is we're adding a monitor here and then the flags would be behind the monitor. >> Fantastic. Okay. Thank you. Um Okay. Can I get a motion to approve the agenda, please? >> I'll make a motion to approve the agenda. >> Motion by Council Member Pchman. >> I'll second. >> Second by Council Member Comrade. Any further discussion. All those in favor say I. >> I. Oppose. Same sign. >> Motion passes. Doesn't appear to be anyone here tonight for community comment, presentations, and reports. We have a 2025 audit report. Miss Shudy, >> thank you, mayor and councel. The city has completed their 2025 um financial audit which was prepared by ABDO. And tonight we have Alex Trippel from Abdo Services here to present the financial audit. Um it went extremely well with our new accountant Mallerie by my side. Um so yes, Alex will present and then I'll be here for questions. Alex will be here for questions and that will be it. All right. Um I'll start by introducing myself. Uh like Lynn said, my name is Alex. I am a manager with um ABDO and our government group. I've been with ABDO now for six years and been able to work on the Carver audit. um every year since I started except for last year I was on paternity leave. Um but I've gotten to know Lynn and Brent very well and we like working with them. So excited to be here and go through the audit for you guys. Starting with the audit results. Um that first result there, that unmodified opinion under GAP, that's a clean audit opinion that's saying that the financial statements are stated fairly in all material aspects. That second result there, the Minnesota legal compliance testing, we do have one instance of non-compliance there related to the approval of checks. That testing is um just testing of state statutes, making sure that payments are made on time, the bid process is going according to state statutes, stuff like that. The preparation of financial statements finding is what we've had in that we've had that in the report every year. That's nothing new. And then like I said before, that presentation of approval of claims. Um, we talked about it during the a little bit. It was just about the different reports and staff that was involved. Stuff just slipped through the cracks there. So, because that violated state statute, it's included in the report. Um, I've seen and heard that it since has been corrected. So, we have no concerns moving forward under the general fund fund balance and budget. Um that top orange line there is top orange line there is the total the total expenditures in the general expenditures in the general fund and fund and then that yellow line is the then that yellow line is the fund fund balance percentage of those balance percentage of those expenditures expenditures and then that black line and then that black line that 40% is the that 40% is the fund balance policy the fund balance policy the minimum fund minimum fund balance. You can see that balance. You can see that increase from increase from 40.5% to 44.2% from 24 to 40.5% to 44.2% from 24 to 25 and that 25 and that percentage is based on the percentage is based on the following following year's expenditures. Um that year's expenditures. So that large increase in the budget from about 4 million to 4.3 million, you guys are still with a good cushion and fund balance to prepare for those expenditures. Looking at the general fund as a whole, comparing um the actual revenues and expenditures to the budget, um you had a favorable variance in both revenues and expenditures. Um that revenue variance, I just have a couple things I want to make sure I don't forget. that revenue variance. Um, a good chunk of that is from special assessment revenue. Um, you guys didn't have that in your budget, but you brought in about $54,000 in special assessment revenue in the general fund. And then the rule fire contract was budgeted for 160,000. It came in at about 137. So, $23,000 favorable variance there. Um, expenditures, you guys were under budget by $175,000. A big chunk of that was uh the police contract which was budgeted for 330,000 and um it came in at 230. Um and then moving on to the general fund revenues by type, you can see the taxes increase there um as a direct reflection of that increase in the tax levy of about 11%. Um about 6% of that went to the general fund that increase. So it didn't increase exactly 11%. This is just showing the general funds portion. And then another thing that kind of stands out in this graph is that intergovernmental revenue dropping off. In 2024, you guys had that FEMA grant revenue. Um you guys didn't receive that in 25, which is the reason for that decrease. Looking at the total expenditures in the general fund uh by department, that general government increase is mostly result of the wages increasing based on that comp study. Um, and then in the public safety fund, that drop off again is costs related to the flood control and that FEMA grant. Uh, public works staying pretty consistent. And then that other section is made up of interest, revenue, transfers, uh, stuff like that. And you guys didn't transfer out as much out of the general fund in 25 as you did in 24. This and the next graph are just going to look at the total fund balance, the ending fund balances um by different types of funds. So these special revenue funds here, you can see they remain pretty consistent from 24 to 25. No real significant