The city council regular meeting of the city of Wyoming, Minnesota, December 16, 2025. Let the record reflect we do have a quorum. Member Anstead, member Schilling, member Luger, and Mayor Mayor Iverson, Mayor, sorry, member Joerger,
and Mayor Iverson are present. Please stand for the pledge of allegiance. 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. >> Okay. So, first on the agenda is open forum. It's an opportunity for members of the public to address the city council on items that are or may not be on the current agenda. Items requiring council action may be deferred to staff or boards and
commissions for research and future council agendas if appropriate. You will be limited to three minutes and we ask that you conduct yourself in a professional courteous manner and refrain from the use of profanity. Failure to abide by this policy may result in the loss of your privilege to
speak. Do we have anybody here tonight that would like to speak? Please come forward and state your name and address, please. Matthew Pulson. >> Okay. >> And address is 6880231st Lane Northeast.
And I am also representing the Fores Lake Hockey Association. >> Okay. And what can we do for you? >> Uh we'd like consideration to be able to use the outdoor rink. So to rent it, have organized practices on it. Um
currently we're short on ice time, severely short. I've we have grown significantly over the last three years. We've gone from 450 kids in our association to over 700. I have 110 kids
from Wyoming. Um right now we have two sheets of indoor ice and we're renting ice at every other city and township in the area. So, we rent ice two hours a night from Scandia, four days a week. We have a fully dedicated
rink for our use at Forest Lake and we're renting ice one night a week in Lynwood. So, we are looking for at least one night a week or just whatever we can get an hour per night, but we are very, very short on ice. Um, our kids right
now only get practices on the weekends. First grade, second grade, some of the third graders get practice during the week. Every association that we play, they have more rinks than us. >> They have two to three they have they have two to three outdoor rinks and they
have three to four indoor rinks. They have about half the ice time. So, our kids are behind and they're struggling. So, we want to be able to use the ice rink that you have. So, we'd like you to consider that. I know that's a policy change from currently it's just open to
the community, but I think we can we can probably work with you to try to make that work. Um other item that I would like to address too and this is from the hockey association. Uh currently
and this is part of our need to try to reduce costs for our players and also in the future we we're going to need to build more rinks. But charitable gambling is something that has benefited a lot of the other hockey associations
in the community uh near us. White Bear, Still Water, everybody we compete against, even North Branch is able to do that. We're struggling to do that because Flaw has every single establishment available in town. And
currently, the rules only allow one charitable organization per establishment per the ordinance in the city. We would ask that you would consider to allow up to two charitable organizations per establishment because there's only a
couple establishments really in Wyoming. And so if FLA has both of them, we don't have an opportunity and neither does any of the other charitable organizations in town too. So if the fire department or the Lions Club or anybody else wants to participate right now, they don't have
the opportunity to do that either. So, two items that we'd like you to consider. Um, but priority is our kids need ice. So, please look into that. And, uh, we need your help on the charitable gambling, too. So, that's,
uh, you know, state of Minnesota encourages organizations to work together and the model is to have more than one establishment or more than one organization per establishment. So, >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you.
Um, Mr. Lynwood, Mr. Lunan, um, kind of not quite sure where any of that goes. So, I'm assuming there's liability, insurance liability, and and all that kind of stuff. So, is that something that um is even doable? And
why? And I'm going to go to the gambling. If there's one and you want to go to two, why not five or six or 10? Yeah, I think you know I can't speak as I guess it's the first time we've been asked in regards to the charitable in regards to what you know I think we're probably just talking about pull tabs or maybe other things if there's um silent
auctions that's something that we've never had requested I guess before in regards to what you know if there could be a change that's something if the council was inclined we could look at the ordinance and you know look at changing that from one to multiple to two or um more than that I think that's
um I think that's I don't know I guess Mr. Luna and I'm not sure if in any of your cities if that's the norm. I think more often than not you see one, but I don't want to say that because I guess I'm not an expert on that. Um, in regarding the ice rink, um, I guess as long as I've been here, the thought has
always been that that's a community ice rink and it's never has been. The policy has been it is not rented out to um, them because I know that in the past >> available to everybody. Sounds like not only, you know, Force Lake hockey, there's other establishments kind of like our soccer and baseball fields that come from all over um the area looking
for that time. And I think in the past that's been the policy where we just had it for the community. So um once again, that would be up to the the council, but that's what we have done um proceeding up to this. >> Okay. >> Out of curiosity, did we rent out any of our fields to anybody?
>> Um ball fields somewhat limited, but soccer fields, yes, some some soccer fields not as much as before. There was one uh lakes I think that they were utilizing some different fields last year. Um some but not as much as usual last year or this year I should say. >> So we have rented out community fields
too. >> We have rented out our community fields. It's not the ice because we only have the one rink and it's usually heavily used by the community and >> um I think that's been in the past that we've just based on that usage by the community to have to open it up to one. We they've talked about that it might
open up to others or do we have to consider others and have we open up to one? But we have more than one field to rent out. >> Correct. We have many many soccer fields, many baseball fields. Correct. >> Out of curiosity, are you guys open to weird hours >> like when we don't think anybody's going
to be using it? >> Mo most of the use would be by our youngest kids because that's where our numbers are. So they can't be on the ice really after 8:00. So we're looking for a five o'lock, six o'clock, or seven o'clock start. To your question on insurance, they're covered by USA
Hockey, Forest Lake hockey. So, they're covered by insurance and that's what covers them wherever they go. So, we'd give you a certificate of insurance that would establish that as well. Um, as far as the use, every other city and township has been able to accommodate
us. They still have significant uh users as well. There's also the pleasure rink that's available. So if they want to skate, they can skate on that while the the boards that rink is being used. >> So that's that's how we've established at other >> Okay.
>> All right. Well, we appreciate it and we'll have conversation. Don't know which way that'll go. So all right. Yep. Thank you. All right. We will move on to approval of minutes number one. Consider approving the minutes of the regular meeting of the Wyoming Minnesota City
Council for December 2nd, 2025. Are there any questions or changes? If not, we need a motion to approve. >> We have a motion to approve by member Onstead. Do we have a second? >> Second. >> Second by member Schilling. All in favor? I opposed. So approved.
