance to the comprehensive plan. State statute does require that capital
improvement budgets and uh proposed sales or acquisitions of publicly held property in the city be referred to the planning commission unless the city council itself makes the determination that there's just no relevance in this specific case or any specific case to
the comprehensive plan in which case there is a procedure for the council to dispense with that requirement. But it requires a twothird supermajority vote by the city council to do that. Absent that, everything has to go to the planning commission. What this charter amendment, I think, addresses is some
confusion over the planning commission's scope. There have been previous transactions where a proposed sale of city property goes to the planning commission. There's been some confusion. Is the planning commission supposed to scrutinize the terms and conditions that the city's negotiated in the purchase
agreement and offer an opinion on is the price sufficient? is you know the uh reserved [clears throat] interest the city has negotiated uh adequate and really what that what statute contemplates is that the planning commission's review there is narrower the planning commission's reviewing does
it make sense for the city to sell this property in this case given how we've planned for this area to be used and that's really the scope of it and they're supposed to make a report on their findings whether the transaction is uh consistent with the overall intent of the comprehensive plan and that's for
council then to consider and make the final determinations on the proposed sale or acquisition. Same deal with the capital improvements from the previous amendment. It's uh does it make sense for the city to be prioritizing investments in the capital improvement plan in these areas given
the way we plan for the development of that area in the future? So, I just wanted to kind of hopefully [snorts] address the I think the underlying uh dynamic here and why the planning commission itself I think was seeking these amendments. But I'm happy to
answer any questions on the statutory framework here. Thank you, Robert. Any questions, discussion? Otherwise, I need a motion. So moved. Second.
Have a motion and a second to set the public hearing for December 15th at 6:31. Okay. All right. Discussion. Roll call. Council member Gilbertson. Hi. Gardner.
Hi. Baggerly. Hi. Davis. Hi. Butterfield. I should I Osc I and Nelson I eight I eyes's zero nos motion passes. Thank you.
Are you taking this next one too? Yes I am. You are okay. All right. So the final one for um this evening is the to introduce an ordinance. Basically, we
kind of talked about it um today to to introduce an ordinance to amend the charter and to give the responsibilities of the board of zoning appeals to planning commission. And so we talked about there's a seven members required by
charter for the board of zoning appeals. We only have two and we have had two or one for the last two years or so despite all the efforts that we have done to um you know recruit volunteers and this is something that's you're going to see
across all of our boards and u commissions. There's just a decrease in volunteers. Uh and so what we'll be looking for so we can prevent that a variance comes back to city council. Uh rolling that over into planning
commission um basically it is aligned with a lot of other a lot of other municipalities and their planning commission how they um take a look at a complete site. And so just back pocket information, a developer can come to planning
commission and have two meetings for the reszone the reasonzoning of their parcel and then they have to come to city council for a public hearing as well. So that's another two meetings and in the event that they need a variance that's attached to it. Um we just saw this with
Jersey Mike's and they have to go to board of zoning appeals too and now we have um added a significant time to the process and that is something that can be um taken a look at at the time that we're doing a reasonzoning or anything else that is aligned with the duties of
planning commission. So, with that being said, I'll be looking for the same motion to introduce the ordinance and set a public hearing for Monday, December 15th, um, at 6:32 um, PM at the Health and Human Services Building.
So, move second. We got a motion and a second discussion. Audrey, um, thank you. Um, I get that what you're talking about, but with what we just dealt with tonight, my assumption would be that the planning commission would have said no because it didn't
meet the requirements. And so, you're now asking that person to come back to the same group as a um to ask for another chance to go through this.
How would that how would what we just dealt with tonight um how does that work when people who I mean technically you should have said no to the building here you
came and asked for a variance um you would ask the planning commission for the variance to begin with correct and so the applicant is their right to request a variance on any property that does that is out of um the standard of our zoning code. Uh the
application would have been forwarded to planning commission and planning commission would have voted on it. Uh and then it would have either come to city council um in the event that um in the event that it was denied and the
applicant wanted to contest it. [snorts] What this charter amendment um aims to do is not to get rid of board of zoning appeals, but to place it on pause until um internally we can figure out a better recruitment strategy for our boards and commission. But the work continues by
rolling the responsibility over to planning commission. Any other questions? Roll call. Council member Gilbertson. No gardener. Hi
Figerly. Hi Davis. Hi Butterfield. Hi. Schultz. Hi. Osc. No. And Nelson. No.
