I will call to order the regular meeting of the Dayton City Council for May 27. Stand for the pledge. I aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Okay. I need a motion and a second for the agenda. I'll make the motion to accept it. Any changes? Um, yes, Mr. Mayor and members of council. We have one item that needs to be adjusted. Payment of claims needs to be rem reduced by $58 due to a dual payment. So, just want to FYI on that. Payment of claims needs to be adjusted by $58 for a summit fire protection payment that was listed twice on the payment of claims. Five $58. Thank you. Okay. Other than that, that's it. Thank you. Any other changes? I would like item H moved out of consent. We'll pull item H out and add it to to add it right after. I guess right after. Yeah, that works. Any other changes? All right, get those amendments. All those in favor say I. I. All those opposed say no. Motion carries four to zero. Um, should I be recording the fact that Sarah's not here or are you ready? Yeah, I'll get that. I I'll note that she'll be coming in a little bit late. Okay. And with that, we have uh board recognition. Okay. All right. Good evening, mayor, members of council. Tonight, uh, we have a very unique opportunity to recognize police, fire, and EMS tonight, um, due to a call that happened on April 8th. Chief Engel talk about that a little bit, but I want to take an opportunity to talk about some statistics real briefly. Cardiac arrest happens about 356,000 times throughout the year in the United States. During that, about 90% of those are fatalities. uh if they're within a hospital facility, there's about a 25% greater chance of them um actually um staying alive, if you will. And uh tonight, like like I said, we don't often get the opportunity to see the results of our efforts. So, if I could have Tom and uh Kendall come on up. You just want to stand next to me. Um so, that's roughly about 975 uh deaths a day. And we are fortunate enough tonight and had an great opportunity to talk to Tom probably about a week after you uh were out of the hospital which was pretty exciting for me. So I'll turn it over to Chief Eningga um to read about what we uh the response we had. Good evening Mayor, members of the city council. On April 8th, 2025, the Dayton Police Department, Dayton Fire Department, and North Memorial responded to a medical emergency involving an unconscious adult male at residence in the 18,000 block of South End Lake Court. Upon arrival, first responders located the male, later identified as Tom, who was not breathing and had no pulse. Without hesitation, the Dayton police officers initiated I shake back. initiated life-saving compressions and providing supplement oxygen for approximately 20 minutes. Personnel from all three agencies worked together with relentless focus and determination to sustain life until Tom could be transferred to the hospital for further care. Tom was given a critical second chance thanks to their rapid response, advanced training, and unwavering commitment. Because of these efforts, the Schmidt family has been gifted additional time with their beloved husband and father. A priceless outcome made possible by the professionalism and heart of those involved. We commend the following individuals for their outstanding service and teamwork. Officer Brian Murphy, Officer Eric Jutin, Assistant Fire Chief Kevin Astra, Fire Captain Joe Tedman, Firefighters Ralph Ash, Lucas Herod, Sharon Bogle, Bill Bogle, John Kudson, and Brad Bamman. Paramedic Captain Tim Hagars, Paramedic Melena Hall, and EMT Aaron Hawinson. Your actions reflect the highest standards of public service and exemplify the dedication, courage, and unity that defines our emergency response community. Thank you for your exception, exceptional efforts on behalf of the the city of Dayton. Thank you. Um, you know, words fail me at a time. What do you say when you get a second chance at life? Um, one of the biggest things that caught me off guard is when I came to with the cardiac team of surgeons and, you know, which are the best in the state. Uh, how they looked at me like almost like I was a ghost, like I shouldn't be there. And, you know, I realized I shouldn't, but the reason I am is because of all of you. Um, without your response time, your training, your incredible ability to execute uh, in a time of crisis, I would not be here. So, on behalf of my wife Kendall, our two daughters, Mackenzie, Violet, and the VV family, thank you all so much. We really appreciate and uh God bless. Thank you all so much. [Music] Thank you very much. Thank you. [Music] Wow. 10% 10%. Which one was yours? Which I'm one of the 10%. Did they do CBR on you? No. No. But you have a pacemaker. Defibrill. Okay. No. I uh waited 17 hours after the heart attack to go in. I was going to drive myself, but they insisted on sending an ambulance. Yeah, they said no way. Cost too much money. Why wouldn't I? I was waiting for that. You knew. I knew why you waited. Why you wanted to drive yourself? Would you expect anything? No. If you had said anything different, I would have been shocked. My dad quicker. I have no idea where I went up and took a shower and came down and said, "We don't even have to go now. I'm feeling good." Absolutely not. Did you get a stint also? Yeah. [Music] Yeah. I'm assuming he did too. Open heart. [Music] I didn't know it was 90%. I want to order. It doesn't matter. It might be. I'm going to figure my clicker one. I'm ordering a new one. Nope. Or where heart attack it was. Can't say what I know. This look pretty. It does. Well, it's pretty quiet in here. It's always public safety they come for. How come? All right. Um, next. Can I move your mic, mayor? Thank you. Um, consent. I need a motion and a second. I'll make a motion. I'll second. Any discussion? And this is SANS H which we took out. Any discussion? Take a look. Thought I had something but guess not. Nothing. All right. All those in favor say I. I. I. I. All those opposed say no. Consent carries. Four to zero. And then item H, municipal consent for purchase of uh Dayton River Road property. We need a motion and a second for that. Did we take it out? There is no discussion or we can I was just going to get the motion in a second. Yeah, I'll make the motion to accept it. Need a second. I'm sorry. I'm confused. What are I'll do the second what? We pulled H out and now we're discussing. And now we're discussing H. Yep. Um. All right. We got a motion, a second, and then now we can discuss. So, go ahead. So, I asked for it to to be moved because I want us to really be thinking about um how we continue down this path. This is another purchase. Um past when we said we were not going to approve anymore and I think we need to be real careful at this point. And I know there was discussion at the work session and so there's, you know, enough uh enough to approve this without me. But I think uh that we we just need to be uh aware that we really haven't gotten three rivers to agree to anything different than their master plan of owning the whole river. uh which I just want to say again we never this council or the previous councils never agreed to as being the plan for this uh river trail. Anybody else? I'll make a comment. Yeah, the only I'm going along with this. I made the comment at the work session. Um I do and I before another one of these happens I we are going to hopefully have that conversation and then I think we talked about another work session at the work session and I hope at that time we can get it all resolved. That's that's my goal. So yeah, this one I think we kind of decided because it stood out as unique due to the condition of the home. Yeah. And I don't want to hold Tom I think it was Tom, right? I don't want to hold him up. Yeah. Yeah. But yes, I I agree with the sentiment. Um, any more discussion? All right. All in favor say I. I. I. I. All oppose say no. No. Item H passes four to or three to one. And we are on to open forum. Anybody here for open forum? Anybody online for Are you telling somebody that? Oh, sorry. Nope. Talk. You're good. Are we good? Um, yeah. So, for open forum, if you wanted to speak, you can use the raise your hand function. Not seeing. All right, I will go on. You guys know something. Yeah, they're secrets here. No secrets. They're passing military eyeball notes. All right. Uh staff consultant council updates. Um good evening, mayor, members of council. I just wanted one update tonight. It's mostly just appreciate the feedback from last week's weekly update. You guys or most of you responded. If you have not responded, I really greatly appreciate that feedback. It's extremely critical for myself when I'm going through and giving direction on items and knowing where the council's at on these items is extremely extremely helpful. So when you do respond, I greatly appreciate that. So I just wanted to say thank you very much. That was it. Okay. Um I do not have any updates for tonight. Morning. I have a couple of things. While the head treatment plant uh work is continuing, um the roof is on uh there's uh they'll be working on masonry stuff and uh still some finishing up work on the on the uh the roof itself. Uh well five startup was completed last week. It went very well. Um we got a high capacity well there. Um what was that going to be rated at? Uh well we tested it um 1,400 gallons a minute to 1,800 gallons a minute. So it's somewhere in that region. All things being equal unless you collapse unless you change it. You know I'm not tempting fate with that. Um irrigation work is carrying on. Um they've done a lot of the work at LC Stevens. They moved over to River Hills now. So they're working in that that area. Um LC Stevens master plan. Um the update for that the first steering committee meeting is tomorrow um between 4:30 and 6:30. Chief, good evening, mayor, members of council. Um this a actually this morning about 10:30 um we had an opportunity to meet with one of the assistant chiefs from the Bazika Fire Department from Ukraine. Um they stopped by and thanked us. Um they left us one of their department flags to hang in the fire station. So it was a cool opportunity to understand um how the truck is being used and they've already had a couple fires there. So um it was fun to meet with them. Um, also Councilman Sonic, thank you. I appreciate the couple hours that we spent the other day. I encourage the rest of the council if you would to come visit with me. We had a great opportunity to sit and chat and uh so I greatly appreciate your time. No update. John, Jason, a couple things. 