>> Consent agenda number two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, and nine. Does anybody wish to pull an item from the consent agenda? >> Seeing none, uh, we need a motion to approve. >> So moved. We have a motion to approve by
member Schilling. Do we have a second? >> Second. >> We have a second by member Anstead. All in favor? I opposed. So approved. Acknowledge receipts of reports of officer boards, commissions, and department heads. Number 10, 11, 12, 13,
and 14. Does anybody wish to pull a report from um our officers? Seeing none, we'll move on to communication. Number 15, Wyoming Library Extended Access Project Update. Mr. McFarland, is that you tonight or
Mr. Lynwood? >> Who would like to take that? >> I know that Mr. McFarland. >> All right. Thank you. >> I think he was prepared to discuss it, but he is aware of it. Um, as you know, the library has been looking at extended access hours. So, just to give the council an update, they are um getting
close here to have their um their beta testers, if you call it, to start participating that. um an update from Carla Leiden, the executive director. Um anticipates they'll start that on January 5th, 2026. Um they'll do that for approximately three months just to
kind of see how it goes. Um see if everything is smooth, see if there's issues, but all the necessary components as far as the the software, electrical updates, um cameras, that has all been installed and implemented and ready to go. So, um just wanted to give council some information as you've been hearing about that probably for the last year.
So, >> that's it. Perfect questions from council member on. >> No questions. >> Member Schilling. >> Uh, no questions. >> Member Jagger. >> No questions. >> All right. Thank you for the update. We'll move on to new business number 16 to consider resolution 2512136.
A resolution establishing surface water rates for 2026 through 2030 based on the rate study completed by Ericson Northstar LLC. >> Mr. L. >> Yes. Thank you, Mayor, members of council. Um, as you aware, the city went through an RFP process for uh storm
water rates to go through our next five years as those are the existing ones are coming to an end in 2025. Um, the city council selected Ericson Northstar to move forward and do that storm water utility rate study. We had a work session on this for both Mr. Al Ericen and Mr. Nick Dragusich were here to
discuss that. Tonight we have Mr. Al Ericen, Alan Ericson, here tonight to go through uh some of the outcomes of that and uh recommendations of the city council on any changes or um increases in those funds to the city council. So, with that, I'll let Mr. Ericen take it
away. Great, >> Mr. Ericson. It's good to see you in person. >> Well, thank you. >> At my age, it's always good to be seen. So, thank you. I appreciate that. Thanks for having me here tonight. Uh my partner, Mr. Dragoich, sends his regrets. Uh he's having fun tonight.
He's, as you know, he's on the city council at Lake Elmo and they're having their truth and taxation hearing tonight. So, >> away you go. So, uh, as uh, Mr. Lynwood had mentioned, we did talk about this extensively at the, uh, at the council work session uh, in November. So, I
think that, uh, what we want to do is I'll try to move through this fairly quickly since we've talked about a lot of this before. Uh just to refresh everybody's memories, uh why we're engaged was to review and analyze the uh surface water utility fund for uh to determine the appropriate rates that would be needed to fund uh your uh
operating uh and maintenance expenses, capital improvements that were being planned, any debt service that you had, which you do not, but uh might be uh projected for any existing infrastructure and to provide for adequate cash reserves for the future.
So, as we said, we talked about this quite a bit at the meeting in November. And at that meeting, if you remember, we presented two scenarios. One was not raising rates at all. And uh that scenario showed that uh by not raising rates, you wouldn't be able to uh meet
even your minimum requirements that you have for your own internal financial policies. Uh and that a rate increase was needed in order to meet those policies. And the biggest policy of them uh is there on that bullet point that states that at the end of each fiscal year, each enterprise fund shall
maintain a minimum cash reserve balance equal to 50% of the following year's budgeted expenses, 100% of the following year's debt service principle and interest if you have any, and the five-year average of the future capital outlay. So basically
we uh built our model to solve for that problem for you and our recommendations were to increase the surface water rates by 2.6%. Uh from 2026 through 2031 each year and establish your surface water rates uh
not just year-to-year but for a three to five year period whatever you're comfortable with. However, knowing that at each budget year, the city staff will review those rates to make sure that uh everything is the way it should be and that no very strange economic things that that were unforeseen had happened
by implementing those and we're not working. >> Well, thank you very much. I appreciate >> you know it's best right >> it What did we get?
What's in our packet? >> I could neither sing nor dance, so I can't fill that air time. >> We have what's in our packet. Can you just go to the website? >> Oh, okay. You're just going to run from there. >> Hey, look at that. Grant, it's not you.
on my screen. >> Is it It's not showing on the other screen >> at all. >> It's not There we go. >> It's okay. >> What? As long as you got it, I'm not going to tell. >> Yeah. Why don't you go to slide five
then? >> So, you've seen slide five and six before. was the last time. This is the operating revenue and the operating expenses, revenues in green, expenses in red. And as you can see, uh that the 2.6% uh keeps you in in the operating uh
positive basis all the way through the plan here through 2031 as as is required by your by your policies. And if you go to slide six then and that shows the cash balances and they're they're above what you need.