Five eyes, three nos. Okay. Thank you. Motion carries. Thank you, Christopher. Next, I call on our city engineer, Jared Vogi, for a professional services
agreement number one. Evening, mayor, council, closing your packets this evening is an amendment to the original agreement associated with the Lakeland Drive path project. As you recall, that was an improvement that was
identified for construction in 2025. Um, city successfully pursued and obtained funding for the improvements along that corridor. Um, consisting of both state and federal requirements.
with the federal requirements. Um brings in the requirements for environmental review, cultural resources review, prevailing wages, and uh additional paperwork and procedures to ensure that
those funds are gathered from the federal agency and all the processes are in place um to acquire those dollars. In [snorts] addition, um during the preliminary design of that project, uh we did have a utility coordination
meeting. Uh the trail shared use path is planned on the east side of Lakeland Drive and through review of that with uh Wilmer Municipal Utilities. Uh they're not interested in relocating any of
their poles on the east side. As a result, um a portion of that the trail will be moved to the west um into uh where the existing batuminous surface is already. Uh so that requires some rework
on that um originally contemplated design as a result of um that utility conflict. But before you, what is before you this evening is a resolution for a contract amendment to cover those items that I just discussed in the amount of
$79,900. And I'd be happy to answer any questions that council might have for a motion. Do I have a motion? I'll make a motion to adopt the resolution authorizing
amendment number one to the 2025 construction project design and construction professional services agreement in the amount of $79,900. Have a motion. Do we have a second? Second. A second. Discussion.
[snorts] So when we first put this out for bid on this uh did the utilities say anything to the city or on their concerns about it prior or anything? No. So during the um during the
preliminary engineering report process last year when this project was planned for 2025, uh the cost came back. It was a big number. um council um inquired about pursuing grant funds for the construction of the
trail. So it was concept in nature um generally reviewed to fit within that corridor because it is a larger corridor. Um when we got into the preliminary design piece of it, we picked up all the utilities.
Um, we put the lines on paper, met with the utility companies as we always do on every project, and we were informed that um, those poles would not be relocated as part of this project uh, without a very significant cost. I believe it's a
larger um, distribution transmission line um, that is apparently not too old. So that was that came out of the utility coordination meeting. Any other discussion on the motion?
So the the path will be moved to the west. Does that mean the Lakeland Drive will be narrower than it is now? Yeah. So since this will be a shared use path off of the roadway, the existing bike lane in that area will be eliminated. Okay. Right. Yep.
Steve, what does this do to the overall project cost and where does the $79,900 come from? Well, the overall project cost um identified in the I have that somewhere. It's
approximately, I believe the overall project cost is approximately 1.5 million through the most recent preliminary engineering uh report planning process that was just completed a couple months ago. That was identified
um in there because the utility coordination meeting occurred prior to that. So, it's covered in the overall Yes. Yep. Any other questions, discussion, roll calls?
Oh, what year were the lines installed? That I don't know off the top of my head, but when we when we had the preliminary utility coordination meeting um with Mr. Zern. Um we were informed
that those are significant line that would um relocation would come at a significant cost. So but we can find that year out for you. Any more discussion? Roll call. Council member Gardner.
I Davis I. Butterfield. I should I Os Nelson. I and Gilbertson. Hi. [clears throat] Eight eyes, zero nos.