90% die, huh? That's a lot. Yeah, it's about 90% unfortunately. That's surprising actually. Uh let's see. I talked to um I have something that I a little bit of feedback or there is a gal that has been coming down South Diamond Lake Road and I've seen her like four times already this summer this spring but every two weeks she picks up along South Diamond Lake Road. Lorie Hansen is her name. She picks up all the garbage off the road and brings it back home. To me, I think that's a good uh recognition thing for the communicator. I did talk to Zach about it and then I'll get him some information and do a little write up if we need to or whatever. I think that'd be a nice thing to put in there. And there's probably more people out there that are doing that. I we just don't know about them. So, um tomorrow tomorrow's meeting 4:30 4:30 to 6:30. Oh, I was told 6. That's be you're getting all getting all the major details done before I get there, right? I was gonna say it might be fine with you missing the meeting. Uh probably a couple months back, maybe not maybe not that long ago. Um because the South Diamond Lake Road deal came in so cheap, Zach had asked about other projects that might be out there. I'd be interested to know what East French Lake Road would take to mill and overlay that. I mean, I I don't think we can buy enough time that we don't have to do something to that road before before we get a uh an eventual river crossing or a Zanzibar. You know, to me to me something's going to have to have to happen on that road before then. So, it'd be interesting to know what that would cost. Ideally the whole East French Lake Road and 125th, but I know that that's going to be way over budget if you did the whole thing. Prices from Salt Diamond Lake Road. It might be in the neighborhood of 7 or 800,000 for the entire stretch. That would be territorial all the way north to 125th and then all the way east to Fernbrook. You think so? That very high level measurements. And so you got my message then when I I I did. Um the other that is scheduled for next year. Y it's already in the pavement management plan. Yeah, there's actually one segment in there that's pushed out to 2028, but we would pull that back and do it at the same time anyway. So, it is already planned for next year to me if we could get that. I mean, it's so cheap. I was surprised that salt diamond was only 800 something. Yeah, very fable payable. So, uh that's really all I've got. I don't have anything and I apologize for being late. Can I piggy back off of CO's comment? I just want to make sure can I get the poll for the council if you'd like us to look into that project this year. It is one year early. Not saying that we can't do the project early, but um it is planned for next year to do that project. Is that something the council would like to look have us look into? Because if it is, then we need to do plans and specs for it and get it all taken care of if that's what the council wants to do. Well, I really like what I mentioned to you was with Steven's part, but I mean that's a ways out. So, we can't we can't really do that one. Only because it's meeting master plan otherwise we say yeah, sure sounds great, but yeah. Is there uh a good reason to pull it any year? I mean, only thing would be the bidding environment that's currently there is we know the prices are roughly and we can kind of have a general idea. We don't know what we're at a dip in that. Well, South Diamond was supposed to be 1.3 1.4. Well, last year they said the prices were staying or going up and they dropped by quite a bit. So, I wish I had a good sense. Um we we did get very favorable pricing on batuminous this year for sure. I don't know if that'll carry to next year or not. Yeah, I don't know either. I've heard from multiple communities that they are getting good bids as well from sewer projects to water tower projects to anything projects really, but I don't know if that's going to carry till next year. I'm unsure. That would be the only reason you'd say, "Okay, pull it in." Yeah, that's the only reason. I mean, it's pay rule. If if we get the work done, it carries, right? It'll carry into next in the next year. The the the design and the preliminary stuff. Well, if you do the pre like plans inspects and stuff, that won't ever go away is our guess. Oh, for sure. Yeah. And then I I suppose we could we could go out for bids and if they seem high, we could wait a year. I I don't have I don't know that I have a problem with it. What were the other projects we were thinking about doing though with the with the surplus, I guess. So, it wasn't a surplus in quotes, but it was there was some leftover dollars available. Could we use those for something else? We looked at a parking lot expansion of this facility only because the parking lot um pavement has gone really well with this project, but it's still over capacity when there are people here. Um I know that it's fairly well used during the sports season, I'll say. And then I think it's pretty well used during the school year, but not as drastic. Another one was public works facility that we had talked about doing an expansion of the parking lot there based on the design that was done when the parks public works building was put in. Both of those projects weren't engineering like really cheap or easy projects to add on. That's why we haven't brought those back to yet. So that was my question because those were so those are kind of off the table regardless. They're not really are off the table but we could look at doing those. It's I'm going to look to Jason to say the idea was okay can we spend two $200,000 $250,000 and get a couple of additional spots or anything that would be favorable. But really, when you add 30 spots to a parking lot for $250,000, it's seems to be like that doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. But okay. So then I would be interested in at least as like the mayor said, the work even if it winds up being more expensive than we anticipated, the work can be used for next year. It's not like we'd have to redo that work. So, yep, it seems reasonable. Yeah, I I agree. I My preference was that we would look to things that were on our payment management list already. And so pulling this one forward, even if it's just the design work, makes sense to me. Okay. Okay. Some I'm surprised that that you can get it all done from territorial all all the way over to run. Hopefully my measurements were quick. Probably three miles. That would be a guess. Yeah. Okay. Well, when was that put in? Like 05. When were those roads constructed? That road? I want to say it was 1999, I think. Oh, yeah. It's It's in pre20. French Lake Road, I think, was 1999. Yeah, 125th was later, I think, though. 125th might have been later. Oh, 125th was later, but not just before I saw here. I think it was I thought it was 0506. Yep, that sounds right. Yeah. East French Lake has got to be the worst cobblestone road we got in this city. The only one left that's cobblestone pretty much. Yeah. Yeah. Look at the riff. Sorry. Thank you. Where are we at? Oh, you mayor. Yeah, I Yep. I don't have anything. Nothing from me. I'm good. Okay, we are on to uh item P. Sorry, mayors, members of council. I don't have my clicker tonight and I don't know where it went. So, I'm running where I get here. Okay, so this is just the budget discussion for ideas on the 2026 budget. I didn't give you a whole lot to work with. Maybe some just some background information in the packet. Um, I want to provide a little background information just because we do have two new council members that may not understand the budget process and I want to make sure that they understand the process. I know this may be repeating myself for some of you, but essentially the budget starts in April. It really started in May for us. So the the things in April for city staff side of sending out the budgets and so on and so forth and sending out things for um department heads to do what was really more in May than April. That's just due to time constraints. But we did get a strategic plan done which was greatly appreciated. That happened in April with the council and I greatly appreciate that. That gives us some good headway on what we need to look into. Um we draft the long-term plan. We put together budgets for us overall as a staff level. We come back in June and talk with the council. This is similar to what we did last year. talk about budget, preliminary budget requests, discussion on that overall. And then city staff goes back to work and says based on what those discussions happen and what the response back is, we'll work on that budget back and forth in June. In July, then we will bring forward the long-term plan that comes forward in July and that will be a longer discussion, typically a workshop that happens with we put together what we call one pagers. They're the next one to two years worth of um purchases on the long-term plan to be able to have council review those. And then in August, we have workshops. Typically, both of those meetings in August. Doesn't mean they have to be, but that's generally how it works to review the tax levy, to review the long-term plan overall together as a group. And then September, we pass the budget for the preliminary tax levy. That sets the ceiling for where we're at with the levy. We can always come down. We cannot go up. October, we work on utility fund budgets. Overall, those typically only take about a meeting to work on. We'll have a final long-term plan discussion with the council. have anything additional in November if we need anything else and then December we adopt everything. So that's kind of the timeline. My goal this year is to try to chop that up a little bit. That's the typical timeline. My goal is to try to have a few less meetings and workshops on other things um and not so much on the budget this year because because everyone seems to have budget fatigue by the time we get to December and we've talked about the budget for the last eight months and everyone is rolling their eyes at the time we get there. So the primary role for council is to set the goal. you guys are the ones driving the vision for what you want to see for next year's budget. And then our our job is to basically hit that goal or hit that budget as much as we possibly can. If we can't, then there's a reason for it and we will discuss and figure out what we have to do to adjust back and forth. But the idea is that city council sets the goals and the visions for city staff and then our goal is to hit those areas of focus within the next year or two. City funds overall, just so that you're aware of these um the hundreds is the general fund. We only have general fund 101 is what we call it. That's our operations budget overall. This is primarily supported by property taxes. There's other fees that go in there. There's intergovernmental revenues that we get in from the state um or from a county. Um otherwise there's interest and such, but most of it is driven by property taxes. The 200s are special revenue funds. These are specific for one item. Um this is where the EDA dollars are laid at. Those are specific for economic development. We have some police forfeite dollars that are in the 200 funds. essentially the revenue that can't be used for anything. They have to be used for a certain item. Um debt service funds are the 300 funds. If you ever see those, those are all for governmental bonds. We don't have a ton of them. I think we have five or six maybe. Not overall that many. The 400 funds are the ones we focus on the long-term plan mostly. These are our capital project funds. These are like capital equipment, capital facilities, um park dedication funds, trail dedication funds, anything related to basically larger projects within the city, pavement management, storm water