Call to order the city council um regular meeting for the city of Wyoming, Minnesota, July 21st, 2026. Let the record re reflect that we are starting at 7:02. Um all members are present except for member Anstad. We have member
Luger, member Schilling, member Joerger, and Mayor Iverson are present. Please stand for the pledge of allegiance. >> I pledge allegiance 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. >> All right. Um, what I'd like to do first, council, is we've been asked to add a number 22 onto the agenda um for an update from Mr. Wack. So, we need a
motion to add a number 22 to our agenda. I'll make that motion. We need a second. Second. We have a second um by number Luger. All in favor? >> I opposed. So, approved. Um, first on our agenda is open forum. Is there anybody here for open forum? Nope. Okay.
We'll move on to approval of minutes. Um, okay. Consider approving the minutes of the work session of the Wyoming Minnesota City Council for July 7th, 2026. If there are no changes, comments, or questions, do we need a motion to approve? >> So moved.
>> We have a motion to approve by member Schilling. We have a second by member Luger. All in favor? >> I opposed. So approved. Consider approving the minutes of the regular meeting of the Wyoming Minnesota City Council for July
7th, 2026. If there are no comments, questions, or changes, we need a motion to approve. >> So move. >> We have a motion to approve by member Luger. Do we have a second? >> Second. >> Second by member Schilling. All in favor? >> I opposed. So approved. Consent agenda
um number three, four, five, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11. Is there anybody who wishes to pull an item from the con consent agenda? Seeing none, we need a motion to approve. 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 and 11. Do we
have a motion? So moved. >> We have a motion by member Schilling. Do we have a second? >> Second. >> Second by member Luger. All in favor? I opposed. So approved. Acknowledge receipts of reports of officer boards, commissions, and department heads number 12, 13, 14, 15,
and 16. Does anyone wish to pull an item from the reports for further discussion? Seeing none, we'll move on to communications number 17, uh, facilities ground breaking ceremony. I'm not sure if that's Mr. McFarland or Mr. Lynwood.
>> Uh, either or, but I can take that. Mayor, thank you. Uh members of council, we just wanted to give you an update in regards to uh the our city facilities. Um staff has been working with Carlos Anderson uh to coordinate a groundbreaking ceremony to recognize the
start of our construction of our city hall and fire department facilities project. Uh the groundbreaking ceremony will be held on Wednesday, August 5th at 2026 at 5:30 p.m. prior to our regular scheduled 7:00 city council meeting. Uh it's expected to last approximately an
hour and the ceremony will include brief remarks, a ceremonial groundbreaking project renderings on display and light snacks and refresh refreshments. Council members are encouraged to attend as we celebrate this as we will have opportunities um for pictures for the groundbreaking. So um if you are
interested in being part of pictures, dress appropriately for that if uh that's something you're considering. >> Besides posing for a picture, does council have any other role in this groundbreaking ceremony? Um usually just the the pictures. Um I think we'll have
some remarks uh probably from myself uh the mayor and potentially Chief Milligan or Chief Bower. >> Yeah, that's for that. But that'll like I said that'll just be um brief. But usually it's >> pretty much a normaly with any facility project that they have. They'll they'll bring the the hats and the golden
shovels and have the pile of dirt and >> so basically grab a shovel, take picture. >> Y Okay. >> Yep. Correct. >> Thanks. >> You're welcome. And I am going to ask that council does stay within order um when called upon please instead of just
throwing out questions. Okay. Um thank you for that update. Appreciate that. Looking forward to that. That has been a very long um time coming and very excited to finally get to this point. Number 18, new business to consider resolutions 260782,
a resolution authorizing the execution and delivery of a ground lease and lease purchase agreement and approving and authorizing insurance of lease revenue bonds and execution of related bonds. Mr. Lumen, I'm pretty sure this is you. >> Yes, thank you, Mayor. Um, just a little bit of background about this agenda
item. We do have uh Jenny Bolton, the uh city's bond council with us tonight as well. But I'll start out with just uh some background on this and then um if there are any uh questions, she is present uh virtually to answer those for us. So um if you do have questions, I just ask that you utilize your mic
microphone as we are having some technical difficulties still unfortunately tonight. So um if you can do that and we'll uh Mr. McFarland I know is going to work to make sure that um she is able to be heard by the council as well. Um, but just to go through this, a little bit of background. The city council previously