activity um that impacted those fund balances. This is a different story. The capital project funds, these fluctuate a lot. They're designed to. As money comes in for projects, the fund balance increases. As money goes out, the fund balance decreases. Um, nothing of concern here. These funds are oper operating as they're supposed to. So, just kind of more of a general sense for where things ended up at the end of the year compared to last year. This is the total debt service. Um, I guess outstanding balance, asset balance, and cash balance. Um, in reverse order of what I just said. Um the graph below kind of paints a better picture of what we're trying to portray here, which is the debt obligations due in the coming 10 years. Um those obligations, those payments made up of principal and interest. They're funded by tax levy, interest earnings, special assessments. Um you guys plan to cover those and have a plan to based on your levy and budget. Um, as far as your total outstanding balance at 15.5 million there in bonds outstanding, that's well below the 3% statutory limit. Um, and that's 3% of the estimated market value of tax billable property in the city. If you get close to that 3%, that starts to come into play with state statutes, but you guys are well below, you're not even at 1%. Um, so no concerns there either. Now I'll go through the enterprise funds starting with the water fund. This top graph shows in orange and green there the total money that came into the fund and then in yellow and black the total money that went out of the fund. Um the water fund remaining pretty consistent in both revenues and expenditures increasing a little bit. And then down below is the total cash balance within that fund. Um that black line being your target minimum cash balance, which is six months of operating expenses plus um whatever debt obligations go with that fund. Um so you guys are well above that um goal for cash balance in that fund. The sewer fund had a pretty big increase in both revenue and expenses. um those revenues, that big increase there is due to that five $5 base fee that was implemented in 2025. And then those costs went up. There were a lot of repair costs that went into the sewer fund in 2025. Um so that cash balance decreased a little bit as those expenditures exceeded revenues. Um but with that new implementation of that base fee, we'll see revenues kind of continue to stay steady. Well, that was maybe an um unusual year in repair and maintenance costs. Um all in all, still above that uh target cash balance in the sewer fund. A large increase in revenue in the storm fund as well. Rates in the storm fund increased 36% from 24 to 25, which is why that revenue shot up while expenses remained pretty consistent to the prior years. Um and then that's reflected down below that large increase in cash balance well above that um minimum target balance in cash. This shows the total cash um across the whole city, governmental funds, enterprise funds. Um as you guys are getting into the thick of these big projects that's expected to go down from 24 to 25. I mean you guys got financing and funding for that and so as those projects continue that balance will trend down. Um, nothing of any concern there. Moving on to some of our key performance indicators. In orange on the left there, that's class 4 cities. That's cities of Minnesota with a population less than 10,000 um for some comparative information and visuals there. And then in yellow is other cities within Carver County. And then that black line represents the city of Carver. Um, overall your tax rate is below the average of the class four cities and the cities in Carver County. And then moving on to that second chart that shows the city's total property tax rate divided among the different tax and jurisdictions. Um, so the city tax rate in orange there at the bottom, you can see how much that makes up of the total tax rate um within the area. Um, yeah. Moving on to debt. debt relative to um the class 4 cities and the other cities in Carver County, you guys do have a much higher debt per capita and then as a result of that your debt service expenditures as a total of your total expenditures as well above um that kind of comes with how much you guys have going on here. You guys I work with a lot of cities all year. They're you guys are have significant infrastructure that you guys are working on. Um, in our opinion, that's not a bad thing. You guys are levying for it. You can fund it. Um, obviously the downside of that is having to levy more and increase um other costs. This shows the total current expenditures per capita um how you guys are using your money um per citizen comparatively to again to those class four cities and the cities within Carver County. And that is all I got for you. Here's the rest of our team. I'm happy to take any questions that anyone has. And if you think of something after I leave, ask Lynn and you can shoot me an email, too. I don't need to put you on the spot either. But yeah, if there's anything you guys are wondering about or any questions, I'd be happy to answer. >> Questions? >> No questions. >> Maybe just a comment. You know, I when I hear favorable variances, I want to make sure that I I state that I don't think favorable variances happen without an unwavering high on cost control. Same as expenditures per capita. I think that's really the work of