that are not funded directly by a utility um as in um like a fee that we collect for service, but um more from taxes and or other areas, whether that development fees or or whatnot. Those are typically for larger multi-year projects. and the 600 funds are all driven by utilities or they're like a service that we provide. Those are the water and the sewer funds calculation for those. So basically the lefth hand side the 100s through the 400s are considered property tax levy. That's how those are funded primarily. Now there's other fees and that go in there but primarily driven by property tax levy and then the 600 funds is all about user fees. The definition of those so tax levy. So this is where just a little bit of background is that tax levy is the actual dollars that we get. Those are set one time a year and that's all we get. That's no matter if there's 50 homes built, 150 homes built or two homes built. Um we have the same levy dollars come in for that year. The tax capacity is the amount of dollars in the total value of property. Um essentially it's set at 1% or 2% of your total house value. If we have a $400,000 house, 100% tax rate, which we'll get to in the second minute, our second or third bullet point here, 100% tax rate would mean that we we would charge $4,000 of tax revenue on that $400,000 house. That's 1%. That's considered a 100% tax rate. If you're a third of that, which is roughly where we're at right now, it would be a third to $4,000. I'm not going to do a simple math. I think it's like 1,300 bucks or something like that. The tax rate is taking that levy, dividing it by the tax capacity, and getting a tax rate. That's how everyone is then charged um for their taxes for the year. And then those depend on if you're a commercial property, industrial property or residential property. Those have different tax values. And your total tax bill is addition of all the property taxes that you pay which are not just city. Um they could be county, state, um school district, so on and so forth. Those are the kind of the main three. And then again, oh I mentioned before, a levy divided by tax capacity equals our tax rate. I did not update the market exclusion numbers. I forgot to do that today. So, don't worry about those numbers. They don't mean anything right now. Anyways, they mean something, but they're different than what they show on the p on the PowerPoint. Biggest takeaways I want to make sure that we go through is think strategically and with vision when we're going through the budget process. It's a process, not an event. Ask as many questions as you need to and then collaborate together as best as possible. The questions for the council that I have tonight and I'm going to grab my piece of paper to write down any notes I have is what are your priorities and goals for the 2026 budget year planning for the future. What are your five or 10 year goals for the city of Dayton in terms of long-term planning and taxes are always the biggest topic of discussion and this year will be no different what you would be focusing on tax rate tax levy or both? And if both which one is the tiebreaker vote? So if the tax rate was perfect that came back, the levy's too high in your opinion, is that okay? Or vice versa. If the tax levy is perfect for your vision, but the tax rate's too high, is that okay? So that's my questions for tonight. Otherwise, I just have the money tree, as Scott always likes to say. I seen that. It is nice. Where where can you find that tree? I've been searching for four years. I still have yet to find it, but I have a feeling it's somewhere behind city hall. But I So given that we know what capacity is except for this caveat I'm going to throw in. Yep. There's always tax and tax rate are just math. Yes. Yep. So yeah, it just seems not to me that they're juaposed there. And the caveat is we seem to occasionally get hit upside the head with fiscal disparities or surprises and we did last year again. Um how is there any way in the year before it was the the county just playing forgot the tiff screwed up. Yep. County screwed up with the tiff for Yeah. And both of those are significant. Yes. I I don't know how we protect against that. I I I I don't know. But they were they were big hits for both years. So they were big hits for both years. Yep. So fiscal disparities just for, you know, general public for if you're watching this afterwards, the fiscal disparities is set based off of commercial property value and essential 20 essentially 25% of that value is immediately removed out of the city and then a portion of that is given back to the city. Essentially, that's how it works. Um, if we give tiff on any of those projects, we'll use Greyco as an example, we then have to pay 125% of that taxes on that property. So, what happens is is that 25% of that value goes away. They still pay their taxes into the county. We still get the taxes from the county and we give them back to Graco for their tiff um contribution, whether that's for roadway or for whatever it may be. Um, but still 25% of their tax capacity went away from the city and we do not get 25% back. We are an ultimate giver to the to the system of fiscal disparities. Um what fiscal disparities is supposed to do is a 7count metro area of Minneapolis and St. Paul that redistributes um what I'm going to call tax capacity wealth from higher industrial properties to more residential. However, Minneapolis is a huge winner of the overall fiscal disparities thing. So that contradicts what I just mentioned. So that's where the confusion is. There is no formula for fiscal disparities. I can't recalculate it. I have tried numerous times and have failed every time. Um, communities that are winners and losers around us. If you look at Champlain, they are an overall winner. They collect about $2 million of extra tax levy every year. If you look at Rogers on our west side, they are an ultimate loser of the overall facility and they lose about $6 million of tax levy every single year. So, um, depending on how our city is built out is depending on how much we win or lose in the quote unquote fiscal disparities, um, game. Um, I call it a game because we are the only city metro area in the entire United States that uses fiscal disparities as a tax levy number. So, why are we the only ones who use it? We also only the ones that have me council as well. So, Minnesota, sorry, Minnesota, not us as a city, us as a metro area of Minneapolis St. are the only metropolitan city areas that have places gambling game. It wasn't I don't think it was originally this was in the 70s, right? It was roughly about the same time the mech council was was created. It wasn't supposed to benefit big cities. It was not supposed to benefit big cities. So why don't they change it or get rid of it? Really? How do we change it and get rid of it? You'll have 50% of the cities who love it and 50% who hate it. Yeah. Which 50% would you like to be in? Yeah. So, I do not know the answer to that. Mayor, I will say that that is if I could tell you the answer, I'd love to be able to, but do we have any historical like we will be a loser this year? I can guarantee it. Okay. So, it's just depending on how much of a loser we are. Um, how much of a loser we were we last year? I cannot remember the number off the top of my head. I think it was roughly a million dollar. $800,000. Yeah. I don't remember. Sounds right to me. And was it the same the previous year? No. Okay. It was one of them years we got 16%. Yes. On the good side. Yes. But that was about two or three years ago. Two or three years ago. Yep. And then we went backwards because then we built the cubes building and Greyco and Capital Partners building and when those came online those then essentially got because of the lag because the lag of taxes they came behind us. So if because the rent residential went in, if you put in a bunch of residential housing, you are a winner of the overall I'm going to call again I winners and losers should not be the term I use. I should say that you benefit from the from the from the uh formula, but so residential benefit the formula benefits residential and it tends to punish I don't know if that's even a good better word downgrade commercial development. I don't know how to use a better term. Like I said if you looked at both sides of us east side is Champlain, west side is Rogers, Rogers is a lot of commercial industrial. They are ultimate loser. Champ is an ultimate winner. Okay. Does the formula change? Sorry. Does the formula change? No. When the tip districts expire? No, it does not. But then we wouldn't be giving the money back to the developer as in great I'll use great co only because they have two tiffs. Um the money then would then go to the taxes and then come to us as a city and then we'd be able to use that tax value to be able to put into the taxes um for the overall community. Right now we give those t taxes back and then we just give them right back to Graco forum essentially. Was it Graco tiff or was it the cub's tiff that we got spanked with last year? Uh Graco tiff. Graco. So that means this year should be none of them. They're all on online now. Uh Graco's 26 or 27. 28. When it's going to be done. One of them expires in 20. My guess is 28 or 29 would be the first one. But yes. So the Q's building we don't ever get hit with because we are technically collecting those taxes every single year. Oh because because we have the we have the bond that goes on those tiffs. That's how we re reconstructed West French Lake Road and the intersection at 81. We worked into the formula. We figured that out too. Yes, we worked that into the formula cuz we were essentially we collect the taxes on it 100%. And then we utilize those dollars for the project overall. Essentially we redid that roadway without causing any tax levy dollars for any other resid. I don't think we were aware. No, we were not. We would get spanked for it. That's correct. And had that worked into the money, we probably would have chose differently. I think probably if we would have known that information, you may or may not have done a different decision at that time. But now you know. So now we can use it moving forward. So my big three questions are priorities and goals, planning for the future, and what's going to be the kind of deciding factor. this helps us as staff and myself specifically so that I can provide good feedback to my department heads when they come to me and say hey this is what I like for budget next year and I go yep that's great or yep that's great never going to happen yeah you got it well and I don't know ne necessarily has to be unanimous across the council but yeah for for for me I would like to see our capacity number we would us use the the new capacity values Um, I'd also like to know what our non-recurring spending was last year that we don't plan for. So, like pavement, it's it's capital, but it's it's a recurring thing and we we plan that. Um, the equipment budget we had last year be nice to know because that's not that would be baked into the to the budget if we didn't look at that. Okay. So, uh that's my SPE. So, essentially capacity values essentially use that up. That would be your kind of your what do you call it? I'm going to call your cap or whatever you want to call it. New capacity. Y and specifically new capacity, not to value capacity. Y and by by that number you're talking 777, right? No, that's the full capacity. Yep. 777 which is the number I gave you in your packet um for information is if 100% of the new tax capacity numbers were utilized for tax levy essentially the tax rate stayed the same from year to year. Say that again. The new is just the new Yeah. So then if you used only new then the tax rate would decrease next year. Yeah. So if you used 777 as the number 6 612 would be the I think it was 6.38 6.38% would be the new something like that. Yeah. And again it's not exactly one for one but it's close. 