selected lease revenue bonds issued through the Wyoming Economic Development Authority as a finance meth mechanism for the improvements of the city hall um and fire department project. Uh, construction contracts have been awarded um and financing documents established in the legal for uh framework necessary
to complete the bond financing to proceed toward closing. Um although several legal documents are included in the agenda item, they collectively implement a single financing transaction. Each document serves a specific purpose while working together to establish the rights and
responsibility for the city, the EDA, the trustee, the bond holders throughout the financing period. And unlike a traditional GEO bond, the finances is structured as a lease and revenue revenue bond issued by the EDA. To accomplish, the city temporarily leases the project property back to the EDA through a grown lease. The EDA then
leases the property and facilities back to the city through a lease purchase agreement while issuing lease revenue bonds to finance the project. The city's lease payments are pledged to repay the bonds as an independent trustee administrator's financing on behalf of the bond holders. And then throughout the finance period, the city continues
to own the underlying property, occupy, and operate the facilities and remains responsible for construction, maintenance, insurance, and all day-to-day operations. Once the bonds have been repaid, the city's temporary lease hold interest is terminated and the financing uh structure concludes. There is a resolution as the mayor uh
introduced when she brought the agenda up resolution 200782 authorizing the execution delivery of a ground lease and lease purchase agreement uh and approving and authorizing issuance of lease revenue bonds and execution of those documents. Those documents are stated as exhibits. You have exhibit A
legal description of property, b the ground lease, c the lease purchase agreement, d the trust indenture, and e the continuing disclosure certificate. Um a is just the legal description of the property that we are looking at from the from the lease. Uh the ground lease,
just to go into that a little more, the ground lease is the first step establishing the lease revenue bond financing structure. Through this agreement, the city temporary leases the project property to the EDA for a nominal payment of $1. This agreement does not transfer ownership of the property. Instead, it provides the EDA with legal leaseold interest necessary
to issue lease revenue bonds. The city retains ownership of the underlying property and continues to possess and use the site throughout the financing term. Once the financing obligation has been satisfied, the EDA's leaseold interest terminates. Now C, the lease purchase agreement. The lease purchase agreement is a primary financing
agreement between the city and the EDA. After receiving the lease hold interest through the ground lease, EDA leases the property and facilities back to the city. This agreement allows the city to occupy and operate the city hall and fire department facilities while making lease payments and corresponding debt
service on the lease revenue bonds. The city remains responsible for constructing, operating, maintaining, repairing, insuring the facilities throughout that financing period. And the agreement further provides the lease payments are subject to annual appropriation by the city council and do not constitute a general obligation of
the city pledge um the city's full faith and credit. Once the bonds have been repaid, the EDA's lease holder once again terminates and the city continues as a sole owner of the facilities. Uh exhibit exhibit D is the trust indenture. The trust indenture is the agreement between the EDA and US Bank Trust Company National Association
serving as a trustee for the bond holders. The indenture authorizes the issuance of lease revenue bonds. Establishes the terms and repayment of the bonds. Creates the various f financing funds and assigns the le the city's lease payments to the trustee as a security for the bonds. The trustee is responsible for administering the
financing, receiving lease payments, making bond payments to investors, and carrying out the duties established under the finance documents throughout the life of the bond. Lastly, the continuing disclosure certificate. The continuing disclosure certificate establishes the city and EDA's ongoing reporting obligations following the bond
issuance. Federal security regulations require certain financial and operating information along with notices of specified material events to be filed annually with the uh MSRB the municipal services rulemaking board. This document ensures compliance with those continuing disclosure requirements
for the life of the bonds. Um with that we can stand for any questions. Like I had earlier noted, uh we do have Jenny Bolton um the city's uh uh bond council present, so I can let council ask any questions.
>> Okay, let's start with um member Luger. >> No questions. >> Okay. Um we'll go to member Joerger. >> Okay. Um what is the bond rating being used to issue these bonds and how does it compare to the city's bond rating? Is Jenny able to hear that?
>> I am. Yes. Oh, good. I don't know if you can see me. Um, but I've got my camera on. Um, the city that that's really Chris uh Chris Hogan isn't at the meeting today, is she? >> She's She's not.