That motion passes. Next is a business LRIP fund funding. Tell us about it. Yeah, thank you, mayor, councel. Um the [clears throat]
2025 solicitation for the local road improvement program uh is currently out. This is the same funding source that we were able to capitalize or utilize uh for the first street
improvements or business 71 improvements that were completed this construction season. I'm sure most of you had had an opportunity to drive on the north end of that project. Um those are the grant dollars uh through this very program that were utilized for that. Since uh
business 71 is a four-lane highway, it carries a different uh classification than most of our streets in town. Um, and we've identified this as a potential funding source for uh improvements to
that next phase south of uh Robins Island to the stoplight on the south end of the bridge. Um, so if council is so inclined, there's a resolution in your packet which is required as part of the funding
application process um to authorize an application to be submitted for the 2025 local road improvement program uh funding for business 71. And with that, Mayor Council, I'd be happy to answer any questions that you might have.
We have a motion to that effect. We have a second. Second. Second. We got a motion and a second. Discussion. Steve, does this uh Mr. Vogy, does this come with matching grant or matching fund requirements with it or how does the
grant work? Yeah. So, the uh local road improvement project, I believe, is capped at 1.5 uh million per project. That project exceeds that cost. similar to uh the project that was just
completed at this time, but there's no specific um matching requirement associated with it. Thank you. Y So, Mr. Vog, you said this would go to the stoplight south of the bridge.
So, the the bridge would get the bridge is concrete, isn't it? would be how would that Yeah, it would not include the bridge, but it would include the batuminous from the stoplight to the bridge. Yep. Got you. Yep.
Okay, we got a motion in a second. Roll call. Council member Faggerly, I. Davis, I Butterfield, I should I Nelson. Hi, Gilbertson. Hi, and Gardner.
I Eight eyes's, zero nos. Motion passes. Thank you, chair. Thanks, council. Next, the 2026 project design and construction professional services agreement. City administrator Leslie Valiant.
Good evening, council. So tonight I'm presenting to you the uh project designs construction for professional services for the 2026 projects that were approved at the public hearing on October 6. that includes the fourth street utility
construction, southwest, the bridge maintenance project and uh the stormwater capital improvement project for 23rd, 8th Avenue, Gorton and High Avenue along with crack and seal coating of various
streets that you see in your packet. Stand for any questions or call for a motion. It's all moved. Second. We got a motion and a second. Any discussion?
There is no uh with the adoption of the bike, pedestrian, and trail plan, is there any extra consideration that should be made in the construction and design of these service services for the city? [clears throat]
That hasn't had we haven't had that discussion on you're talking about fourth street could be. Yeah, we haven't sat down with Rob to discuss any further changes to any of this. [snorts] Is there
something the council would like to change? Audrey, um I believe and we talked about it before that um it was acknowledged that they would look at that in the design
of that. So, I would hope that we would be doing that with all of our streets and comparing them to that. We can take a look at that and then we can bring back any changes that are necessary to the construction project
engineering designs to go ahead council member Nelson. It would just be Fourth Street, correct? Or would there be What would council like? Well, I'm just looking at the other is storm water and the bridge maintenance. I don't know
that there's anything that can be done there, but we could certainly look at it. I guess I I would say we need to incorporate that into our designs here. Um, yes. Do we receive any other bids other than from Balden and make?
We tip we have not gone out for our FPS on that. I mean, we'd have to go out for RFPs for specific projects and we have not done that in the past. We've entered into an agreement with
professional services with Bolton and Mink for the for the year basically and that covers all of these projects. Well, these are projects that the council approved and that they had preliminary designed and then this is
just the balance of completing those projects next year through construction. Okay. So each phase is actually given to the council as to costwise but we don't go out for bids on the
individual projects after the annual award to Bolden and Mink. No. Okay. They've done the preliminary design work already. So, we would have to we would have to completely rethink how we're going to do this. We would have to come
up with the projects we're going to do. And then we would have to have an RFP for each specific project to go out for preliminary design through the public hearing through the construction and package it that way.
Thank you, Audrey. Um the preliminary design work was done like with four street we've delayed it but that design was done and as you see we would need that in order to decide what streets we can do and what we can't
do. So it I get I get the work ahead of time and as you see we have already on the last page well second to last page uh under compensation you see that for street preliminary prelim preliminary
design and design there are no charges there because they've already been paid. Any other question, Tom? For street was actually supposed to be done last year. We pushed it off because of due to the project cost cost and everything. So,
yes. So, then now it's just uh construction building the bidding [snorts and clears throat] pro the bidding process is still in the project management and the construction services and closing it out the project.