6 6.13 I think it was. Yeah. So that's your that's your number. Six. Yeah. And the overall capacity was eight. Yeah. 8.1 or something like that. 8.3 I think. 8.1. Something like that. Yeah. Yeah. So if you used all I'll use the one. It's not technically one for one, but it's close enough where 8.1% of tax levy increase equals 8.1% of tax capacity means the tax rate stays the same if you use that formula I showed a couple of slides ago. Um, so that's kind of the general number. It doesn't mean it's exact. It's relative. Um, but if you use the only the new values, which is what the mayor had mentioned, then the tax rate would decrease because if you have 8% increase in capacity but only 6% increase in the levy, now the tax rate would go down. Um, so we have some um things that are, you know, that are built into built into this for us. We've got union contracts and yep, health insurance payments and so forth that we that we know are going to go up. Yes. um and can predict maybe not so much on the health insurance piece of it, but um certainly where we have contract employees, we know what you know what they what those costs are going to change like and what our um current current levels of staffing will cost us going forward. So there's those kinds of things um that will cause an increase. If we said, "Okay, last last year's budget was great. Um what what's our new spending?" then we would have to look at those things that have either inflation or a structured cost increase to them and it would be nice to know kind of what I'll say I don't want the tax rate to go up so at a high level that's that's where I'm at. So, if you look at, you know, what what things are going to drive the budget to need to increase from last year, um, you know, what's already sort of baked in that we don't really have the ability to debate. Um, we can talk about capital equipment, we can talk about pavement management and what we feel like we can afford to put into those uh those different parts of the funds, but uh some things we don't really have a a choice about. Sure. And so it'd be nice to know where, you know, what that what that sort of wiggle room is and then yeah, you know, and then we can get into the kind of the the needs or um it wants this is the winners, losers, priorities, whatever you want to use. But before we do that, it'd be nice to know what we're already working with that that has to be spent. Okay. Yeah, that's a good point. Go ahead. Um my Do you want a different slide up? Sorry. Looking up here. Oh, no. This is fine. Um my gut instinct is I want to keep the tax rate the same or maybe a little tiny bit lower. I'm not like I'm not like we have to lower it by 5% or anything like that, but like I definitely don't want the tax rate to go up and I would be happy if we could shave a teeny tiny bit off. That'd be great. Um so to me tax rate is is my driver versus the levy. Um, as far as priorities, I agree with Dave. Like I I definitely think we need to see what are the things that are totally outside of our control, right? Like we have X number of employees. We know they're going to get this pay increase. Like all that has to be accounted for cuz we don't really have any say in that anyway. Um, not really. We do, but we do. We do, we don't, but like um like so I want to have all those things earmarked out. Also, as the mayor said, I'd like to know like what are ongoing things versus what were the onetime projects that like particularly projects that happened before Stephanie and I had anything to do with anything, right? Um, so those are things that would that would be of interest of me or of interest to me. Um, I think the planning for the future in my head there are kind of there's a couple big things that are all kind of interwoven. Um, ultimately I think we need to as a city take a bigger look at our transportation plan for the city. And I think that depending on how that conversation goes would definitely have me feeling like okay this is an intersection that we need to like prioritize or you know so I think having that conversation would help me with this would help me with this part of it. Um, I also think we need to finish out that conversation with our parks commission and the Three Rivers Park about that what's going on with the river trail. Um, you know, we're putting in the water trail. In my mind, I would love to see a completed circuit from the the uh boat launch in the historic village and the com at LC Stevens and get a trail that connects those. That's a priority in my mind. Um, so I would like to, you know, think about where that falls and if that's a priority for us. I don't think we can wait because it sounds like Three Rivers is more kind of just waiting to see what happens with the road itself and like the state county I don't is that a county road or a state road? Dayton River Road County road. Um, and they have indicated that like that portion is not coming for quite a while. And so I don't think in my mind I don't think we can wait for them to like do that. I think we need to maybe be a little bit more in the driver's seat on that portion of the trail so that we can connect up our water trail and have a really nice closed loop. Um, and so that would be but that's a whole conversation we need to have before I can say yes it is a budget priority or not because if I'm the only person who feels that way and no one else does well then you know whatever but if as a counselor like no we think this is important then then that would move. So, um, those are things, the planning for the future, those are the big things, the the overall transportation plan for the city and that little part that river trail possible closed loop situation. Um, those are two things that are are very important to me to have that conversation to to decide what that five for 10 year goals are. Um, also just things I need to know more about that I'm not expecting to hear, but I just need to do my own homework on is tip districts um, in general. So, um, there's clearly a lot going on there and I, um, I think I just have I have some things in my head that I need to work out before I can make any sort of educated comment on that. So, was that s is that answering your questions? Okay. Giving me direction? I appreciate it. Fire away. Who go first? You want me to go first? Yeah. Um, I guess I would kind I kind of sit in the same spot as Sarah. I don't know what my tipping point is at this point. Like I don't know what is the, you know, is it the capacity levy? Like I I'm not there yet. Like I need to I think digest a little bit more too. Um, the only thing that I guess as we're talking about budgets that I would like to start talking about, and this is kind of a loaded hot ticket item, so I'm going to say what I'm going to say and then we're going to leave it alone. Um, the other fire station. I'd like to talk about that cuz I think we've got pushed to 2030 somewhere out in there. Um, and I guess I would just like to start talking about it now because that's not that far away. And I have, you know, my own opinions about if that's the right amount of years out or not. But I guess if we're going to be talking about, you know, things that are important to us or things that planning for the future, um, if it is 2030, 2031, that's not that far out or sooner. Sure. Anything else? No, that's all I got. Okay. spew. I wanted to yell it out. Save the best for last, huh? Best for last. Uh, well, my rock solid number will not be it can't go over uh the 8%. And I'd be anywhere from that six to eight somewhere in there. Some somewhere in there I'm fine with. It's going to be tight. Mhm. Hm. You guys are going to suck up a couple hundred grand of that just like in a blink of an eye. I think that happens regardless with union contracts. No, it doesn't. It doesn't have to. But I mean, it does when the union contracts have been approved doesn't have a choice. Saying that unless you go back to arbitration, but I guarantee unless you're going to fire people, if we have employees and they're in a union and that contract is negotiated outside of us, then that I that's what I'm saying. like that's that's 100 grand right there or whatever it is, right? Yeah. But there's another piece of it that is not part of the unique contract for some reason and we can talk about it. It'll it'll get there. That's it. There's nothing good, nothing bad. Okay, cool. And just Yeah, if we can you I will send this out on this week's weekly update so you have more time to digest. If you need more information about something specific like tiff districts is a great one. I can provide some information on tiff districts so that you're aware of them. maybe what we have right now. So, you know what we have, what they look like, what they mean. Um, we don't have all that many of them left. We still have I one, two, three, we have five currently. One, one comes off to this year or next year. I thought the first Greeko building came off in 26. So, because the county screwed up that one year, we are one year behind leg. We paid the one year in advance or whatever to try to catch up to it. But, um, I think it's 20 It's either 28 or 29. Um, but it will be sooner than what they anticipated it because the dollar amount that we have set on a square foot basis for that building was significantly less than what actually it was valued at when the county came in to evaluate it. And so that means that they get they have to pay more taxes in, but that means that their I'm going to call their loan that we have to give them is paid back that much quicker. Right. So I think it's 28 or 29 on the first one. The second one is 26 and 30 is what I thought it was. It's not 26 and 30 and it's there is a lag there as well. So you have to remember that right now we're working on 26's levy. If we didn't get the first tax payment until 24 and it's even a 9-year TIFF. That's typically how those economic development tiffs work. If it's paid off in 5 years that's still 2029 if it didn't come on till 24. But again, we approved it in 22 maybe pretty bad. So there just there's a two-year lag and it seems odd when we approve something and then it doesn't go on the levy for two years. It seems weird. So, does Elvis have a when you know when he's come in and talked about Tiff before, but I'm wondering if he just has some sort of slide deck that that these guys could get just that's what I was going to probably send out. Jason has a bunch of things from here's Arshel