>> Okay. Um so Chris uh with Chris Hogan with Baker Tilly um is the the uh Baker Tilly is the party that uh um will obtain the credit rating. Um it is based on the city's credit rating. Um because
the city is the party that's that's ultimately making the payments. The the EDA is the pass through and making those payments from the lease payments that the the the city makes. And um so it is based on the city's um um rating, but it
is um generally uh adjusted just slightly downward from a general obligation bond because of the right to non-appropriate. um investors uh will assume that because
these are essential public facilities uh for um city hall and and fire uh operations uh that that there is a a high expectation that they will be paid. So it is very just very slightly below
um the city's general application rating. >> Okay. And then with that adjustment downward, how much more uh interest or cost is it going to add to the bond? >> Uh and again, that would really be a
question better addressed to um to Baker Tillia as the city's municipal advisor. Um >> Mr. Lynwood. >> Yeah, I think I think there'll be this is this is really the the point for the lease documents we will have for the bond sale when Chris Hogan will be here
to go through those components of that. For in regards to that, the city's current rating is an AA2. Um we were upgraded recently from AA3. Um as um Miss Bolton had uh stated, I think the it'll be nominal in regards to the
difference, but it is still a little bit lower. But how what that impact will be in regards to that, we'll have to wait and see on um bond sale. But usually, yes, it is. We don't quite receive quite the same interest rate as we would a normal general obligation, but it is um should be close. Okay. Okay. Right.
Well, obviously I'm not in favor of taking out EDA bonds. That's going to cost the taxpayers more than GEO bonds for a project where costs have already have and will continue to escalate much more than the original estimate and that doesn't even include
what's it going to cost to move the police over to the new building. Uh what I'm conser curious about is what do you all think or Yin thinks going to happen if the city takes out uh the less
expensive geo bonds? What are you guys afraid of? I don't that was a direction given by council to use lease revenue bonds. So I don't guess I don't have a response for that. We >> staff supplied the options of the geo bond and the lease revenue bond and that was the one selected. So that was the
direction staff received and that's what we that's what we did. >> But what are you guys afraid of? >> I'm not afraid of anything and I think that verbiage is very very disrespectful. So um member Schilling your turn. >> I really didn't have any question.
Actually the bond rating question was one I had and Linda hit it first. So, um, but as far as the decision, that just seemed to be the the lesser of the two evil path, uh, with the cost and the time constraint that we had in front of us and we've had this conversation multiple times since I've been on this
council and this project has continuously gone up every year because we keep waiting. So, I think there was a lot of factors in why we did that and that was that's my interpretation of it. So, >> member Luger, >> um, I have no questions on that.
>> Okay. I'm just gonna say this. If we wait a whole another stinking year, it means it's going to add more money onto that project. So, verbiage is verbiage. Nobody is afraid of anything. We just want to get this done. So, um I will make the motion to approve resolution
260782, a resolution authorizing the execution and delivery of a ground lease and lease purchase agreement and approving and authorize insurance of lease revenue, bonds, and execution of related documents. Do we have a second? >> Second. >> We have a second by member Luger. All in favor?