what your what your policies state you should need and it provides a little bit extra there in case there's any unforeseen disasters or anything else that might happen as well. Uh and you see there's slight degradation in the cash over time. That's mainly due to the capital improvement plans. Uh you don't
uh issue debt. You have no plans to issue debt, but you're using the cash you have available to pay for them. That saves money in the long run by not having to pay interest. So, and again, the capital improvement plan was developed by city staff with your city engineer. Now, Two things we didn't really talk
about at the last meeting but I think we can touch on here uh is if we go to the next slide which is seven as a comparison with the neighboring communities as you can see the five communities are in blue that
you've normally used as uh comparison cities and if you look at the two gray bars at the end uh that's the quarterly rate storm water rates in Wyoming for and what they'd be proposed to be with a 2.6% increase, which is about 25 cents
uh per quarter. So, you're way under all of the other neighboring communities in this particular uh comparison. And please remember, too, that uh the rates for the other comparison uh communities are for 2025. We don't know what their
2026 rates are, but even with your 2026 proposed rates, you're still quite a ways below them. Finally, the word affordability is getting tossed around a lot and I don't want to be political about it, but I'll bring it up anyway. Uh, get this
tightened up here. >> It should just come up to if you want. >> There we go. We're going to be fine. Uh, everybody wants to talk a little bit about affordability. So, there was a number of ways to define storm water rates and water and sewer rates as being affordable. Uh in the late middle to
late 1990s, the United States Environmental Protection Agency defined what they thought was affordable for people and they said that was about 4 and a.5% of household income for combined water, sewer, and storm water
bills. Uh they determined that that would be affordable. So census data, current census data for Wyoming shows the median household income is about 109 $101,000 per household. That's the median income. If you take four and a half% of that,
which is the EPA suggestion, that's $382 a month. If you look at your combined water, sewer, and storm proposed storm water rates here, that's about uh $87 a month, which is way below the $382 that the EPA would say that would be uh
affordable. Now, if you use that criteria, if you believe in that criteria and want to use it, that would mean that rates would be possibly unaffordable for anybody who had average household income below $23,400. Um, census data shows that you have
about 123 households who have income below $25,000. So, there may be some affordability issues under that criteria uh for a small number of households in town. There's been a more recent measure of affordability
uh determined and that was developed by a bunch of organizations cooperatively including uh the American Waterworks Association, National Association, Clean Water Agencies and the Water Environment Federation. They developed a matrix that I tried to determine what was affordable
and that includes the matrix includes the percent of households that are below 200% of the federal poverty level. they get down deep into the weeds here and then they compare that with the cost the water sewer and storm sewer as a percent of household income uh versus the lowest
quintile income the LQI that you'll see and that's of course uh the bottom 20% of income. So if you look at this uh that's what we used in the two uh go up one more back to eight Rob for just a second. Um if we take the water sewer
and the surface water monthly cost at 2026 rates uh and use a water usage average monthly usage of about 4,500 gallons uh a month and that's what we consider for essential water use which is drinking water uh washing your
clothes using the toilet things like that. Uh that would be about 2.1% of the LQI or 49 a year. Um, and you've got 22% of your households are below 200% of the federal poverty level, which right now
is about 51,300 a year uh for a household of 2.82 persons. So, if you go to the last chart, then that's uh what the matrix looks like. So, as you can see there where the yellow highlighting is, it would say it's a moderate to low burden because
you're between 20 and 35% of the households that are below 200% and you're less than 7% of water and sewer costs as a percentage of the lowest quintile income. But I'd also say here that even though it's kind of in the middle there, it says moderate to
low. uh you're at the very bottom level of that middle at 21% and you're at 2 point 2 2.1% instead of 7%. So I'd say you're you're really kind of on the low low burden according to that particular judgment. So um I don't pretend to know
what's affordable for any individual person. Uh however, these are two supposedly authoritative agencies that have come up with different ways of measuring affordability and you actually measure quite well according to that too. So, with that, um, that's everything we covered last month with a
recap and a couple of new things thrown in. And I'd stand for any questions you might have. >> Council, we'll start with member Schilling with any questions. >> Um, I actually don't have any questions. This was kind of a recap of the previous meeting for me. So, >> all right. Member Joerger.
>> Okay. Well, I see on page nine, if we do not raise the rates, we don't we are exp revenue exceeds expenses until 2029. And I noticed that we buy a Jeder truck. Is that the same as that vacuum truck we
bought in 2021? >> We bought a used about a 15y old jeter truck. So, right. So, this time we are um >> you're going to buy a whole new one. >> A new one. We're looking at utilizing both the sewer fund and then also some of the storm water fund for that because you can um based on the the use of that
item. Um it's utilized probably about equally probably a little more for sewer but also significantly for storm water activities too. >> Okay. So that's the same one. Now when we bought it that one was supposed to last for 10 years and
obviously it's we're buying it we're replacing it before that 10 year mark. I I think that uh particular item um I think based on some of the continued um we have done some maintenance on that and I think just the the expected life I
I guess u Mr. Almald, I guess I would defer. I don't remember if he said 10 years, but I'm assuming he did based on your comments, council member. Um but we would be purchasing one um then slightly earlier than um right based on that original of that used that used piece of equipment because like I said I believe
that one was about 15 years old that we we okay because from the memo from April 1st 2021 it talks about um we would need to get 10 years out of it for this to be a feasible project. And
then it goes on to say that the expense would make the unit have a payback of eight years. So are maintenance costs getting really high enough that that's not sustainable anymore? >> I don't think I think we've I think it eb and flows. I know that um our our superintendent isn't present tonight,
but I know that there have been some years where just those as they age, they become um more expensive to maintain and utilize. So um you know, I think like I said, it es and flows. There's some years where it's ran quite well. There's other years where we put more more dollars and more money into it.
>> So basically it has issues. >> Um off and on it does have issues. Yes. It is an aging piece of equipment and um notoriously as those get older um they're just known for having continued maintenance on them. >> Okay. So basically the rate increase
is it basically to pay for this truck and then the the other big expense was a boom a boom mower. I think there's a component of capital that's within the rate. I think there's other things that we've identified within the annual in regards to um inspections and other um
types to make sure that we're in compliance with that MS4 permit. So the capital is a component of that, but there's also inspections that um need to be completed that we've had identified by your city engineer that um are necessary as part of this as well. So there's a combination of both just um
expenses through that and then some of the capital costs. Correct. Okay. But it's not solely just to buy a Jeder truck. >> Correct. That is not just solely for the jeter truck. There there are components of this that we have raised in the the year-to-year maintenance and operation of that permit
>> that have gone up. >> Correct. >> Okay. >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> Welcome. >> Member anticipated or about what >> I think what we've anticipated it's it's a pretty useful uh piece of equipment for a city like I said from you know
sewer um and then also just from storm water so it it's been utilized pretty heavily um within the field is my understanding um but like I said it is definitively aging and with that those jutdder trucks just continue usually to have more issues I know when we had a comp a collapse on it that was actually
something that was covered by insurance but um you know as as time goes on that's something that right it's just there's usually more continued maintenance and like I said the last few years I think um it's been off and on. I think there was one year we're okay here and then I think it was I believe last
year where it was really we put a lot of maintenance into it. >> Would you say that it's >> No, I think I think that the use that we've gotten out of it I think it was something instead of these are a very expensive um purchase and something at
the time that we didn't feel we had the means to do. So I think in the short run it was a good purchase and we utili utilized it fairly significantly and um it was purchased um I think at quite a reasonable price. So I think it's been um been used and it's and normal life is
coming to an end here. >> That's unfortunate but it sounds like it was still a valuable piece of >> Yes. Yes. I would I certainly think so. >> How many times a year do we use it? I I guess on that one I would probably defer to the superintendent how many
times they're actually taking out I know it's obviously used for jetting you know we by our league of Minnesota cities insurance truck trust we have to jet a third of the city every year um you know I can't say how often in regards for we haven't had a lot of backups for sewer happy to say that um otherwise but then
in the some of the storm MS4 permitting I know it's utilized there too but um probably a question for the superintendent he'd be able to answer that a little better as far as how often it actually goes out, but the the jetting a third of the city every year is significant >> for the sewer
>> because it was more I remember the original discussion and whether it was more cost effective to or cheaper to rent it, continue renting it rather than buying a very used piece of equipment. Mhm. >> I do remember some of that discussion
and I think that was um something and I think it came down to some of the availability with a rental in regards to if you did have an emergency and how fast they can if I'm recalling appropriately. Um I guess like I said that was a few years ago but I think that was part of the discussion with the rental you necessarily don't have the
emergency response that we had if we did have it in house. So that was I think part of that conversation but I know that there was conversation on both ends to look at rental or to look at the used uh jeter truck. back when that was purchased. >> Yeah, I remember that.