from Ellers and then he also has um the bond or what do you call the loan schedules and I can send those out to you guys if you really want those to say here's when the plan's going to be or whatever based on outstanding. Yeah. Oh, yeah. That's what that's how we pay them is based on the loan that comes in and what the percentage of interest was that we agreed upon and how many years and it might be nice to know. Yeah. There's only one that's going to last a long time and that's the Sands building over here on Balsam. Yeah. Just because that's a housing one. Those are 26 year tiffs. Is there anything that you have this year we had a tax capacity increase of 8.1%. And I know you've done projections which is as good as they can be, but what's coming over the next four or five years? Well, with new growth this year, um you're seeing a Quick Trip go up. That'll add some value to the city overall. You're seeing that Opus got built this year. So, there was there's going to be a percentage in 26 based on that building being so far through 2026, but then now being finished as of today. Um, I believe Turbine Pros is moving in here shortly, if not moved in already. Um, that'll be fully on the books in 2027. Um, so they evaluate on January 2nd of every year and depending on what happens in growth, that's what'll be for the next year's following budget year. So, just based on those two things alone, there's probably a couple percentage points of um increase there from those two. Um, with a TIFF district, and I can't remember if it goes off this year or next year, but either way, it'll be off in 27. Um, I'm going to have to look again to see if that'll be a couple percentage points. I think that's Prolois, which is the Spears Manufacturing Building right by Graco, across the street from Graco. It's a one-off building on French Lake. Um, but most of them are also going to be housing as well. So, we have still have quite a few housing stock left open. There's still quite a few lots available as those houses go in and they come in on the tax roll in 2027. anything you'll see constructed at the moment or whatever. Um DCM farms will come in here pretty quickly for a final plat. That's why it was on that weekly update this week. And if they can get moving, they're going to platundred and I'm looking at John here. And how many unit? 180 153 153 platted lots is what they want to do. The first round essentially the whole east half or west half, sorry, of that property. They want to plat. And if they do that, they're going to be putting homes right away essentially. Um, so if you think of those things, those are going to be going in and those will have some partial value. So I would assume we're going to see a 10% increase almost every year. I was surprised it was only at 8% this year to be honest with you. Um, I'm assuming 10% every year. I'm also putting in projected numbers of fiscal disparities to be very conservative now because I don't want to get um in the same boat we were at last year where we're cutting tax levy to get to the end number. But I'm going to guess 10% is probably a fair estimate to see for the next few years is my guess. No big dips or I don't see any big dips. Um unless there's some sort of huge market crash, which I don't see happening. And from all of my professionals that I talked to, none of them see a huge market crash. Um specifically within housing or commercial seems to be pretty steady. Um the only things that could be in, you know, increases with, you know, Greyco tiff come off comes off. That's a big win for the city in quotes because those dollars then go back to us instead of having to go right back to Graco themselves. Um, no, I don't see any major ones. Um, still have some talks with CRG and the cubes building to try to fill out the fill out the rest of the half of that building. So, that hasn't been touched yet in total of valuation. So, that'll be an increase when that gets fulfilled. Um, you you think that'll So, it increases once you get capacity in there. the square foot dollar per dollar square foot that the county uses goes up and increases based on um being occupied. So a used warehouse is better than an empty warehouse. That's correct. Yeah. They said a base value here's what it is per square foot. I'll use a number 50. And I I don't know if it's the right number. I just threw a number out there. But if it's occupied now it if it's depends on what it is and occup you know occupied with a bunch of manufacturing equipment that costs hundreds of thousands of dollars. It might be now you know 70 bucks a square foot. Um, if it's biomedical, maybe it's$80 or $85 a square foot versus if it's just um distribution, then it's just pallet racking and and equipment. So now it's, you know, $55 a square foot or something. But if it's occupied, it always brings in a larger value than if it's not occupied. Seems odd. I would agree with you. It's just the pattern you see. It's just the pattern that I see from the county. Um, I did if we're thinking about the planning for the future, the five or 10 year goals. Two other things that I want to I don't have answers for, but I've been thinking on um water water towers. I know um I need a lot I have to learn a lot more and I have a meeting scheduled with Marty to so he can catch me up to speed on that. Um but also the historic village um if there are any what are the plans? I mean I've seen in our 2040 comprehensive plan, right? Like there's that but yet how do we for development? Well, the how do we get from where we are to that plan, right? Like and we don't exactly. So then plan that's just so that's where I also I need to I don't have an answer but I want to think more about that when we're talking when you're asking about five to 10 year plans. I think that is um in my head particularly. I really think this this water trail loop could be a way to really um be an impetus to rethink about the historic village um and a way to get tra like traffic get people to come there um from outside from within our own city but from outside our city. And what would that mean if we're drawing in traffic to the historic village? How can we like, you know, get them to spend money here before they get in their kayak and then get them to spend some more money after they drop their bike back off, right? Like what are ways we can like how can we do that? And I think this is the chance really to really think about that and and be ready for when that that happens. So, um it's going to be a large conversation. Oh, yeah. Absolutely. That's why um but you you did appreciate that. That's that's true. I'm answering your question. So, I do appreciate that. It's just um just as a quick context, the biggest thing that we have is constrictors on there. It is not space, it is sewer capacity and water capacity. Yes. And so I think everyone is aware of those things, but I think just some more general information from engineering would be good to be shared again cuz I know it's been done at least once. Okay. Um just some high level stuff. So yeah. Well, that's just if you can just give it to me so I can read it like that. We don't necessarily have to have a whole council thing about it, but if I could get caught up to speed on that, that would help me give better answers. I love it. Sounds great. You did? I'm good to go. Thank you so much. All right, item Q. I'll leave that up there for you, Scott. I like it. Good evening, Mayor and Council. You took the tree down. Tonight, we're we're talking about the uh the public infrastructure related to the Parkway neighborhood development uh in Southwest Dayton. And the council's probably familiar with this project located in the far southwest corner of the city on the I'll call it the west side of 94 um as indicated on the screen. And just a closer look. This is a little bit dated, but this is a concept of the overall site uh layout for the development just to get the get a visual of it. Um little bit about this project. There's significant infrastructure um public infrastructure needed to extend to to support this development and it includes infrastructure um extensions mainly sewer and roadway extensions that are beyond the extents of the development. So just showing here on the screen the the colored background if you will is the proposed development area which does include a section of the city of Dayton owned property as shown and indicated by orange as well as a short piece that has to be extended through um property owned by the Sheney group which is better known as the Dayton Creek edition that's been in front of you and and proposed as a development. The typical process for these situations is that the developer builds what they need to support their development. Uh in this case, the developer has requested assistance with the infrastructure being that there's such a large extent of it outside of their plat boundary. And because of that, the city is considering contracting and constructing those off-site improvements uh to work with the developer. So again, back to the depiction of it, the the red circle, basically the extension through the I'll say the Shaney Group property or Dayton Creek edition, uh as well as through the city-owned property, and then from that point, it would be extended uh through the Dayton Parkway neighborhood uh project itself. So, how the project could move forward is we would obtain site and design information available for this segment. Um, the developer has had engineers working on the design. It's actually quite a ways along. Um, so we would get or we're in process of getting actually those design files so they could be used to create city-owned documents that could be used for for the construction. We do anticipate some additional information being needed. there's some soil boring information for missing and um a little bit of topography survey that we would need for the final design. So we would collect that information but then complete the final design and prepare the construction documents, the plans and specifications for uh obtaining a uh contractor bids and then bid the project publicly um per statute requirements and constructed under a city contract. So anticipated costs, we remain to only have a high level cost estimate of these projects based on what the developer has has put together to date. Um we have gone through and it does seem like the numbers are reasonable um for the work that's being included. Just to to show a rough breakdown of this, this does include um they had about 2 million for the construction of it and then our contract as proposed is 204,000. Hopefully that comes down if we're able to obtain um as much of the design that's already been completed as we're we're hoping we can. Um that number should drop from there. Um there is significant wetland mitigations on this project um to the I think it's like $514,000 um for the mitigation credit um for that road extension through the city parcel. Um and then there would be other indirect costs for testing legal and and other that are just estimated at 50,000. So our recommendations would be to move forward with the engineering services to take this on as a city project and and move towards putting together the the bidding