>> I I oppo opposed. Nay. >> It passes. Flying colors. Number 19 to consider resolution number 260783, a resolution approving amendment number two to the construction management agreement with Krauss Anderson
Construction Company. Um, Mr. >> 19. Sorry. >> Apologize. Um, >> my notes more technical issues. All right. Uh, thank you, mayor, member of the council. Oh, there it is. >> Um,
this resolution, we have a few different um, and I apologize. Actually, I'm going to have to go back up here. Amendment number two to the construction management agreement with Crow Anderson. So, on September 20th, 2022, the council approved the construction manager advisor agreement with Crow Anderson uh, for the company with the company for our
future um, at the time actually I I take that back for our future for our present public safety building when we were looking at that option. Um, at that time that established Krauss Anderson as the city's construction manager during the planning and design phase of the project. As the project progressed, the city council approved amendment number
one and that was on November 18th, 2025. That amendment updated the anticip project scope of what we're doing now and that's in regards to the existing city hall and fire just becoming a standalone fire and then the renovation of the building over at 26263 Flores Boulevard uh for the city hall and then
uh further down the road for the um the police department. Um that amen amendment updated the project scope uh established pre-construction services and revised the anticipated construction schedule and provided the framework for construction phase compensation as the project project continued through design
and bidding. Since approval of amendment number one, the city has completed architectural design, project financing, bidding or continuing on our project financing and project development. The city council has approved construction of the new city hall and renovation expansion of the existing fire department with the construction
scheduled to begin on August 10th, 2026. Amendment number two updates the existing construction manager agreement to reflect the prop the project as it transitions from a pre-construction into construction phase. Uh specifically the amendment amendment and that is as follows. Updates the project description
to reflect the approved city hall and fire department facilities. Updates the project budget identified within the agreement. Revises the anticipated construction schedule to reflect the approved project timeline. Identifies the current Krauss Anderson senior project managers assigned to the project. Establishes compensation for
construction phase services including project management, field supervision, construction administration, and reimburseable expenses during construction. The amendment also establishes compensation provisions should the construction phase extend beyond the anticipate anticipated 10-month schedule. Uh this amendment does not expand the scope of the project
authorized additional construction work or increase the overall project budget previously approved by the city council rather rather it finalizes the construction manager agreement for the approved construction phase and provides the contractual framework necessary for Krauss to administer construction of the project. Uh construction management
services will include that coordination of contractors scheduling construction administration quality control budget monitoring project oversight and overall management of construction activities throughout the duration of the project. The costs associated with this amendment are included with the overall project bud budget that was previously approved
by the city council and will be funded through the approved project financing. Um like once again the approval of this amendment does not increase the overall project budget. Um with that we would ask council to approve resolution 260783
a resolution approving amendment number two to the construction and manager agreement with Krauss Anderson construction company. >> All right we'll start with questions from member Joerger. No questions. >> Member Schilling. >> Uh, I actually have no questions on this. >> Okay. Member Luger. >> Also, no questions.
>> I have none either. I will make the first motion to approve resolution 260783, a resolution approving amendment number two to the construction manager agreement with Krauss Anderson Company. Do we have a second? >> Second. >> We have a second by member Luger. All in
favor? I opposed. >> So approved. >> Number 20 to consider resolution 260784. Resolution approving construction contracts for the city hall and fire department facility projects and authorizing limited construction to
change order authority. Mr. Lynwood. >> Thank you, mayor, members of council. This is uh approval of construction contracts. This is the first and there will be more to come. We can anticipate that you will have other uh construction contracts to approve at the August uh
5th council meeting. Um we have approved all that. has gone through before and we are using Krauss Anderson uh as a CMA project uh manager on this. Um Krauss manages the bidding process and coordinates construction. We've gone over some of this and administers the project. Um the contracts with this
agenda item are just a first group. Like I said, we will anticipate having more of these, but the contractors on this are Twin Tower Demolition, Ever Construction for concrete and masonary endurance exteriors for roofing, Falcon Mechanical for combined mechanical, EER construction for concrete paving. Uh,
these contracts were competitively bid and reviewed by Krauss Anderson and their project team. Staff has reviewed the recommended contract awards and finds them to be consistent with the approved project scope and budget. Approval of these contracts will allow construction activities to proceed while additional bid patches are presented to
the city council as they become ready for constit for execution. Um the second component of this is a limited construction change order authority order authority. Um it is possible that we will have change orders within these projects. Sometimes minor construction
change orders may be necessary for unforeseen site conditions, coordination between trades, materials, substitutions or other construction related issues. Uh delaying action on that until the next regularly scheduled city council meeting may interrupt construction activities, delay subcontractors, increase project
costs, and affect overall efficiency of the project. To facilitate efficient project administration, staff is recommending authorizing the city administrator to approve individual change orders up to $20,000 provided that the change order is funded entirely