Any other discussion? Roll call. Council member Davis. Hi. Butterfield. Hi. Shel. Hi. Os. Hi. Nelson. Hi. Gilbertson. [snorts] Hi. Gardner. Hi.
And Faggerly. Hi. Eight eyes. Zero nos. Thank you. Passes. Thank you Leslie. Next I'll call our city engineer Jared Vogi back up in regards to crack seal coat storm water.
Thanks, Mayor Councel. Uh what you have before you this evening are three capital improvement plans. Uh staff has been collaborating on these for a number of months along with uh Wilmer Municipal Utilities. The first one uh is the
street and utility CIP. Uh ultimately that aligns [clears throat] the the projects that are presented to you in preliminary engineering reports um and provides a a road map if you will of what streets
are the priorities within the next 5 years. I should note that as part of the uh street and utility CIP uh we did meet with Wilmer Municipal Utilities. They identified some high priority water main areas that they would like replaced. And
so we were able to identify those and incorporate those into this plan uh to make sure that they're addressed within the timelines uh that they felt their utilities uh could remain in place without without failing.
Uh the second one in your packet this evening is the crack seal and seal coat CIP. Very similar map to to those that you've seen in pre peers previously. Um but it ultimately lays out the next five years um associated with that. And then
finally, the five-year storm water CIP with the overall intent of that CIP to uh mitigate localized funding uh provide storm water quality improvements and um identify key maintenance areas uh
that will help the overall storm sewer network within the community. Um in your packet, there are some costs estimated currently for each of the years. uh there have been some inflation factors applied to that um as we get out to
2030. Um so those that is there for your information. And lastly uh there are maps associated with each of these uh capital improvement plans. And ultimately what we're seeking this evening from council is a motion
adopting the street utility crack seal seal coat and storm water capital improvement plan. Lastly, I will mention uh that these are similar to all the plans that we have within the community. These are guides. Ultimately, the authority of when these projects move
forward or what they look like rests with you all. Um so with that, I'd be happy to answer any questions that you might have. Um Jared, [clears throat] just looking at this. I believe this is the overlay
for 2029 on Oolina. I don't know if that's like 12 or 13th Street. Looks like we're going to have a couple corner lots on there. Okay. So, how is that going to come in play where we're doing, you know, doing
a corner lot on both sides on that one? Um, you're going to test my memory of the corner lot assessment policy, but ultimately they would be assessed for the short side plus onethird of the
long. Okay. Yep. So, they would get both sides at the same time. Okay. Yep. Motion to approve. We got a motion. Do we have a second? Second. Have a second. Discussion.
Roll call. Council member Shel. I Nelson. Hi. Gilbertson. Hi. [snorts] Gardner. Hi. Aggerly. Hi. Davis. Hi. And Butterfield. I
eight I eyes's zero nos. That motion passes. Thank council. X is rail corridor study cooperative agreement call on operations director Kyle Box. Thank you Mr. Mayor. Good evening
council. Tonight before you is a rail corridor study cooperative agreement that the city of Wilmer Candy County and BNSF have been working on for quite some time. But we're finally at a point to uh get it in front of the respective bodies
uh for your consideration and approval. So just a timeline of events here. City council meeting is tonight. This is before you. Uh the county board will see this exact document tomorrow. So any action that the council does take tonight uh would be pending county board approval as well. So I just want to get
that in front of you. Uh what this uh corridor study cooperative agreement entails is a uh an opportunity for the city, the county, and BNSF to evaluate opportunities for improved safety, uh reduce trespassing and transportation
conflicts and consolidate rail crossings. Uh through this corridor study, we have identified specific areas of interest within this document that you can see within um starting on page three. Uh it's item section four under
the scope, but again to evaluate uh bicyclist, pedestrian overpass, alternative alternative uh access to the Wilmer yard, including possible reconstruction of the existing 71 uh First Street Bridge overpass for accommodations. We'll be looking at uh