documents necessary. Um we would continue to coordinate with the adjacent property owner for access uh to the property. has mentioned it does go through land owned and controlled by the Sheni group. So we'd work with them for land rights such that information could be collected for the design as well as access to the property for construction of the actual improvements and then complete the wetland mitigations as necessary. I will note that all of the permitting is in place including with the army corps which is a a big step. Um it's just the mitigation would have to have to be satisfied. In other words, payment for the credits when the project is to take place. And then our thought is that we would target a spring 2026 design. I think it would be quite challenging to get anything sooner than that. Maybe we could get things in place late summer to allow some of the grading to occur um yet this fall or early winter, but that might be wishful thinking. Again, it'll depend on how much information we're able to obtain and just how far along it is. So, um, with that, if there's any questions, was that that target date, is that consistent with the developer? I don't know if it's been shared with him or not. He I'm trying to remember what he said. I I get the sense that he wants to go last year. Yes. Um, but but I Yeah, I just I don't think it's realistic having to transfer everything over to to the city project. And um I'm not sure what the communications have been directly with the developer. Mayor Councel, I've communicated with the developer multiple times that it will be a 2026 project for us, just so that you're aware. Um he's liking to go as soon as possible, right? I mean, uh and makes complete sense to us, but we've I've told him multiple times that it will be a 2026 project. If we can get something done, sure, in the fall, maybe some sort of construction road or something like that was taken or something. Yeah. Something to get to get in there. Sure. But at some point we're going to have to shut down the road to construct it. So at some point he's going to have to find alternate means to get into the site. So it has been shared with the developer multiple times. So can you talk more about the the snag with the the sheny piece? Yes. Um I can but I'm going to allow him. So there as it sits that is not platted. So there is not existing easement nor right away. I'll go back to the figure just so it's a depiction of it. So the yellow piece uh there is not existing land rights. There's no public granted or city granted easement um over that there there probably is a limited easement for drainage and utility because there is sanitary sewer that's installed um up to a location. However, that's not intended for access or other purposes. Um, as of now, the the Cheney Group representative has not indicated that they would be willing to give access to the property. Um, would you characterize it as that or would you say they've specifically said we couldn't? No. Um, okay. It it's as simple as an easement agreement for access um or even a right of entry to collect information um which we haven't talked specifically about a right of entry to suffice for the design portion. Okay. We've just talked about permanent access um such we could construct the actual improvements. So from the communication I got the impression that they knew we needed this and they were going to sit on it. Oh, they know we need it and they have removed this section from their final plat for their first edition, which tells me they've said okay. All right. Yeah, I'm I'm having a hard time understanding what their motivation would be on this. It's the only access to the north side of their property as well. Is that correct? that there there wouldn't be another one further to the west or whichever direction that is north sorry north of Dayton Parkway or on their south side still on the south side but to theirs where you have the yellow that's on the sh property which continues on then to Dayton Creek also needs the yellow constructed to gain access for their property is that yes that's that's for sure that is their only access they don't need it today or tomorrow that's the and in looking at it um physically it's not something we can shift over to the right because of the way the the islands and the whole intersection how the intersection was laid out which was dictated by or determined in conjunction with I'll say the so it just seems like this you know there's already a curb cut there it's it I don't know how this can be a surprise to anybody but that's where it's going to go so I I'm struggling with why why now are they saying that we're not interested in in doing this? It kind of frustrates me too. How did I mean it seems like we we should have had a little better control of this piece before we I mean we seem pretty deep into this other project and then we get surprised by this um um yeah mayor and council we had been working with the developer on the um Rogueberg parcel for many months and let him know that we do not have access to that. he had had conversations with the Shane representative and had sounded like they were very positive from my understanding um to be able to gain that access point. So we did not worry about it based on the fact we said this is a developer issue that needs to be worked out with another developer issue and they'll figure it out and it sound like the conversations were positive in that aspect. So city staff did not bring this to light or guess bring it to the attention of council because we had every intention to move forward with this based on what we had heard. Um and that changed as soon as um the became a city project I guess is kind of when it changed or roughly when development was going on or I don't know exactly what approval was. Yeah. I our anticipation was always that the Sheny project would go first or they would at least go so close together that the plats would essentially both be finalized and recorded prior to construction on either and this would be a non-issue. uh earlier conversations with the Sheny group there was indication that sure build the road then I don't have to those types of things. Um that has since changed and again they were also attempting to plat both north and south of Dayton Parkway. That changed actually very recently. Um I'd only be speculating if I tried to give reasons for it and I I haven't had any success um hearing a justification from the developer. Uh so I mean I I don't know again you know what the motivation is but has there been any maybe discussion about swapping? So we have land on the west side there and it seems like it's a lot of property. Um, and I'm wondering I'm guessing it's it's intended for ponding, but I don't know what the point of that property is, but is there any way we could negotiate? It's all low and wet and hard to use. So, is it doesn't come up as wetland on the Yeah, it doesn't all the the darker green is actually wetland area on there. It's it's significant. Yeah, if you're looking at the county, that's the National Wetland Inventory. That's their best guess. Okay. and and I should stop saying this, but I usually say it's generally pretty accurate. Um, however, on this project, not only are the wetlands off quite a bit, the flood planes off quite a bit as well, which is okay. Non-typical. I usually find those to be generally representative as well being farmed. Well, yeah. So, I don't think there would be much value, I guess, is maybe for some ponding, but I think it'd be pretty limited. I guess if we get even farther into this by doing all the the pre-work I'm seems like well it's a it has me scratching my head where where this thing kind of fell off the rails but that the Parkway neighborhood project doesn't happen without a road we've agreed to build the road on property we don't own. And how do we get past that? And there's no Do we carry liability here that we approve this project and said we'd build a road that we give them? No, you're not a lawyer. I'm definitely not. Um I don't know the answer to that. Easy answer to that. Okay. Um, I mean I at least as far as my involvement, I haven't been part of anything that would be misleading as far as suggesting there's there's there. But I your point is taken as well. I just I don't know the answer from a legal standpoint. I'm confused in this whole project. When we say Sheney, I'm thinking North Diamond Lake Road. Oh yeah. The 105 acre. So it's the same owner. The Shaney Group is the property owner and I should be saying Dayton Creek because that's the development application in front of us regarding that. So it's just been Shaney since 2014 when we started buying right away for the change. So where I am, I guess it's the yellow right on the side. So it's this is the Parkway neighborhood the apartment buildings. Yes. And this is that little piece of ground that's probably it'll be northwest of of that right along Yep. Right along the right right along the What's the road near Brockton? Brockton's just to the west of the interchange. Yep. Yep. Right on that corner right there. Should I go to an overall area? Would that help? Yeah, that might help. So they go to your right there. Yeah. So the highlighted blue is the the Parkway neighborhood. That's our portion there. Yeah. And then and then that's this piece that notched area is the city owned parcel. That's right. And then the Dayton or sorry, yeah, Dayton Creek edition is west of that. That goes all the way to Brockton. Oh, okay. Yep. Yep. And the apartment building that $5 million, I think it was 5 million bucks to build that road for the apartment building, right? Um, I was thinking six, but yeah, something in that area. Yep. And now we approved that apartment building, but we don't have any road going to it. That is correct. Mhm. Part of that approval, the expectation and I think the direction was still that the developer would build all of the infrastructure, including all the way out to Dayton Parkway. Well, this sure is a backass way of doing it. Well, I just also don't understand why we're not asking the Dayton Creek edition. Is that the name that we're going by? Um the Dayton Creek Edition to pay anything? No. No. And they will need this when they develop. What about the lights? Are we asking for them to Nope. Not anymore. You'll see that on item. I did see that. So, I just Why was that? just as in negotiating. I was trying to be we were just trying to be nice. Basically, we're trying to be like reasonable. I I just it blows my mind that I if I'm sitting here going like here's the stuff I would like to develop it. I know I'm going to need a road. I know I'm going to need a stoplight. And you know maybe 2 3 years ago the thought was I would have to chip in for all or part of it. And now suddenly it's all going to happen for me for free. I have to do literally nothing. But now I'm going to say no. Just because. That does not There's a because. Well, I'm sure there's a because, but not a because that apparently we can be told. Huh. Um, but like that just nothing. Yeah. That doesn't give me warm fuzzies. I'll say that. Um, and so I believe and I just I don't know where we go from here. Um you you're thinking we should still