within the city council approved project contingency. what we have for the project. The change order does not increase the overall project budget. The change order does not materially alter the approved project scope and all change orders approved under this authority shall be reported to the city council at the next regular meeting. Uh
the limited authority is intended to keep construction activities moving while maintaining city council oversight of the overall project budget and construction administration. Uh funding for the construction contracts is included with the overall project project budget previously approved by the city council. Any change orders approved under the proposal
administrative authority must remain within the approved project contingencies not increase the overall budget. Uh with that we are recommending to approve resolution 260784 resolution approving construction contracts through the city hall and fire department facilities. I can't stand for
any questions. >> Member Schilling, you're first. >> You pretty much covered a couple of things. I was going to bring this up uh early on because uh this this authorization lives within the contingency of the contract. So, it's usually something that doesn't cause any issues in my tenure of running these
things. Um the one thing I was going to ask though, um because construction is construction, so if we do run into something that is an unexpected or you know, we we can't stop the process of when you're on a punch list, things got
to get done. I'm going to ask though that we try to make ourselves available because if we need to call a special meeting, if something happens, we need to do that because we cannot stop when contractors are going in, they're here this day to this day, this day to this day, and they cross over. We we
don't want to delay that. Now, that doesn't need to be in here. I'm just making the point. Um, we haven't had to do that in my career, but I I'm all for this, but I wanted everybody to kind of know my thoughts on that. If something comes up that's outside of this scope,
we need to meet ASAP cuz once you bump a project, you're going to end up two months behind, 3 months behind. That's the construction world. So, that was it. Sorry. >> Okay. Thank No, you're fine. Member Lucer. >> Um, I have no questions. This is seems
very reasonable to me. Um, in kind of in the same vein of what member Shelling was saying is that we we we've worked really hard to get here and we want to keep the project going. And so yeah, let's um I'm totally in favor of this. >> Okay, thank you. Member Joerger. >> No questions, but I don't think this is
a really good idea because especially for a project where costs keep going up and up and up and the sky's is the limit. >> Well, it's not as it's within the project contingency amount that we have set aside. So, it can't be outside of that. And essentially, it works like our purchasing agreement when we have an
emergency purchase that even though I approve it, it still comes back to our city council at the next meeting. So, but it does have to be within the contingency. It doesn't have an exponential uh size that it can just go outside of. >> And that's kind of why I was talking about the special meeting if we need be.
>> I'd rather have special meetings than blanket authorizations. So, >> that's just my opinion. >> Um I what I believe on this is um we have had Mr. Lynwood as our city
administrator for 10 years now. Right. >> Not quite. >> Not quite, but we're getting there. Right. And um I honestly believe we've never had an issue with him managing money or funds or any orders or anything like that. I have full confidence that
he has been transparent. You can write that in your notes. That he has been transparent with us through every single process that we have gone through. So I have absolutely no issues with this. And to your point, member um Schilling, that
we need to be available should it be any more outside of that scope. So um I will make the motion to consider resolution number 260784, a resolution approving construction contracts for the city hall and fire department facility projects and
authorizing limited construction change order authority. Do we have a second? >> Second. >> Second by member Luger. All in favor? I opposed. It does pass. 21 to consider lease agreement between the city of Wyoming and Halird Marine Inc. for the
um Wyoming Fire Department. Again, Mr. Lynwood, >> it is uh Thank you, mayor, members of council. This is the last time uh tonight unless something comes up, Mr. Wex item that we've added. You'll have to listen to me on this topic, but essentially uh what you have before you
is uh as part of the renovation project, it is not possible to continue our having our fire department occupy uh the existing building with the construction schedule. So, um staff uh continued to look at potential sites um as we went
through this to temporarily locate during that construction. Uh we have negotiated a lease agreement uh with Halberg Marine for approximately 6,000 square feet um with building C um 26581 Fbrook Avenue. Um that space will
accommodate all of our fire apparatus, equipment, operational functions while work is completed over at the existing fire department. Um right now we are anticipating to operate from this location until March of 2027. Um obviously within the lease agreement uh
it goes out at a further point. We have communicated with Hullberg Marine that that is the the anticipated date. Obviously with construction schedule it will be somewhat fluid. Um but that is right now what we're anticipating. Um with that there is language within
the lease that if guests giving 30 days notice to Halberg Marine we can uh exit. So we would just have to follow um that. But uh as of right now the lease would begin on July 26 with that like I said initial 12-month term. uh the city retains that ability to to terminate
within that 30 days. Uh monthly rent during the initial term is $3700 $3,700 excuse me $3,750 uh monthly with no security deposit required. Uh the agreement is structured as a gross release and Halberg Marine would be responsible for property taxes,
building insurance, snow removal, uh water and sewer. So we would be responsible for utilities serving the lease space and including electricity, natural gas, internet and telephone if we saw fit and then any of the structural maintenance also remains with the landlord. This is a very critical
component of this is we just it does not allow for our fire uh operations to do this and that is um very um important to make sure that we have uninterrupted services to our community during this time. Um I'd like to say that the Hallbergs were fantastic to work with.