the city. So, I I don't want that to go unnoticed. City employees. >> Thank you. Um Yeah. And I, you know, I think we all know that the weeks leading up to an old week of the audit is some stressful times for our finance staff. So, Lynn, and please pass along to Mallerie, like really good job. Know it's a lot of blood, sweat, and tears. And um not only was the work that you did to prepare for this great, but like clearly the results demonstrate a lot of really good work. So, thank you. >> Thank you. And it's been a pleasure working with Abdo, too. So, Good job, too. >> Um, with that, I >> I I have one quick question. Oh, yeah. Go ahead. >> Um, so, uh, your first slide there, we had one instance of non-compliance. So, how have we fixed that or will we be fixing that? >> We did that on a meeting recently. >> So, if you look at the claims that were presented, um, this evening, you'll see that we are now listing um, the check numbers in sequential order of what is being presented to be approved for the claims. um both electronic checks uh AC's EFTs and physical checks and then that way it gives us a starting point and an ending point of what checks are being presented whereas in the past it was just a total number a total amount that was being presented to council. Um and that left more room for error depending on what parameter was chosen um for the report that was being presented. So um that's the change that we made. >> Okay. Thanks. And I just wanted being that it was brought up if anyone is watching and they had a question about that. >> Yep. Thank you. >> All right. Uh with that, I'll make a motion to accept the 2025 audit. >> I'll second. >> Motion by Mayor Johnson, second by Council Member Ser. Any further discussion? >> All those in favor say I. >> I. Oppose. Same sign. Motion passes. All right. Um thank you. >> Yeah. Thank you guys. Uh, we don't have any public hearings this evening. Can I get a motion to approve the consent agenda? >> I'll make a motion to approve the consent agenda. >> Motion by council member Pchman. I'll second. Second by council member comrade. Any further discussion? >> All those in favor say I. >> I. >> I. Oppose. Same sign. Motion passes. All right. Um, we not going to throw anyone under the bus, but we ran long. >> Oh, I thought it was cuz I ate your Reese's. No, but now that you made that public and on the record, um, we ran long in the work session, so we're going to revert to some work session topics going back specifically to the 10-year staffing plan update. Just a reminder for the tens and tens of people who are watching from home. These are our casual conversations. These are concepts and plans and thoughts and ideas that we are seeing for kind of the first time. So, um, with that, let's continue talking about the 10-year staffing plan update. I know Eric, you had the floor last. Did you finish your thoughts? >> I think I did. I think that uh it may be worth a a further discussion about uh our information technology specialists being 10 years out and as um it is more and more uh a role in in virtually how everything is done um not just maintenance but again ideiation about uh what can be done uh that we look at uh a sooner sooner time frame than 10 years. And I'll shut up with that. >> Lori, any thoughts? >> Um, no. I'd be curious to know how we do the partnership with uh the county sheriff's department where we share with the city of Victoria if there's any other models where if we're at a spot where we don't need a full-time IT person. Is there >> I think Brent had mentioned that a little bit. Yeah, I think we're exploring uh opportunities. Um >> just nothing has we haven't been able to connect on something that works for both sides, but I think we'll continue to explore that as our needs become more defined. >> Thank you. >> Talked a little bit about you. >> That's okay. I was um Eric, if you were to when you're looking at the IT specialist, is there one then that you would like to flip-flop it with? Have you looked in the list there and there's something that you want to push back in order to move that forward or hadn't got that far? >> That's a great idea. I hadn't gotten that far. >> All right. Um yeah, I mean we talked about the fire station or the fire chief um in the previous session. My concern with moving the information IT specialists up is that when you're working with IT in the private sector, all of the efficiencies that you have can increase they'll decrease your expenses, but they'll also possibly and probably increase your revenues. And as a city, we don't have the increase in revenues to help offset the cost of an IT specialist. All we have is savings and the most expensive thing we have on our budget is our people. So by moving for someone forward that makes a huge impact on the budget. Um and so if I'm not if we can't see the efficiencies leading to the savings that would justify it. I don't see how we can justify moving it forward would be my concern. I also have um because you know a lot of the things that I brought up been talking about kind of tow that line between communication specialists because you kept mentioning communications as to it. Is the communications part of it something that we might need more than or earlier? take my >> sorry or earlier maybe I should say more earlier than the it um again because when I we were talking about this before I was saying so you know