crawl forward and and lay out. I guess a question I have is there a way to force the issue and get the land that we need for the road? I again not I'll preface with I am not a lawyer. You are not a lawyer. I we've discussed somewhat with staff and it seems that eminent domain would be an option here. It can't be used for development purposes. However, if this was viewed as reasons for public utilities and access that and again, we have not reviewed this with an attorney, so I don't I don't know this um to necessarily be true, but we think that could be an option in which case it is, if you will, forced. Okay. To be acquired that way. Is that something that Amy could give us guidance on or is this something at her firm or Amy or somebody at Campbell most certainly can give us guidance on that if that is something the council would like to do? Now again I want to preface and I know the council's direction on eminent domain and the word around that. Um I think it means something differently here where it's not so much like a taking like we're just taking it just to take it. This is a this helps everybody involved. This isn't like it's just a bas planned. It's planned and it was in their preliminary plat discussion with the developer when they came in and did the preliminary plat on their development. They had it platted as right of way and it would be reimburseed for the value of it. It's just that route and there's other issues. And again, I'm not just trying to provide like this is maybe slightly different on the fact of that process that you normally would see it as so much of a takings because they had already told us they're going to do that and we made plans accordingly. Like you had conversations with lots of people and in all of those conversations you said yes, we're going to do this. Yes, we're going to do this. Yes, we're going to do this and suddenly no, we're not going to do this. Like that is a very different situation to me than someone who said no all along and then we're like well we're going to do it anyway and we're going to take it. Like those those two scenarios are very different in my mind. Um and I don't think they should be comparable. Well, when do when does when do they want to develop this? When do they want to do something? Which one? The Greek edition. The diamond edition. Well, they modified they were doing a final plat for just the infrastructure and that's been before you. Um, their final plat was going to be the infrastructure, which means roads, utility extensions, storm water, um, both north and south. They revised their application to just leave an outlot on the south half and only final plat. That's why the land doesn't get So, they're they're looking at moving forward with the north sometime soon. And that was only recently that change happened. That was this spring. Yeah, maybe two months ago. So everything up to two months ago was the engineers have been working together. The developers have been communicating. We've been communicating with them. The plan was always to do anything would go. Sure. I mean, do we have the We can play poker, too. Mhm. We can do it legally, but Yeah. Yeah. Again. Yeah. So, city staff's been operating for two years based on all the information we have provided to the council that everything was going in the right direction and then two months ago it got changed. Yep. Were there and I I think I use two months ago as a time of reference. Doesn't mean it's exactly two months ago, but have they given any sort of give us this and then you can do it on the north side. Oh, you mean no? No. What do you mean? Okay. Yeah, you can relish. I mean, there hasn't, as far as best my knowledge, there hasn't been any requests or this this is why or this is what we need or anything. Okay. And what you would need to go forward, you you think that you can get the bulk of it done without going on the property for the design? Um, it would be a lot better if we could get on the property. Um, we're if they'll share design files, yes, it'll be easy to fill that gap. It's not a It's It's like 180 ft. So, it's not a significant area. My front yard, but um I mean, and we can get everything in the rightway and we can get everything obviously on the city parcel. We just can't get between the two of them. Um so, we, you know, we would we'd be more comfortable if we could get on the site to verify things with the design, but we could probably piece together what's needed just using readily available info. And I mean, maybe they'd be willing to share design files. They haven't as of yet. They would. But um what about like do you need to do soil porings or things like that or you know probably both sides is sufficient. Part of the part of the area we need more is on the city parcel right off the bat. It's going to be that way anyway. There's been soil borings out there. We just want some more specific ones in certain areas. So well it'd be nice to get information from Amy. Um, as far as what our options are on that, I I know that there's it's not just as simple as that, but still. Yep. And then that's why I was in my weekly update because I knew it would take some thought process, but this isn't a simple decision, nor has it been a simple decision that count the city staff has worked through. Obviously, it's been and it would be nice if we could get a response from them saying what's what's up Sure. Are we going to get access to this or not? Uh I don't know. Sure. Because it does seem like we've so far bent over backwards, but yeah, that pending needs to stop. I mean, it's kind of two I know they're related, but it's kind of two different questions. The question we're deciding on tonight is do we want you to move forward with the design work? But we also need to solve for what do we do about the property we don't own. And I I would agree. I think we would like to know what our options are that you know certainly from um the attorney and other leverage we may have. But I would also really like to understand what what changed for them. I mean, there's some reason they're just saying, "No, we're not we're not interested anymore. We're going to only focus on the other side of the street." I mean, there maybe there's some economics that go with that, too. But it it just seems a little bit like we're going to pick up our ball and go home here. And I would I would like them to have the opportunity to say why they're doing that. Particularly because from our perspective, nothing has changed. It's only been to the positive for the developer since the whole conversation has started. Yeah. Like it's only ever been adding better better better. So it's not like it's changed to the now we're adding more to your bill and now we want you to chip like then I could get it right. If it was like suddenly then I I could I could get why you're like you know what? No, I'm taking my ball home. But like we brought everything else and for them to say no suddenly without explanation. Um that's I'm struggling with that. I'm gonna be honest. So, I'm also kind of struggling with the the fact that we're not looking at any liability for the lights. Um because I I have a feeling that's going to be a significant contributor their traffic it and we were just talking about that the south essentially all of the contributend roads to service the area. It's the only access. So, all of the benefit it's it's the southern property. Now, we didn't do that for the northern property, did we? Or would we? We just said not at all for anything. Yep. Oh, we should reset that. Well, I mean, if they're not going to play ball, then we're not playing ball. Like, this was apparently a twoball ball game and they decided to take theirs home. Well, then we'll take ours home. Like, come on. No, we we probably should get more information from Amy and then it would be nice to hear from them what's going on and because maybe there's some other thing going on that they just hadn't shared from this side. Sure. I mean, right now we're kind of kind of down on them and maybe there's something else going on. But well, that's Yeah, from what we know, it seems like we have done nothing but be nice to them. So, that's why I'm just curious about where this suddenly came from. So, and there I'm assuming there is a reason. We just don't know what it is. Well, I think the reason is is if they're hoping that somebody else pays for the whole thing. We are. That's that's already happening. We are paying for the whole thing. Not yet. We're not doing it. It's Well, if they say no, we're not doing it. That's why that's why I'm so confused. If they say yes, then they are not paying for any of it, right? No, I get that part. So, why would you say no? Why would I say no? Why? Why? That's why why on earth would someone say no to this? I just do not understand. I get confused. It's a lever. So, what do you would uh are we still suggesting we go forward with I think we we I mean we could go forward. You could you could approve it. I mean you could to be honest. I mean you could condition it formally or informally if you want to hold for some other answer is fine. Um I mean or postponed. We're not I mean we are looking at a 2026. We would like to get going on it but there's not an urgency necessarily. Move it out. Let's say we move your work out two months. Does that impact the the deliver? Probably not. It'd be nice to It'd be nice to do it earlier um if we could get things done to allow some to occur over the winter, but um again, it it Yeah, I mean, if authorization is given, you know, maybe just throwing it out conditioned on you would like to hear from the adjacent property owner on why this is or what would it take to to gain the land, for example, if you would like some assurance, if you will, before dollars are actually expended on the effort. I mean, that would be fine, too. Or or table the item. T table the item and maybe maybe in a month you'll have some more answers. Well, I still think the design work needs to happen. It deal still needs to happen. And and again, this is another case where it'll probably keep, right? It it will I I I will point out because I I do see and I albe it I think slight um some potential risk that if if the design work is done but progress is not made on land rights the project doesn't happen heaven forbid the development falls apart or other or maybe it's the same development but then it reverts back and the developer is going to build the whole project now you spent money on further design that's not necessary if you're following that I don't again I don't know if that would be a significant risk or not. I'm not trying to suggest it's likely to happen, but okay, there there is that off chance that the city develops plans and they don't get to get used and then a new development comes in and the city does not offer to build the road and instead it falls back on. Yeah, I think we should table it for now. I just thought of something else, too. But do you I'll talk offline on that. You need um So, is it a motion for tableling that? I'll I'll make a motion to table it. I'll second it. Okay, we got a motion to second. We have enough direction to staff as well to figure out when time to bring it back to. So, thank