>> That was it. >> Okay. Thank you. Um I do have a couple questions, Mr. Ericson. Yes. >> Can we go back to the comparison to these, please? >> Yeah. >> Yep. So, I I think what I want to point out is um
you know, we look at our other cities a lot. um our taxes, property tax, all that just came out and to your point, there's a lot about affordability, right? >> Correct. >> When I look at that, when I look at the cost comparison and I look where our
city is, I think that speaks volumes as to how Wyoming approaches the affordability here. >> Um so my question would be, let's say we didn't raise this at all. So, what what
would happen if we ended up not having the money down the road? What are some things that we would have to not be able to give our residents? >> Well, with anything, uh, this particular uh, utility is for storm
water utility. And I and I kind of hinted how old I was earlier at the meeting. But I'm old enough to remember when I was running cities that uh back in the 80s and the early 90s we didn't have storm water utilities. And the reason we didn't is because the federal government hadn't passed the clean water
or clean water acts and things like that. And then they mandated all the cities had to start doing things and in the same breath said, "Oh, by the way, we're not going to give you any money to do it. You just got to do it." So, uh, by not raising rates or by not doing what's in the planned, uh, maintenance
and capital improvement things that your city engineer is recommending that you do, uh, you wouldn't be in compliance to certain permitting things and and certain laws that are out there to do that. So, um, you you appear to be, at least in a comparative basis, and from
what I can see, uh, extremely competitive in how you're doing this and cost effective for how you're doing it. And I believe that that's probably for you than it is to to to fight the attorneys at the federal level who want to >> right >> tell you you're not in compliance with
certain clean water permits and things like that. So >> I do know uh the I'm on the board of the Minnesota Mayor's Association. We have a lot of com a lot of conversation about unfunded mandates, right? >> And how um we are the closest to our residents, which we
>> I'm not going to say get blame for it, but it's hard to understand that, right? And so I remember when we were talking about um being a four whatever that >> MS4 >> MS4 Yeah. Um it was hard to wrap our head around it
>> and then how much more the cost would be, right? >> So um I would say um very proud of those numbers that we do have in comparison to others because um I think that goes back to the fact that we do try to be as affordable as possible with our residents. So, um, totally appreciate
what you did on this. Um, Mr. Lynwood, one other question. If we weren't planning ahead, >> because there have been times when the city has not planned ahead, not during this council. Um, what did they do if they weren't planning ahead and they needed something, what would typically
be they'd have to go out bonding, raise the property taxes? what >> I think this is just the normal um proactive approach to the the council and the city as far as trying to make sure that we're looking at these things and doing studies like this and hiring professionals to do it that we position
ourselves where we don't have to necessarily be reactive and to your point all of a sudden um look at a very large increase or um look at something where we would maybe have to take a equipment loan or bond for something if it was capital. So, I think this is very pragmatic and um good that the council
has always been in support of doing this for our utilities to do these studies and make sure that we're uh in a position to kind of keep these items steady and not have them be followed over year to year. >> Perfect. >> I just add to that, having spent most of
my career in the in the municipal bond industry, um there's nothing wrong with that and there's nothing wrong taking it on in a planned basis when you need to do it. But to the question you asked, if you haven't planned for something, intentionally didn't plan for it and it came out of the blue and you had to go
to the debt market to do that, you're at the mercy of whatever the market happens to be at that time and it doesn't allow you to properly plan and take advantage of of the marketplace uh and the good times when the markets are good. So, >> yeah, thank you. I think that's one of the things I've said this quite often
that I'm proud of this council um and to our city staff for leading us down that direction to make sure that we have those plans. So with that being said, I'll move um to approve resolution 2512136, a resolution establishing surface water rates for 2026 through
2030 based on the rates today completed by Ericson Northstar LLC. Do we have a second? >> We have a second by member Onstad. All in favor? I opposed. So approved. Thank you very much. Merry Christmas. >> Appreciate it. >> Number 17 to consider resolution
2512137, a resolution receiving the feasibility report, setting the public hearing, and authorizing the preparation of plans and specifications for the 2026 street improvement project. Mr. Ericson, we had a great open house. We were all set and
ready to go. >> Yes. Thank you, Madame Mayor and members of council. Um we did send out 246 invitations for that uh neighborhood meeting. We had I believe four households here, five people. >> Um so it was uh a little bit
underwhelming, but they were all happy. >> Nonetheless, it was uh a good meeting. And so I just want to quick highlight uh the results of the feasibility study here in a short presentation. I might go through a couple slides really quickly because I don't see uh residents here from the project. I thought I'd have
another opportunity. Yeah, I was gonna say >> you're on the project area. So, well, I didn't recognize you from the other night, I guess. >> So, you gota go through >> I didn't realize you were on the project area. Okay. Well, we'll go through in a little bit more detail then and I'll I'll hit some of those slides that I I
mentioned. I may not. So, >> sprinklers are like we've been here through every single one. >> You've seen a lot of it. Yeah. So, I'll I'll I'll spend uh just a little bit of time on that then. Uh do you have the slides, Rob? >> I can you have it now? Okay. Okay. Uh so our project location and again the
council authorized us to prepare a feasibility study. We held one neighborhood informational meeting and now uh this evening we're asking city council to simply receive the feasibility study um set the public hearing and and and and move forward
with the the final design. And we might just sit back on the final design even though you may authorize it this evening. sit back on that a little bit to again wait till we hear a little bit more details from property owners and make sure we understand what direction the council is going to move forward with as far as ordering the improvement. And so just want to make sure that is
clear. Um so the project location you can see um shown there all streets in red are proposed to be mill and overlays. Um so similar improvement to what we saw last year in the Hawk Meadows neighborhood. Um, so just wanted to quick highlight that it is simply a mill and overlay and again that's to
take advantage of a lesser costly improvement rather than waiting until it deteriorates to a point where we can't do this type of mill and overlay improvement uh effectively. So our project schedule you can see here uh we have the uh firstformational uh
meeting was completed there just last week on Wednesday. This evening um receiving the feasibility report and setting the public hearing and you can see um as we move forward through this process um we get to the point where uh we'd be having that uh that public
hearing that we hope we're able to set this evening uh on January 20th. Our intent is to have plans and specifications approved either the first or second meeting in March and then um re um advertising for bids, getting bids
back and awarding a contract sometime in April and then beginning construction during the summer months when school is out. We know that's a a very large neighborhood, a lot of students uh with uh busing and we just want to be uh cognizant of that. Try to minimize the impacts. This is a little bit more
impactful project than what we saw with the Hawk Meadows project. They're both milling overlays, but this has a lot of uh infrastructure within it. So, we have to adjust all the gate valves, adjust all the manholes. We're going to replace all the rings on all the catch basins.