we only have so far that we go right now that doesn't mean again there might be a robot in here in 10 years we don't know that but is it something where we are going fine with status quo because we aren't a we aren't a for-profit business that maybe it makes sense that that isn't getting pushed up or maybe It does. I don't know enough yet about what that could look like. But the communications part of that which is some of the things I mentioned too I think are kind of important because that is a lot of the different things that we are working with every day and it directly hits our community when we have that. So I don't know I'm not sure again thing this is the work session part where we start throwing stuff out. So that's been crossing my mind too. >> Um so my thoughts on that. So, first of all, I want to recognize that everything five years out and more is in the conceptual phase and really like so much can change like respectfully we should be focusing more of our efforts on the annual budget, the critical review phase a little bit more. I get it that we have a big long list. You know, I always take a look at the communications specialist, right? It's wild how you look through the the lens that you're the most familiar with. Um, and I would love my first kind of gut feeling is always like I would love to see that come up a little bit sooner because I know the importance of communications. I bet we all do. But then um I look at it and we are sitting in here with our communications specialist and our chief communications officer in both Brent and Brenda who are serving these roles really as other duties as assigned right now. And I think we're doing a great job. Do we have, you know, fun and funny videos on Facebook? No. But that doesn't feel like a need. And I think we've always kept a really like need-based staff. So, um I think that that can wait. I I'm open to figuring out the fire chief, but I remember when that came up probably a year ago when we still had Cali as the fire chief and he came in and was like, we could use a full-time fire chief tomorrow >> and I pushed for it in 2026 and it was a little bit of a compromise to go to 2028. So, um I know that it is hard to find somebody who has the duties and responsibilities of a fire chief and want them to do it off the side of their desk. And like there's a pretty unique unicorn that you need to fill that role as a parttimer, somebody who has the experience and like quite honestly like has the time to give that role. Um, my only other thought is we're looking at this. Brent, remind me. We didn't hire in 2026. Did we also not hire in 2025 or did we >> I think we added a public services technician. >> Um, but I think, you know, as we're talking about kind of taking a really critical look at the budget, we're already doing this. We did not we're on kind of a soft hiring freeze in 2026 and 2027 anticipating some larger capital improvements that we need to do. So, um let's just make sure that that's on everybody's radar. >> So, one more question here about my pontificating on an IT specialist. Can we go to one of our neighboring towns like Victoria uh and say what did having an IT role do for the city that might not have been expected other than you know the maintenance things we kind of think of. What did that role uh do for the city that created some efficiencies and were were those efficiencies enough to overcome the salary of that individual? Maybe we don't know. Maybe we should ask that >> because I I think I think maybe we're we're focused on fix it stuff. Uh and do we need a dedicated fix it person? Probably not. But I'd like to know what that role has done for another community and and did it pay for itself. >> Sure, >> we can do that. >> I think that'd be good, Eric. That would help get a better view of it for sure. >> Yeah. >> And I don't know, Eric, I hear your concerns, but I don't think you're advocating for it in 2028 or 2029 necessarily. >> Um, well, let's find out, >> okay, >> what's going on. And I'm not advocating for it in 2027. >> Okay. >> All right. >> Okay. All right. Any other comments on the 10ear stopping plan? >> All right. Let's move on. >> Before we move on, >> so I have uh for to-dos to to update that table with Dog Grid and San Francisco residents. We'll do an exercise with Victoria on because they just started that new position two years ago. >> Four years ago. >> It's Lynn's husband. >> They got a really great IT guy. Uh um but as a do you want are the inputs good for this year or do you want to see this back again with that data before we input it into the Northland analysis? >> I think we should see it again. There's been enough discussion about the different positions and things that that other information at least especially for the fire chief. I think I need a little bit more for me to make a decision on that. >> Okay. >> Can I ask one more thing about that when you're when you're checking on those numbers for the fire chief is can you talk to Chesa and Chan and just see what that what that motivation was at that why they went to fire chief like you said it might have just been the way of the world and most cities were were doing at that at that point or what it was that made them hit at 12 23,000 rather than 15,000 or whatever it might be. Do you want the townships that they serve as well, the populations of the townships that they serve or does that >> that's that's kind of here or there for me, but >> Okay, got it. >> Okay, >> thank you. >> All right, city manager report. >> Uh, so a couple things. Uh we are continuing I think I mentioned this at uh your last work session to work with the city of Chaza on uh the eventual reconstruction of Spring Creek Drive. As you may recall, Chaza is going to be installing a sanitary s I believe sanitary sewer. Does that sound right, Andrew? Sanitary sewer um in on the north side of Spring Creek Drive. And so the whole road is going to be reconstructed. And what we've offered to CHASA staff is that the actual reconstruction is going to have a bigger impact on our community than their community just because of the location of uh the Meadows at Spring Creek. And so they agreed uh after we reached out and so Aaron Schmidt is going to kind of be um heading up that project, if you will. So, he'll be kind of managing and making sure that Brenda and I get the communication outreaches to those residents on uh when it's going to start, key contacts, uh you know, potential, you know, road closures or soft closures, etc., if you will. Um, plus it this gives us an opportunity if there is like an issue reported. Uh, not that Chesa couldn't handle it, but it gives us the opportunity to handle it personally rather than saying call the city of Chesa. I think frankly everybody wins in that scenario. So, just wanted to give you an update on that and as we learn more about their project and when it's going to occur, uh, we can share that out with you and impacted residents. Uh, regrettably, uh, uh, Erin Smith shared with me that our prospective tenant, uh, for 490 Old Carver Road, uh, elected not to move forward. And so, um, just wanted to share that news with the council and see, uh, if you're still interested in trying to get it leased out or or where you're at with that. >> Yeah, >> yes, please. uh JCP and CASA 11 improvements. Uh I think I already covered that actually. Uh I was going to give you an update on uh that uh which I covered in the uh facil or the uh preview for the long-term plan. So that kind of I covered that already. Look at that. Uh fire board meeting is April 27th. We're going to have you remote, Council Member Conrad, for that. Um, one of the things I'm It's been a while since the council asked for this, but it's been still on our radar as a discussion of adding a fourth uh tier to your water rate system. Uh, so we've been working behind the scenes on that with help from Northland and uh the finance team. And so uh we're going to have uh a discussion on that at your May 18th work session. We'll have a kind of a conceptual fourth tier and show you the impacts and you can kind of brainstorm what you like or don't like about it and decide if that's a path you want to move forward with. The concept behind it is developing a a fourth higher tier to on a high water user to um kind of somehow manage um that highest use that drives the need for addition or additional infrastructure. So, um I know it's been a while. Just wanted to we're doing that work. Just want to check it and make sure that's still of interest to the council. >> Uh mentioned it quite a bit tonight already, but public services department uh still working on that design development uh update. We have a pretty big meeting uh this week. Um that'll uh probably put us in a position where we can start to schedule a work session with the council on uh the work that the team has come up with and uh some preliminary cost estimates. Uh spring hydrant flushing has begun. So you'll probably see some signs and notices on uh website and social media. And then uh just a little commercial for the spring organic collection that'll be May 2nd at Carver Station. Uh, thank you to Andrew and his team for staffing that. And again, a thanks to Lynn and the finance team for a great audit. >> Great. Thank you. Um, up next we have city council requests. Eric, you wanted to revisit the cell phone policy. >> I do. So, uh, during the last council meeting we discussed or Brent, uh, socialized allowing council members to participate. uh in the $70 stipen that city employees receive uh for their cell phones. And I made a quick decision that that was wasn't something that I needed. And therefore um I didn't think it made sense to to increase city costs for a for a benefit that uh I just again made a quick pretty quick decision about um in that meeting. I noodled over that for a while and you know these none of us are on city council for uh for the money. I go back to the stories you talk about when you're meeting with middle schoolers and they ask how much we make and uh you know it might be pennies on the hour if you really broke it out but the stipend is to help offset costs and it's it's a varied cost. We all have different levels of participation in what we do for the city. And I I think I made a mistake in imposing what my needs or are uh for other people to to um to utilize the stipen to to offset whatever costs may come with your participation in the council. So what I asked for is that uh it be represented. I'd like it to be an optin. Uh so it is not something we just automatically receive as a city council. If it's something that you think helps offset the costs that you have for the work that you do on this council, I think you should be able to opt in and receive that. So that's that's my opinion. So I don't