and evaluating conceptual alignment, alternative alternatives of grade separation with grade potential. uh looking at what grade closures at 7th and 10th Street look like and evaluating conceptual alignment of alternatives for grade separation at Lakeland Drive. Um
and then also looking at grade separations uh at those at grade crossings uh throughout uh county road on county road 5 as well. In addition to that, we'll be looking uh uh for the county's perspective at all all at grade crossings will be evaluated
uh throughout the entire county as well. Uh so again uh what this is is just a planning document. It would be um if council does want to move forward with this document. An RFP would be released um through the jointly through the city, the county um to be come back and be
evaluated by the three partners, the city, the county and BNSF. And then we'd be moving recommending a consultant uh to start the planning process. So again just kind of next steps. Uh BNSF has agreed to the document that's in its packet. The county board will
consider this action at its meeting tomorrow. Uh if approved, we'll be drafting a request for proposals for rail uh consultants to review and provide uh guidance and uh respond to the proposal and then we'll bring that RFP back to the city council for
approval. Our goal is to do that yet in 2025. Uh throughout this as well, uh there is the compensation piece of it. Uh we're estimating the total project to be uh right around $300,000 and that would be
equally split uh 1/3 and 1/3 by BNSF, the county and the city in the event that the any proposal would come back above that 300,000. It would be the responsibility of the city and the county to make that difference up. Um but that would be we'll we'll know that
we'll know more information once once we receive those proposals. Um I will pause there, Mr. Mayor, if there are any questions specifically about the cooperative agreement. We have a motion first of all. So move second.
You got a motion and he's got a second discussion. [clears throat] Audrey, this has been in the plans for a while. It says CIP 2024. We have 100,000 in there for this study. Correct. Correct.
Tom, we split it if it's less than 300,000 and get that uh between the two of us or No, it's a reimbursement. So, it is up to So, the city will take the the city will pay the invoices and then seek
reimbursement from the county from BNSF or being re and then being re reimbursed back from BNSF. Okay. So, if it doesn't cost us that, we won't spend it. Um, but BNSF will be on the hook for 100 no matter what. Then a third.
A third up to 100,000. But we get the overage. Okay. Correct. Kyle, does this uh include uh the possibility of quiet zones extended? U Mr. Mayor, yes, that is part of the
scope that will those will be looked at during uh that is one of the requests through the RFP. Now, there is a different specific program that covers quiet zones, but uh we know it's a um not a hot I would call it a hot topic,
but it is it's it's talked about quite a bit in the community. So, we wanted to make sure that was part of the um that we touch on that through the corridor study. Again, this is just what the hopes that we will get from completing this agreement is a a planning document
that opens us up to apply for uh federal rail dollars for any capital projects that would come in the future. Uh so any anything that we would identify in this study um if it was quiet zone related, we would have a plan and documentation
in place to go for capital grants. Audrey, thank you. Mary. Um it's of interest to me the bike and pedestrian overpass. Um it's shut down right now because it's not safe. Um it's my understanding that
that was um the railroad's responsibility to fix that. This is talking about looking at alternatives. Um, does is that still evaluating their responsibility to do it or to just look
at the best location for it to be? Council member Nelson, uh, I think twofold. I think there's an opportunity for us to evaluate the current location and see what can be done with the partners that we have. uh or if it best
aligns to move potentially move that pedestrian uh bridge maybe to an an attachment or an expansion of the first street bridge. Uh so that would be part of the study though looking at what what uh the community and what the plan calls
for for best use of that um amenity. In that situation, Candy County interested in this or it becomes the city's responsibility with BNSF. That would be the city's responsibility. [cough and clears throat] The planning
document is a goal to benefit the city and the county and BNSF and then each respective entity would be able to go after any projects they would want to within their identified areas. Thank you. Any other discussion?
Roll call. Council member Osk. Hi. Nelson. Hi. Gilbertson. Hi. Gardner. Hi. Faggerly. Hi. Davis. Hi. Butterfield. I. And Shel. I.