And so, there's a lot of curb work, and it's going to be a little bit of a maze to get through there. And so, we we want to make sure that we're trying to do that um and minimize the impact. And that can be done by by minimizing or avoiding that school season. Um, next slide here. Um, uh, just a little
background for property owners. I know again you are aware of this. You've, uh, been at a lot of meetings, but we've been, uh, aggressively, uh, taking on road improvement projects over the last decade plus. And so, we've made significant headway on that, but there's continued roads that we need to maintain
and operate. And so, we develop what's called a capital improvements plan. Um, those plans are developed based on road ratings that we do every uh, three years. We we rate the roadways on a scale of 0ero to 100 and then we look at roadways that could be improved and we
couple that with resident complaints uh city council bus tours and so uh public works feedback. There's a lot of things that go into developing that capital improvements plan and the plan that we're looking at is not a worst first. There are roadways that are worse but those improvements are going to be the
same whether we do them this year or next year. this project is getting to the point where we risk losing it where it's going to be a much more costly improvement. And so that's why we've prioritized this and we've had these conversations with council regarding that. Uh these uh streets were constructed um
in the 90s early 2000s and so again your typical lifespan where you're wanting to mill and overlay in that 20 year range and so we're a little bit past that and so we want to make sure that we're we're taking it uh taking care of those while we can. We have identified some minor drainage
issues. Uh we're hopeful that property owners will continue to reach out to us. We heard a couple of comments at the neighborhood meeting and we hope to hear more at the at the public hearing. Um here we have just a number of slides that just show uh the surface
deterioration of the roadway. You can see as we go through um the project, you can see we did a complete survey of the project area using a drone and that works really well for mill and overlay type improvements. And so um you can see the top is the is the drone. You can zoom in and see the condition of the
roadway. We can verify if property owners had a crack in their driveway before or after the project. And so those are really helpful tools to have uh for us. We'll um but you can see the the surface uh deterioration that we see here is primarily uh shallow potholes,
surface delamination and things like that that we can address with a millin overlay. There will be some full depth pavement removal where it's not appropriate for a mill and overlay. And so there's going to be uh not a one-sizefits-all, but um we certainly feel this is a good candidate for a
millon overlay. >> That was my sorry Grant that was me. I had the wrong >> um again just uh photos here you can see of the existing condition. Just wanted council and residents to see uh the condition of the roadway and understand
why we're doing uh the type of improvement that we're proposing. You can see the the cracks um from the aerial image here. So, what are the proposed improvements? We're looking at a mid batumous mill and overlay milling off the top two inches of pavement and
replacing that pavement. um simple easy project but I mentioned all the manhole repairs um the spot curb and gutter replacement so there are some deficiencies to the gerbin gutter will be replacing about 20 to 25% of that so either one in five or one in four panels
will be replaced on average it includes um the concrete pedestrian ramps there's currently some ADA issues out there that don't meet ADA requirements and so with the sidewalk that's there we'll be making sure that that's in compliance there is an option for trail
replacement. There's a lot of rear yard trails and so we'll talk a little bit about that. Um pretty significant um effort to undertake, but it's certainly more cost effective to include it with the project and so we want council to at least be aware of that. We're not asking for you to make a decision on that. Just
again this evening receiving the feasibility study and setting the hearing. um the improvements. This is just the typical section what exists there today. And it really just shows uh various typical sections of the roadways that are present. Uh this roadway uh happens
to be about uh 32 feet of curb to face of curb. It um it it includes a sidewalk on one side. You can see other sections here where there's sidewalk on and a trail on on the other side of the roadway and other portions that just have the roadway and no trails. And so
similar improvements to all of them, just a simple mill and overlay of the roadway and spot curb and gutter repair. Those that have sidewalk uh would also have repairs made to the sidewalk. Uh the project funding is consistent with our policy and I'll quick highlight
that, but it is 20% of the surface improvements and the drainage improvements are accessible. And so we'll make sure to highlight that. There are other costs that are not um accessible and those are uh um water main improvements, sanitary sewer
improvements, trail improvements, and so we'll we'll touch on that. Uh assessments are based on the city assessment policy and we assess based on the unit, not front footage. So each property would receive one unit assessment in this scenario. I don't believe there's any partial assessments
with corner lots because we're improving both um I guess all the driveways within the project area are are on to the roadways that we're proposing and then city funds paying the remaining portion of the improvements. I'll quick highlight the the properties
that are included in the assessment. Uh it's all those highlighted here. And you can see um in the southwest corner there's a number of parcels uh that are on private roadways or private eyebrows where they're a a I don't know if I can
point with this. You probably >> one next to me. There's one in the bottom corner. >> Yeah. there's th those private drives. Uh those parcels um have HOA responsibilities for those private drives and they're responsible to repair their internal roadways, but our policy
we do also assess them because their only access is via our public roadways. And so they continue to be assessed and part of the improvement project. So our total cost of the project, I want to quick highlight that because it's it's not really shown in here. The total
accessible portion of the project cost is $2,65,410. If we multiply that by the 20%, it yields a $413,082 in total assessments for the project. We have 400 or 248
accessessible units, two of which are city-owned parcels. And so we do also assess ourselves um because we we want to make sure that we're we're fair. Uh keeps the assessments down a little bit. So we have a a total of those 248. Oh,
>> we have those 248. >> We have the 248 units uh resulting in an assessment of $1,66565. You do one slide for me. I get this going. Um and so our assessment policy
um and our assessment public improvement process does follow chapter 429 of state statute. Um there are options for property owners regarding that. If they do have an objection to the assessment, they certainly can provide this in writing their objection uh prior to or
at the assessment hearing. There's two hearings that are required. One of those will be January 20th. One will be in the fall of 20 uh 26. And so that assessment hearing will take place in the fall and property owners do have the right have the ability to object. Um but as far as
payment goes, they have the ability to prepay assessments within 30 days of the assessment hearing or the property or they get applied to property taxes. The city certifies those assessments uh to the county and the interest rate would
be set at the time of the assessment hearing and those have typically fallen recently in that 5% range. In a project of this size, the term would likely be in that fiveyear range because it's an amount that is much less than what we've seen on previous projects.