know what that means from a >> Okay. Does anyone else want to revisit that? >> I'm happy to revisit it. >> I'm fine not going back to it. I don't think it's necessary. >> I would like to revisit it. >> Okay. Um I don't have any desire to revisit it. Um but I'm outnumbered here. I would actually advocate because I think it's not transparent. I think a cell phone reimbursement should be for folks who have an exceptional use of their cell phone for these roles. And I don't think, and maybe this is a really biased, this is absolutely through my own lens, but I don't know that anyone else uses their phone as much as I do for this role. And maybe that's it's definitely a biased perception. It's definitely coming from a place of privilege. But what I'm trying to say is is I would almost favor taking a look at our salary substructure or our perdemium um per year so that it's a little bit more straightforward because if you're not making if you and Brent aren't connecting on the phone, if you aren't sending tons of texts, if you aren't if your cell phone isn't for the city's role, It seems not transparent to be reimbursing you for cell phone usage. We all have cell phones, but I would I would say that we probably should revisit what we earn as council members and mayor instead of taking a look at a cell phone reimbursement that would be $900 a year. So, I'm going to push back on that because that is true for everybody. I don't think there's a city employee who doesn't already have a cell phone, but they do use it. >> I want to be really clear that I'm only talking about the five of us. City employees, I have no problem whatsoever. I think that it's different for us as elected leaders. >> Okay? But it is the same logic. City employees have their own phones. It is a mechanism to help offset some of the costs that an employee or a city council member may have. And again, we all have different levels of participation, but this is an opt-in. So, is it $900 for each one of us? Not necessarily. You It's an opt-in. uh everyone can make a decision whether or not they think their level of of work and what they're doing for the city necessitates that. I don't and you use the word um you said um bias. I wanted to be sure that my bias didn't impact uh my decision. It did last time. had to think through that and that's why I asked to bring it back up because I'm I was looking at that through my lens. >> Yeah. No, I get it. I get it. I just want to be really clear that my comments are only for the five of us. >> Y >> um do you want us to keep on with the debate if it's going to come back because that if there's three of the council members who have asked to revisit it at a regular No. >> Or are we revisiting it now? I'm just I'm trying to make it work. >> If somebody says like, "Yeah, let's revisit our salary structure instead." I But I don't know that I have the support for that. So, >> okay. I just don't want to if it's going to come back if if we're going to keep going through the whole thing, are we going to go through the whole thing a second time when we bring it back to the council meeting is what I'm asking. >> You asked me. >> Do we want to go through the whole process of debating now? Because we had three that said we'd like to revisit. Is this our only revisit or are we looking to bring it to like a council meeting to revisit it? >> Oh, Brent just put his finger up so I want to make sure >> see the policy before we agree to it. >> No, no, that's not what I'm saying. >> Yeah, that's not what I'm saying. >> If the council says they like I hear revisit it, it means that we'll put draft language and a policy for you to consider with the entirety of the changes. >> Okay. >> And then you can >> push pull or whatever what you like and don't like in that setting at a future work session. And I think we're meeting as a team here in a few weeks to discuss the draft that we do have. >> Okay. Thank you. I just wanted to make sure the revisit was the what I was thinking revisit what everyone else is thinking >> and done. Now we've got a policy. >> I I know that. Um so my thing that reason I'd like to revisit it is the fact that um our cell phones don't turn off at 5:00 p.m. I mean this is how we are expected to be able to be reached by the public with our cell phones. I get numerous texts or phone calls on mine, but to me it's more the expectation that this is another avenue that the public can reach us. If I said I don't have a phone and I don't have I just don't have a phone, I think that was it's a disservice to the community to uh have access to to me if they want to talk to me about whatever issue it might be. So for me, I'd like to revisit it. I think it's an expectation that the community is able to contact us that way. It's an expectation that we are able to move um you know with staff and and and ask questions and they have the same um and when we look at our staff where we are staff and we aren't staff we're council um but there's an expectation that that we are reachable and that staff is reach reachable um and I think that goes the same for us. So those are my reasons for wanting to to take another look at it. >> Okay. I am out voted so we will revisit it. >> Um okay let's go back to um communications the monthly reports in our packets. Council communications. Kayla, you want to go first? >> I'll start. Uh so last week we had the planning commission