Eight eyes's zero nos. Motion passes. Thank you, Kyle. Thank you, mayor. Thank you, councel. Next is the act act agricultural land exemption of special assessments. I'll call on city clerk Vernate Lor.
[clears throat] Thank you, Mr. Mayor and council members. Each year, uh, properties that have been used for agricultural purposes have the opportunity when they have assessments placed on their property to ask for a temporary exemption. That is
something they do on an annual basis. I have a motion tonight for the current two owners that have been in the past asked for exemptions. They are again asking for those uh assessment exemptions for the year of 2026 crop year since their properties still meet
the requirements for egg deferment. Call for a motion. Some move. Second. Discussion. Roll call. Council member Nelson. I. Gilbertson. Hi.
Gardner. Hi. Faggerly. Hi. Davis. Hi. Butterfield. Hi. Shel. Hi. And Osk. I. Eight eyes's zero nos. Motion passes. [snorts] Next is an amendment to the assessment
role for 2025 street and other improvements. Again, city clerk Bernie Larson. The final assessment role for 2025 was approved and confirmed through two resolutions and sent over to the county
for a assessment adoption to the assessments role. Um it had come to our attention that Candy County Housing and Devel redevelopment authority had a parcel on the assessment role in the amount of $5,75.
However, the city is contractually prohibited from imposing special assessments on county H owned properties due to a contract that stems back to 1979 again in 1989 and the HA is requesting that this be
removed. There is a motion in your packet for that to be removed and for the new assessment role to be brought over to the county by my office to be amended. for a motion to that effect. Some move. Second.
A motion and a second. Discussion. Roll call. Council member Gilbertson. Hi. Gardner. Hi. Faggerly. Hi. Davis. Hi. Butterfield. Hi. Sheld. Hi. O. I. And Nelson.
I. Eight eyes. Zero nos. That motion passes. Next, I'll call on the city clerk again for a reassessment of KCH property.
In being made aware of the properties from the HA, um it was found that there was a property that was overlooked last year in the 2024 uh assessment role. So, um, in order to meet our contractual agreement with
them, we are requesting that the city reassess or the council reassess the a property for the amount of $0 so that it can be sent over to the county and removed from the assessment role.
Call for a motion to that effect. Second motion. Second discussion. Roll call. Council member Gardner. Hi. Baggerly. Hi. Davis. Hi.
Butterfield. Hi. Sheld. I. Osc. I Nelson. Hi. And Gilbertson. Hi. Eight eyes's zero nos. Passes.
Next is uh city council member Nelson requesting a review or other way I put it. What do you want to say? Um I am requesting that we schedule a special meeting
um to be determined or a non- annian annual evaluation of a performance of the city of Wilmer city administrator under Minnesota statute section 13D.05 subdivision 3A and I might suggest that we look at
doing it after our next regular meeting or if there's a time that we want to do it before that um open to when we might want to do it. Yeah, Justin, I'm just wondering maybe our city
attorney can advise. Is that something that could be done in close session at the conclusion of the November 17th meeting? Yes. Thank you, mayor, members of the council member uh council members. We uh fielded a couple inquiries in followup
to the previous performance evaluation which had already concluded and uh in advising council members who had inquired. It seemed like if this needed to come back before the council, it would be most appropriate to do so in close session in another performance evaluation.
That was the motion made. It [clears throat] can be closed. It should be closed unless the city administrator requests that it be conducted in open session. So, it wouldn't require a special meeting. It could be part of the November 17th agenda. It could be part of the November 17th
agenda. Okay, [snorts] that would be my request. I'll make that motion. Second. All right, we got a motion and a second. Discussion. Tom, did you have a question?
Roll call. Council member Gardner. Hi, Berley. Hi. Davis. Hi. Butterfield. Hi. Shoulders. Hi. Os. Hi. Nelson. Hi. Gilbertson. Hi. Eight eyes. Zero nos.
Motion passes. Any announcements? If not, I'm open to a motion to adjurnn. Move to adjourn. Second. Well, I usually do.