Just uh highlighted that I think our our projects um again have ranged over the last decade in that four to five and a quarter% range. This is really just the improvement process. Um we're very early on in the stage here. Um, and so if we're inclined
to uh order the uh or I'm sorry um set the public hearing, we'll send out notices uh here in the very near future. I do want to highlight there's some other options with the project. And so we do have some sanitary sewer televising that is currently occurring.
Again, those are nonaccessible costs. And so once we get the results of that, we'll determine if there's any additional project costs associated with sewer repairs. Want to make sure we address those before the road is repaired. Similarly with storm sewer. So we're televising both the sanitary sewer and the storm sewer. Um we do identify
about $25,000 in water main improvements. There's some valves that are not working. We want to make sure that we address and correct those while we go. And then there's also this trail improvement that I talked about, right? Almost $400,000 uh to repair the trails there. And so that's a pretty
significant uh cost. Um it is certainly more cost effective to include with the project than doing it at a later date. And so we'll talk more about that um as we get to the public hearing. There's some complexities with that with fences and locations of the fences and things
of that nature that we'll get into a little bit more um in future meetings to discuss how we want to handle those situations. But again, uh the overall project cost is, you know, $2,474,993 including the trail and including the water main improvements.
>> Perfect. Mr. Mrs. Spangler, do you have any questions? >> Okay. I didn't think so, but just thought I would ask just in case. Okay. Uh questions from council. We'll start with member Oddstad. >> No questions. >> Member Schilling. >> Uh no questions. Just uh real quick, Mr. Ericson, uh ironically, I had this
meeting on my schedule and I don't know how we missed it. Um so I I I do know the next one's in January 7th. Uh but I did speak to three of my neighbors and it's funny because I know you guys mailed stuff out. I've received twice something in the mail
that I've gotten about this project and three of my neighbors that are friends, they were like, "What are you talking about? We're doing a road." I'm like, "Do you open your mail >> at all?" I mean, I' I've received it twice in my new place. >> Yeah. >> So, uh, very interesting, but I'm liking
the way it's looking. So, um, looking forward to the new road next year. Can't wait. any suggestions on ways of communicating other than I mean that's I had a I had a I had a meeting last evening as well and the resident >> was actually there and he said I
apologize I didn't come to any of the other meetings I was invited to I I usually don't check my mail that well >> oh my god >> and so I think it's it's common right um so I just you know that's it's the best avenue that we have we do ask property owners to sign up >> to email list but we need to connect
with them first right so I think that's a a good way of communicating but hopefully Um, property owners like yourself are sharing the word, right? We >> Yeah. So, what I did was shared the link from our city site and then I sent them a scan copy of the documents you had already sent out and I said, you know,
if you have any questions, let me know. So, >> do you have a we we are meeting with the HOA representative uh here in the near future? I can't remember the meeting date that we had, but I think my intent is to talk to them and see if they would be willing to I'm sure they have an email blast as well, right? Yeah. Potentially. So, we'll work work with
them to try to improve attendance at these because we really do find ourselves much more successful when we have a lot of engaged residents there to help us um with scope and understanding any other issues that we might be not aware of that they see uh because they live there. >> Well, and one of the things I was going
to bring up with that is, you know, those little bumpins, they wouldn't be included technically because that is the HOA responsibility. So I think a meeting with them to get them to do those portions. >> We that is our the purpose of our meeting sense to me and as a as a member
of that association as well. So >> great. >> Okay. Perfect. Thank you so much. Appreciate it. >> Member Joerger. >> All right. So this was rated fair in the pavement study. >> Yeah. I don't remember the exact
ratings. I think it was in the 50s if I recall. um um anywhere in the the the fair range, which is where we need to be if we want to do a mill overlay. If it's poor, it's too late. >> A mill overlay is appropriate when it's rated fair. >> Correct. >> Okay. >> The other question about the trails
since I spend quality time on them every day. >> Yeah. >> Uh can you just do certain spots of the trails? It's like there there's one spot I know where it tends to collapse by the uh city property.
>> Okay. >> But instead of I mean it seems like a lot 400 and some to refurb I mean that would be reply repaving the entire system back there. >> It it would that is what the estimate is including. And so we're certainly happy
to look into other avenues. We've we've worked with our public works staff who've reviewed it um looked at it. We've had some other staff from WSB with them on those tours and walks and really tried to identify and they felt that it probably was more appropriate to do all of it rather than parts of it. They know
that they're just looking for signs of fatigue and failure. They're, you know, the trails of course are as old as the roadways as well. >> Yeah, I remember. >> So, yeah, you're you're aware. We're certainly open uh to any suggestions and feedback. Um certainly if that's something that council would like us to look at closer, we certainly can. It is
a significant cost. It is challenging to construct a trail, right? When you're have a paving piece of equipment there to to pave it, you can't get around it with a truck, right? I mean, it's it's hard to get material to a paver when we're doing these things. And so, it's
it is certainly challenging backing in a truck all the way along this windy trail to get back to the paver. And so, um you also have to have strong enough subgrade to support the truck that's loaded in these areas. That aren't often the case. And so it certainly is uh is challenging and that's why you see the costs the way
they are. Um we're hopeful we can get it a little bit less but we're we're cognizant of the issues associated with it. And so we have a pretty healthy cost there what we feel would be appropriate after talking with a couple of contractors and getting some initial feedback on that. I >> mean some of it's wide enough I think
you can get the truck through but some of it's very narrow. For example where Mr. Schilling used to live >> where it's all fences >> in there. Yeah. And and those fences um that's one area that we we will need to discuss because that is an area that is
not constructible because of the fence locations. Those fences are actually not located on their property. Their property line is actually further back in. So those are areas where we might look to have those fences relocated to the property line to allow us to reconstruct that if we move forward with
that portion of the >> Okay. But there'll be another a fuller um a fuller discussion at a future work session or >> Yeah, we have another umformational meeting I believe January 7th. Um so we'll we'll discuss uh that with some
property owners. Hopefully we have some good attendance at that meeting and we'll work with the HOA to get another email out as well as the mailed notice. Um, and so we'll send that notice out to invite them to the seventh meeting. And then we'll also include that in that same mailer the public hearing date. And
so we'd like to have theformational meeting in advance of the public hearing so property owners can see the result of the feasibility study and the assessment amount so that they can come to the public hearing uh being informed about what the project scope and and costs are. >> Okay. Uh Mr. And just a quick question
about the trail, the 400,000. That is not something that's being assessed to the 248 properties. Correct. Correct. That is something that because it's um property that everybody every resident gets to use. Basically, that's why it's
not charged to those 248 res. >> That is that is uh true. That is a nonaccessible cost per our assessment policy. And similar with other uh 2024 project had some trail work there near Vis Park and that was not accessible as well. >> Yeah. Perfect. >> Okay. So, since this is more extensive, where's the money coming from?