meeting. It was a big meeting. We saw and heard a lot of things. Um the big things is the uh preliminary platting and resoning for the enclave um which is the old Lensen property. Um kind of the the good news is the thing that we've talked about over and over and over again with that project was the concerns about the sound rating for the proposed town homes up there. Um it looks like Dr. Horton has created a very workable solution both to address the sound and the visibility on Highway 212. Um so that should that that looks like there's some real work that's been done there. Similarly with that park that we were all kind of concerned about. They for those of you who haven't had a chance to look at the preliminary new preliminary platting, they actually removed a couple of lots at the end of that culde-sac where the the park would be to make the park more open and visible to everyone as opposed to being kind of hidden in somebody's backyard. >> Um so they they have definitely taken our concerns into consideration and so that went um went very well and was um approved by the planning commission. We also talked about the uh changes in the final well no changes in the final plat but the changes in the uh plans for the what was formerly the United Properties up um off of Commerce Drive. Um that they're not changing the platting at all. It's just the one the first building is going to be bigger and the second building is going to be smaller. Total size of the two buildings together is going to be about the same. the platting itself is the same. So, that was approved, moved through. So, we'll be seeing that shortly here. Um, and just so that everyone knows, uh, there were community members there that were asking if the if we knew the user was going to be a data center or not. Um, and so I'm really glad that I was able to tell them, no, it is not, and we have a plan in place to make sure that the concerns about data centers are addressed going forward. So, thank you to my fellow members on the council for having picked up that baton very quickly and and put that moratorum in place. So, that's planning commission. >> All right, we're going to keep talking about moratoriums here. So, um Kayla, thank you for that because I actually have heard we have uh been on people's radar. Um, people that don't live in the city of Carver have talked to me and said, "Hey, I saw the city of Carver put this on and they were very um, supportive that we were so proactive in doing that. So, yay to everyone in the room who worked on that because I just think it's interesting when people who don't live here come up and are are excited to to see that we're we're have an eye on something that isn't here yet. Um, this is a little this is also outside of Carver. Um, but there's something happening with the city of Lakeville right now. I don't know if anyone's been seeing this or paying attention, but they may be voting on it tonight. Um, a moratorum on development because they are nervous about infrastructure, school capacity, a whole list of things that they are actually considering putting on a year moratorum for development in the city of Lakeville. Um, one thing that in a number of the articles that they're talking about is um, local controls and being able to keep their local controls. And there's something I believe something is happening at the state where they're talking about this right now as they always are but something possibly more but um that gets noted in a lot of the writeups that I see about it. So if you're looking for something um again a little outside of our space here but um it's kind of interesting information to look at. >> There was an article in today's I think it was today's Star Tribune about that and how like >> kind of how you summarized it. The bigger part is the schools and the infrastructure, but the smaller part is this legislation that I they said was going to be voted on today. >> Um, and I don't know how that vote went, but um it's what I've been updating you guys on and that the league and the Association of Counties and the Association of Small Cities and pretty much anybody that's local government related has been fighting for years. um this year has been a a little bit more palatable proposal that the league has um talked hasn't been as on the defensive about because um after year after year after year of just saying no. They're taking more of a negotiation stance. Um and this has a little bit >> it depends on your perspective, right? We can have five different perspectives up here, but in general, what I've seen over the years is >> this has more opt outs and isn't as one sizefits all as previous bills have been. >> I still wouldn't be opposed to just saying no all the time. So, that is my that is my vibe to the League of Minnesota Cities, but um anyways, take a look at it. It's some interesting reading, interesting things to see what's happening. But, um and then >> your disagreement, not your bias. >> Yeah. And then um we have the Lions pork chop dinner is coming up this Friday night. So 4 to 8 downstairs here at the city hall in the community room. Come by and support the Lions Club and you don't have to make dinner or do dishes. So it seems like a great great idea. That's all I have. >> Lions always make a great workshop. >> Yep. >> Uh I do have an update and probably a great example of local government control. So last Tuesday, April 