Um I think they negotiated a very fair price on the space um and were very accommodating with the changes that we asked for in the space um during they are cleaning it out from another lease holder. So um we appreciate them u working so diligently and really
honoring any requests that we had in the space. >> Okay, questions from council. I believe the start is with member Joerger. If we get the ladder truck back before the lease runs out, can the building accommodate it?
>> Chief Bo, I don't think we will have it back in in that duration, but I don't know if the building could accommodate that ladder truck. >> Oh, okay. Because if you were talking a second year on the lease, I thought maybe the ladder truck would be done at least by two years.
>> Well, I think within the if we get you're talking about if we got it back in the anticipated March 2017. You got it back before the this is all finished and you're still doing the lease. You said it didn't uh it won't it's not big enough to accommodate the ladder truck,
but when you mentioned that you had a second year an option for a second year on the lease. >> Yeah, >> I didn't know if there would be overlap. >> We do, but we don't anticipate utilizing it for the ladder. I think the timing on that, it's going to take long enough for that ladder truck and the timing that they've allocated to us allowing to
essentially grab it when we're ready to pick it up and bring it back here. So, I don't think that should come into play. I don't Chief Bowers, is there anything I'm missing there? >> No, I don't anticipate. >> Okay, >> member Schilling. >> Uh, a couple of things. Um, I got to say, uh, thank you, Mr. Lynwood, and any
of and all staff that worked on this. Uh, this was one of my biggest worries was finding an immediate space for our fire department to get this construction going. Uh, secondly, I was actually very surprised by the lease price. Uh, especially in what is being offered and what we're responsible to take care of.
So, uh, this was a big for me, uh, because of this project coming in. So, um, and yes, I know Austin was really nice to work with. So, anyway, thank you very much to any and all of you that worked to get this done because this was
one of my scary hurdles. Okay, >> Luger. >> Um, I don't have any questions, but I I mean, obviously, this is something that is really critical to maintaining public safety and and providing our community the services that they that they pay for. And so, um, to kind of echo what member Schilling said, thank you to our
city staff who worked on this, and a huge thank you to the Halbergs for really working with us on it. >> Yeah, I agree with all of that. All right, so I'll make the motion to approve a lease agreement between the city of Wyoming and Halberg Marine, Inc. for the Wyoming Fire Department. Do we
have a second? >> Second. >> Click the second. >> Second by member Luger. All in favor? I opposed. It does pass number 22 that we added to the agenda. Um I don't have a written note on that, but I know that Mr. Wack is going to be talking to us um
regarding a building. So Mr. Wack will hand the floor over to you. >> What is it? >> Madam Mayor and council members, um we call it the Wyoming Motel. I don't think it has an actual name, but 262 374 Boulevard Trail. Um, back in March,
public safety was called for a medical. Um, after being in the in the unit, they asked me to come out and take a look. Um, the basement's flooded. Um, if you read my report, but um, the electrical the fuses are blowing in the
unit, so they're running cords out of the yard out into the hallway to plug into outlets out there. There were no smoke detectors operable. No carbon monoxide detectors out operable. the basement, about half of it had about two inches of water in it. The rest of it was wet just from the rest of it. You
can see the mold and mildew and everything in the pictures I provided. Um, and talking to the property owner, um, she first got back to me on April 13th, um, after I had emailed her the letter and sent it to certified mail. Um, she was going to get bids and all
that. Um, she's in England. She came into town about a month ago, talked to contractors. Um, I told her that this meeting was coming up and I' we'd have to either get a deadline from or her or get get a answer from her for when she was going to take care of the building
or I start this process which would be to raise the building, demolish it. Um, on Thursday she contacted me. She said she's still working on bids. She didn't have a hard timeline. I asked for a soft timeline. She never responded. So, here
we are. Um, so in the order just basically giving me authorization to to start the process to get the get the building torn down and and any of the other structures on the property also. >> Okay. Um so let's start with um member Lucer.