>> It would come, I believe Mr. Lynn would, correct me if I'm wrong, but it would uh come from our street fund. Correct. >> Okay. >> Past practice where it does come out of our street fund. And then we just look like Mr. Erikson said, you know, the mobilization costs we save at these and um these trails, I think there, to your point, uh, council member, I think there
are some areas that are okay and I think there's some other areas that are in very poor shape. And so, like I think Mr. And there was I even actually walked those with our public works staff to look at a few of them in a few of the fence areas to see the >> the tightness on how we would have to go about constructing those in some of the
fences not on uh individuals property lines. So, but I know that um like Mr. Ericen stated, some individuals also from WSB kind of reviewed that those pavement conditions on those trails. the issues with with leaving some of it is is driving all the heavy trucks and
construction equipment over what we feel is already a fragile trail system that it may not hold up to that traffic. And so those are those are some of the concerns we had and why we might recommend uh doing the full trail if if we do the trail. >> Are there grants to be had for? We
always if when we get to this point right here, we do always invest and look in uh to what grants might be available. And so we can certainly tap that and see what we can do for that. They are challenging to find resources certainly for roadway improvements, but where we do have a little bit more success is
with trails. Oftentimes they're with new trails and not reconstructing existing trails. >> Um but we'll we'll certainly look to see what might be available. >> Okay. >> All right. If there are no further questions, we need a motion to approve resolution 2512137,
a resolution receiving the feasib feasibility report setting the public hearing and authorizing the preparation of plans and specifications for the 2026 street improvement projects. Do we have a motion to approve? >> So moved. >> Motion to approve by member Anstad. Do we have a second? >> Second.
>> Second by member Schilling. All in favor? I opposed. So approved. Last on our agenda is number 18 to consider approving the reclassifying to reclassify the existing police property and technology technician. Come
on, that's a lot. >> We got to redo it, right? >> Um, crime analyst position to the public safety manager. There we go. Only three words. Effective January 1st, 2026. Chief Bower, your turn. Uh, I would like
to acknowledge that I'm a little lonely over here tonight. >> Yeah, you look it. >> Um, okay. Mayor Evson, members of council, I'd like to uh bring this forward for uh any discussion >> and uh looking for this approval tonight. Um, as we've looked at the
current staffing of our department. Um, currently we have uh Cali Resnney in the police property and technology technician crime analyst position. um which is essentially three different positions crammed together. Um and initially there was just focused on
evidence management, technology oversight, and analytical support for our investigator. As time has gone on, um essentially her role has expanded significantly. And what we're looking to do with this reclassification is to calibrate what's
currently being done and also add uh a couple additional roles um to her that some that I am doing right now. um and that we'll just be re-shifting a lot of what she's already doing into this position. Uh essentially this position we did
figure in on the approved 2026 budget the the the increase in the salary. Um and the what we did was look at the public safety manager position uh in a variety of different cities really is a oversight administrative
leader within the organization. Um this position is part of the supervisory team, the command staff of the department. Um and does administrative, managerial and compliance or uh oriented functions. She's already doing most of these things already. Um audit preparation is a significant component
of her position uh through the BCA. Uh she's very involved in our hiring and decision-m in our hiring processes, our records management oversight, and in general a lot of operational oversight as well. um she works in collaboration with our two police sergeants on a
regular basis um and is very involved in the decision-m in the department at this point. What I've been looking to do is with this position also adding the supervision and leadership for the administrative assistant position. So the um that administrative staff that works in the front office at this point
she would be supervising that position. uh let's see currently as we look at this. So the process was to come up with the job description um that accurately reflects what she's currently doing in addition to that supervising this admin
uh the CR the administrative assistition position um we submit that for review and then the salary range comes back from um from that process. So we submitted this and looking at the salary increase uh for
the current position she is at for 2026 would be 3562 an hour for 2026 for the public safety manager position for the first step of step five or fivestep position would be 4251 an hour. Um
essentially the other big parts of that would be uh that increase is because we've increased the minimum qualifications for this position. So going from it was a a high school degree with some work experience. Um changing this to a a bachelor's degree, a
four-year degree in criminal justice, public administration or business administration or some other related field. four years experience in public safety um with administrative and and and managerial responsibilities um knowledge of public safety operations
data practices which is a giant beast to understand and then the compliance requirements um ability to lead supervise and develop staff um overall organizational staff and um managing records management and other aspects of
the office as well. Um, let's see here. I wanted to touch on a couple other things. Also would be assisting me with some of the performance measures that we've been working with with fire. Um, that has been my I've been doing that, but I'd like to shift some of that to her as
well and this overall supervision of the administrative physician records clerk. Um, let's see here. Essentially, we're looking at really just this is a
lot of what she's currently doing. Um, and we want to try and retain her. There's a lot of discussion that if we ever did lose her in this department, we would be um in a really difficult spot. She holds a lot of institutional and organizational knowledge. Um, and she's
very confident in her work and uh, it is un it is a difficult process to tell cops what to do and tell sergeants what to do on a regular basis when you're not one. Um, and she has absolutely no problem doing that and they respect her for it. So, it is that that reflection of of her work that she's uh currently
performing. So ultimately looking to reclassify this position to public safety manager effective January 1st at that updated rate of 4251 which is a um also an exempt position because it is a supervisory role. So it's not entitled to overtime um versus her current role
she is entitled to overtime. So there's any questions and we happy to answer those. >> Chief I'm going to start tonight with questions. So, um, first thing I always applaud being able to advance our employees that are in a department, >> right? >> And I've talked with her many times. You
can see the confidence in her grown over the years that she's been um in that position. So, applaud what we're doing. My only real question is um will we be sending her to some leadership training because I think that's so valuable um
for any of us to go to training. >> Yes. um she's already enrolled. Um there's a program through actually through Ecertrance with LEAC. Um it's called a sergeant academy. So it is specific leadership directed at law enforcement. Um while that's not her position, it is very relevant. We
already have her enrolled in one in January. Um and also we' be looking at there's other uh I have a um education kind of u plan for all of our new sergeants and her as well as they transition to these positions. And my
other question would be because I public safety manager um I you know the Minnesota mayor's association has a group we have um city administrators that have a group there's a lot of different groups that you can go to be able to have conversations and learn from others. Is there such a group like
that for the public safety manager position or you you know what I'm getting at like it's important to be able to have peers that you can talk to as well. >> Right. So the the position she will still maintain a lot of what she's doing already. So, we're going to continue her um membership in the analyst group as
well because she'll still be doing some of those functions. The evidence technician, we maintain her membership for 26 and know those that group because she'll still be doing those functions as well. Um and then this this managerial position, it is a lot of different job titles depending on what the department
structure is. Um but because we do have both police and fire, we're looking that's why it's called public safety manager. So, there are some networks that you will maintain. Yes. >> Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. I could never um do that role. I'm just saying. So, all right. Um we are going with member Schilling next.