14th, I attended the uh heritage preservation commission as a council member liaison and just really great collaboration among the commissioners. There was one main topic on the agenda. Um and the commissioners were able to give real-time feedback. Um Paul Newman from Carbon Insurance Group, he shared in a presentation his preliminary design. And so it was good to see them kind of walk through that real time and just getting that real-time feedback I thought was really great. Um, so good collaboration in that group. So thank them for their volunteer time. >> That's it, Eric. >> Well, since I already made the meeting run long, I >> I don't have any more comments, >> you know, and it's this time of year it's pretty important when you make meetings run long. Although I don't think Carver Creary is open on Mondays yet. I'd have to double check that. I know the sign said open when I walked by. >> Oh, did it? At a certain point time of the year, they're open until 8:00. So, um I will make my updates quick. Um I already mentioned about how Brent and I met with Liz Steinbo from uh Emmer's office on April 4th. Um and she was the one who encouraged us to continue to apply for project funding. On April 15th, um the school district has coffee with the cabinet. Um and they were at Getaway Motor Cafe. Dr. Rapki, Erica Merrick, and uh Kaylee Hagga were there. So, it was good to see them. Um on the 16th, we had a League of Minnesota cities board meeting. And one of the highlights from that is we got a a legislative update from their intergovernment relations team um talking about legislation that is in um the state house talking about data centers. So, um, just want to share that with you guys with the caveat that this was accurate last Thursday and things change quickly in St. Paul, especially this time of year. So, um, outside of data centers, um, the IGR team felt that there was a 50-50 chance of a bonding year, uh, bill this year, which feels like really strong odds from what I've believed previously. Um, data centers, there were at one point 25 different bills. um none have advanced their strong bipartisan interest in prohibiting um a strong bipartisan interest period. Um, there was a bill that was looking to prohibit the use of any public employee to enter into a non-disclosure agreement except for state public officials, >> which is like such a bummer cuz that was well that was the hearing that we went to day the capital which was like this sounds so great >> and it's one of those like okay what is the saying good for thee but not for me like >> but I that that's a start. Um there's also some um thought talk about putting in some hurdles for high water users. Um folks who use 100 million gallons a year or more face additional scrutiny from the DNR. Um there would also be additional scrutiny if the user takes more than 50% of the city's water budget each year. So, um, they said still very messy, but a deal could pop at one of the last minute deals at the capital was kind of their feeling. >> Um, I'm sorry. So, who is this user that they're expecting? Is this the >> a data center? >> This is the data center there. Okay. That it's just data center. >> Um, well, >> it could be anybody, but is there anything else that would >> like bottling facilities like um water bottling and like beer production? >> Okay. >> So, just high users in general of water. Um, let's see. Switching topics. Um, on last Friday we had the community leaders meeting. Um, folks at the school district are super thrilled with the progress that they're making on the bus garage. We also learned about their graduation rates which are all heading in the right direction. Um, also last Friday we had the Carver Business Alliance. Um, it sounds like there is some staff already working at Le Schwab and the folks from Hometown Bank said that they're really great people and super community-minded. I haven't had it up there to try to meet them yet, but um, when the folks from Hometown Bank who are super community-minded and super great say that another business kind of shares that same philosophy, that's a high bar that I'm really excited to see continued. So, um, last but not least, um, last night was, um, the second to last official Carver stories for the season because last month it was so snowy on the third Sunday of the month. They're probably going to extend it until June, but um, they the two interviewees were, um, two members of the band, the Polish Playboys, which were really popular down at the Riverside Ballroom. And then I can't remember her name um but the woman grew up on a farm where Fleet Farm is now and she used to love to go down there. So telling stories about like getting home a little too late in the morning and >> my dad's band used to play at the Riverside Ballroom. So >> well you should have talked to Annette because I'm sure she'd want to do uh an an interview with him. Um just looking ahead real quickly, I had the Lion's Pork Chop dinner on my list. Um on Wednesday night I'm leading a hike to the cheese cave and then on um Saturday May 2nd from 9 to 11 I'm doing mayor's office hours. So that you all still have 10 minutes maybe to get to the crearyy. Um I would entertain a motion to adjurnn. >> So moved. >> Motion by council member Pasco. >> I'll second. >> Second by council member Pchman. All those in favor say I. I. Oppose. Same sign. Motion passes. Good evening.