>> Um I I support this just reading through all the um all the concerns. Also I feel like when I look at these pictures I can smell them. Um yeah, and I like I think it's unfortunate that um the owner
wasn't willing to provide a self that line but unfortunately I mean I think this is part of the this is part of community safety too. >> Furnaces are standing in water and there's no emergency but that's >> Yeah. >> So yeah, I don't have any questions. >> Okay. Thank you. Uh member Jagger,
>> are we going to have a bunch of hazardous material to dispose of in the debris? it it mostly household items that were in there that I last saw. We will have to do an asbestous assessment to find out if there's any asbestous, but other than that, I don't think there's going to be anything else. >> Are the costs going to be charged back
to the property? >> That's the 429 process be just like the street assessment process. It's the same same process basically. >> Okay. >> Member Shilling. >> Uh I absolutely have no problem with these. I do a couple a month. I'm just glad Wyoming only has one every couple of years.
>> Yeah. Um, yeah, this is bad. >> Figure it out. >> I have no questions. It's >> Yeah. >> Um, so we need a motion to approve that. Uh, Mr. Wack >> Oh, is there a problem? >> No, no problem. Uh, I was just going to ask if you could for the resolution if
you could use resolution 260785. >> 85. >> Correct. Thank you. >> I was just going to wing you. We need a motion to approve 260785. A motion to approve um our building
official, Mr. Wet, to start the process to have the building raised in accordance with Minnesota statute 463. Do we have a motion? >> So moved. >> We have a motion by member Schilling. Do we have a second? >> Second by member Luger. All in favor? I >> opposed. So approved.
>> Thank you. >> All right. Uh we will do um >> council reports. >> What? No, >> it's fine. He can do it. >> We need to redo this. >> Resolution. >> Correct. So there is an order that
administrator wack had put in front of you. I I what you just approved there really was to start the process. He does have a more formal draft resolution. However, this could wait. We I think we do have to provide notice to the property owner. This happening anyway. This could come next or you could do it
right now too. We still would have to allow the owner an opportunity to come before counsel. >> Sure. >> Um but I I just you didn't based on what procedurally what was just voted on. It wasn't this document. It was just allowing him to go forward. If council wants to formally then we would have to
do this this resolution here. >> Let's just get this done. What would be the number on this resolution? >> It would be 260785. >> Yep. Okay. >> Okay. All right. So, we need a motion to approve resolution 2605. Um, order of the city or >> 07 260785.
>> Yeah. 26 0785 >> 26 >> 07 >> 0785. >> Yes. So, >> thank you. >> Okay, we have a first. Do we have a second? We have a second. All in favor? I opposed. We're done. That's good. All right. Council reports, please. We'll
start with member Luger earlier today. >> Thank you. Um, member Joerger. I attended the budget work session earlier tonight. Thank you for coming, Lauren. And thank you all for watching. >> Member Schilling. >> I attended the EDA meeting last Monday
and the budget work session in front of this uh Thanks for coming. I know nobody's watching because I think we're down, right? >> We are down right now, but we'll we'll post our audio tonight yet. So on there, the live stream is not working. >> Otherwise, >> we'll have the audio up >> tonight.
>> Yeah, no worries. >> Well, thank you all for listening, whoever listens. Okay. So, I attended the work session as well. Um, Monday we had the um joint sewer commission. Always a lot of fun. Um, we had the EDA meeting last week. Um, and I would like
to give a shout out. During my day job, Chief Bower, I was at Meadows on Fair View and I had the opportunity to ask them about a lot of different things within the city as well. They wanted me to say thank you for the fire department, the elevators and everything
that you guys do, whether it's police or fire. Um, everything that you do for that building, they are highly appreciative and they say there is nobody better but you guys and your staff. So, yeah, you're welcome. All right, we need a motion to adjurnn at 7:39.
>> We have a motion to adjourn by member Lucer. Do we have a second? >> Second. >> Second by member Schilling. All in favor? I oppose. We are adjourned at 7:39. Sunday. >> Huh?