>> I don't have any questions. >> Okay. Um member Joerger, >> you know, in your presentation, you actually asked answered most of my questions. >> Excellent. I'm happy to do that. >> Uh are you going to be looking for another crime analyst? >> No, she will continue to do those functions.
>> Okay. Um, my problem is I have no problems with the reclassification and I have no problems with your raise. I have a big problem with 19.3%. >> Sure, >> that's it. >> Okay. And member Anstead, you need to
close this out. >> Just a couple quick question clarification questions. You said it had a five or four year degree and four years of experience, correct? Or >> both in Okay, both. Yes, sir. I wasn't sure about that. And will the
pay scale that's comparable to uh a regular officer? Where where does that lay? Is it comparable to sergeants or is that comparable >> to the officers? >> Um it is ballpark right kind of in between them. It's not quite sergeant.
Um but it is in between them and it is within the org structure. would be on par with the sergeant work group >> and everything else would you know colas and steps would all be following the same path. >> It is a there's five steps. It is not a
representative position. So it's not there's no collective bargaining. >> That was my next question. Yeah. >> So thank you for >> Okay. No further questions. We need a motion to approve the reclassifying of the existing
10 words to position of the public safety manager effective January 1st, 2026. Do we have >> So move. >> We have a motion to approve by member on. Do we have a second? >> Second. >> We have a second by member Schilling. All in favor? I opposed.
>> So approved. We're going to go really quickly because it's getting kind of late. We're going to go quickly to council reports. We're going to start with member Onstead. I went to the tree lighting and the I attended the work session just prior to this meeting. >> Perfect. All right. Member Shel.
>> Uh work session prior to this. I unfortunately missed the tree lighting uh this year because I had another event. Uh and uh thank you all that came out earlier today that was packed in here and those of you that are there. And hope everybody has a merry Christmas
and we'll see you after the first of the year then. Right. >> That's right. >> It's our last meeting of the year. Right. >> Member Joerger. >> Oh, I went to the tree lighting ceremony. I went to the 5:30 work session. And thank you all for coming. Thank you all for watching. Thank you all from Liberty Ponds, if you're
watching, that you all showed up. And I hope you all have a happy holiday season. >> All right. I also attended the tree lighting. I also attended everything that you guys attended. We'll just leave it at that. Um, as well I do have a
question for Mr. Ericson really briefly. We're going to get a lot of rain, like inches of rain and um my understanding on our street project that just got done that um everything clogs up before all the snow. Now there's a lot of snow. All
the drain ditches are, you know, um clogged with snow. So, with all this rain coming, is there anything that residents should be doing to kind of not have a ice skating pond? >> Yeah, good, good question. And I know
that I've had conversations with our public works staff and more related to like falls and leaves and things blocking these drains because they, you know, rainfalls do collect leaves and debris and brings them to the inlets, right? And a lot of times they'll get clogged. And so if residents see that
certainly um you know remove material. I I think snow is probably a little bit less of a concern. It's not bringing as much debris, but they can freeze as well, right? And so certainly just alert city hall if you're seeing road uh low points where catch basins are. If
they're frozen and not taking water, certainly notify public works. They have means uh to to unplug them. And whether it's the new jeter or a steamer or things of that nature, they they have the ability to do that. Okay. My understanding is like an inch or two of rain.
>> I did not I did not see that. I haven't been tracking the weather. So, that's significant. >> What do you mean? No, it's official skiing and snowmoiling. No rain. >> We all know me. I prepare. Um, okay. So, good to know. I really appreciate that. Mr. McFarland, we didn't hear from you
today and that makes me sad. Uh, any updates you have about the plows or the success of the tree lighting? You did another great job. I mean, you are um very you just do a really a great job when it comes to these events and stuff. And then any updates on the mayor for the day contest?
>> Um yeah, I can share updates on I believe all those things. Thank you for including me today. Yeah. Um mayor, members of council in terms of the tree lighting. It was our 9th annual tree lighting that we held um this not this past weekend, but the one before that. Um it was a great turnout even though it was incredibly cold and by the end I
think I was frozen solid. So I'm sure everyone else was too. Thank goodness we have the fires. U but thank you to all the cloggers that came out, the the dance factory, all of our sponsors as well that helped make that uh event possible and Santa for stopping by as well. But it was fantastic and we had a great time. Um in terms of the mayor for
a day contest, we did reach out to uh the fourth and fifth graders. Sixth grade moved to the middle school which made it a little bit more difficult as you have to then try to wean out who's and who's not. Um we did not receive any submissions this year. So, unfortunately, we don't believe that contest is going to move forward this year, but there's no saying we can't try
again in 2026 then for this as well. >> Okay, perfect. Thank you. Really appreciate that. >> Thank you. >> Yeah. So, to everybody watching, merry Christmas, happy Hanukkah, happy holidays. Um I'm always very grateful for being able to sit up here and with my teammates, my colleagues, my council
members, and our city administrative staff um to represent one of the best cities I think in all of Minnesota. So, um with that, I'm going to make the motion to adjurnn. Do we have a second? >> Second. >> Oh, beg urgently. All right, we have a first and a second. All in favor?