you. Got a couple couple months yet. So, I mean, Yep. All right. Uh, all those in favor say I. I. All those oppos say no. Okay, it's tabled for Thank you. Item Q item R wish I had a money tree on this one. Uh so this is the approval of 113th Avenue East French Lake Road uh concept plans. So in uh March, I believe it was March, um the council reviewed a concept plan by OpEdent for an industrial project. Uh there were questions about that was raised on the road alignment whether it should be the extension of 113th um versus a new road that would go through the opt-in project. Uh the council elected to adopt a six-month moratorum. So this runs from April through October. Um and this would allow uh the city to conduct a study for both trans road corridors as well as land use. And so this proposal before you tonight is to develop a concept plan. Uh Stantech who's would complete this is proposing I'm going to say task one is to complete two concept plans. Um and then to revise that into a a third plan or combi combination into a third plan. Uh the total cost for this is $15,300. uh this would be completed this summer and there is money in the budget for something like this correct? Yes. Okay. We've we have money budgeted for uh unanticipated plans I'll say or studies. Mhm. So would this uh plan be based on the current land use that we have defined? It's a start because we know it's all wrong, right? I Well, I mean it's Yes, the council need to determine wrong. So, the the comp plan assumes that we had the X, which we don't have. Well, no, the problem with this area was we didn't do this. We did this. Yeah, it wasn't the X. So we can as a brief starter we could send out this map blank with each council member and you guys could each fill in your kind of areas of what you feel is best for land use in this area by coloring it coloring map and then that's something we can use as a starting point because I can have my grandkids help me. Sounds great. Um otherwise we we have to start with somewhere. So that's why it's either we have everybody draw their own and we can kind of mash them together or we can say here's what we have right now adjust. we start with something. So that's why and if the current one is all wrong then do we want to start with that? I mean that's well on the flip side the current one there are some things that already there that we can Yes. Yeah. So some things are just done. Yes. Yeah. And when I say all all wrong what I mean is that that swoop that we were going to do had commercial alongside of it. So I I guess I don't know what it looks like now, but I'm pretty sure that at least those north areas have commercial and that doesn't necessarily sense. I'm pretty sure whatever we come up with is is going to be drastically different than what's in the comp plan. Yeah, I think we need to get started. Yeah. Put a moratorum on a month ago and in intent was to to do this make this make more sense. Yeah. And it's also kind of a test case I guess before we get into the larger like this is a this is an a critical area because it's where residential and industrial meet up right like so it is a tricky spot in the city. Um, also there's we have the bigger 2050 plan coming and this is kind of a chance to a mini case of practicing some of the things and figuring out how that looks on a small scale. Um, and so I I think it's worth it and I'm I think this is I think this will I think this will benefit the city in many ways beyond the project and beyond the benefit we'll get just from this part of the city. I think it will be helpful. What we learn from this process will be applicable in other parts of the city and other projects we have. So I think it's worth it. And the primary goal here was to figure out roads. We roads and land use. Yeah, we've had pretty limited direction. Um well that's part of it is figure out the roads so you know what to put in for land use, but as an engineer I argue what do you want to use the land for? I'll tell you what you need for roads. So, it's going to have to be a collective effort, if you will. So, um there'll have to be directions on both ends of it, I suppose, to to lay those out, which we can do through an iterative process. Well, and so part of me is like I I I hear what you're saying that like we tell you what to do, you can make the roads happen, but on the flip side, some things have already been put there. So, like it's not like we have infinite options, right? So, like we have some constraints. So within those constraints I feel like if you could be like you know I do see like there's the back and forth. So within these constraints I feel like there's probably edges of like and also there are you can't just put a road anywhere. So like what are like the most reasonable places for roads to go and then yes the land to me then you're like okay you could either go option A or option B for roads and then to me the land use would come next and then we'd go back to the final option for roads. That's how my brain would process. That was the thought process between the two layouts is we would have some different splits in the land use and then have a couple different road configurations and mix and match if you will. Yeah. And then we could look at that and give you feedback and then Yeah. So that seems like a reasonable process to me as well. Mr. Mayor, we we do have comment from the audience. Oh, if you'd like to hear, thank you for hearing me. Bill Ramsey Ramsey development 217 Avenue. 5 years ago uh we purchased property on 114 on French Lake Road in a current growth zone guided as medium density. When the moratorum came up uh my friends asked what did you think of that? I said, "Well, this is first time in my career. I think it was really a good thing. You need facts, different options that you can look at." And so, backing up a little bit, three years ago, I met with some of the neighbors to my east and I said, "Look at medium density. I'm not in a rush. I want to look and see how this the roadways tie in. make sure that what we present which we could have presented for your guidance and approval or denial 3 four years ago we've waited we have delineated the wetlands which would be a benefit to Stantech we know uh the existing roadways that we've laid out as a buffer between industrial or business park to our west and we thought okay we'll we'll just keep waiting a year and a half ago I had sent a letter because there was a previous uh proposer on the open end site and I sent the letter to the staff and I said look at we want to be involved with this. We want to make sure that what we do corresponds and designs properly with what's happening. It's important. I met with staff on site. uh I have shared these concepts uh with some of the staff and said look at these are some of the thoughts that we have and so when I go through and I look at these different variables just being open and not in a rush. I look at that comp plan it showed an existing roadway running east to west up to open site and then north to south. And what I look at is that there's a reason for that is that if you look at extending 113th Avenue on those plans, those delineated wetlands are a massive amount at the end of 113 Avenue. So the cost to try to bring that across and mitigate on my parcel, which is 15 acres, 2 acres, which is wetland, and bring a road. going back to when moratorium went on, there was two bubble designs. One that came through the eastern side of my property is about three acres. So when I look at it, I think, okay, would we really want to, you know, taking out the cost of all of it, I say, as a community, as a city, do we really want to bring industrial traffic down to French Lake, East French Lake Road? My opinion is no. And so I'm not an industrial designer, but I've seen enough of it that what I look at is that if you look to the west where we show off of the the plan that's medium density is all currently business park on the comp plan. Myself, I thought the road that Openend should have been constructing on their east property line would have came down and stopped short of French Lake Road. the width of the building. Your employee parking would have pulled in off of French Lake Road and your truck traffic would have been on the back side. The next building to the west would have been reversed where its truck traffic would have backed up the same to the building that is on French Lake Road. And I hope that makes sense to you. And their their employee parking would have been on the west side. And then the on 117th your building would have been facing parallel to 117th with employee parking there and the truck traffic in the back. That's what I see as a land developer from Plymouth and Maple Grove to Woodbury that you try to keep that truck traffic controlled within there and not bring it out to residential areas. And so my request tonight is that you have different variables that I think once you're given all the different facts, you'll make the right decision. When we looked at you just had looked at what great co-pays, what you your payments back, the share in the funds of tax base, if you take industrial versus median density, they're they're not that far apart. When I look at what land is in Dayton that's in the Maple Grove School District, this land is and it's a variable that needs to be considered. And that's one of the reasons that I acquired the property. It's it's it's a soughtafter school district that helps promote the other buildings and that are coming of where their employees are going to work and want to live and send kids to school. And so I would like to know we have did baseline reports on all the different boundaries of the property the wetland delineation I think that would be an asset to Stantech to present to you different variables. In saying that, I think that to try to bring truck truck traffic, industrial truck truck traffic down to French Lake is a mistake. And um we would like to be involved in the process going forward. And uh that's what I'd like to tell you tonight. Stand for any questions that you may have. When you look at that plan of medium density, I'm only 15 acres of it. We've coordinated with the land owners to the east of us and did a design. They would come in independently. So, it's not all my my development there. 84 of those those units are on the 15 acres that I've laid out. We've calculated storm ponding, wetlands, and road design. And we thought we were buffering up against proposed future uh industrial or business park to our west. And so the discussions that are about to happen over the months to come, we'd like to be involved with that. Any questions? No. This is very helpful. Okay. Those are for you to keep. Thank you. Uh look forward to working with you. Thank you for your time. Okay. So, first step here is you you're you're thinking that we need to first figure out in this area what land use is in order to have Jefferson go forward. Lane, you saying Broad Corin in hand. Well, I'm assuming you want land use first. I mean, we can lay out some schematic, which we've done, some schematic road connections. I mean, there there's not a lot of options. I mean, a lot of the roads are in place. Um, right. But as far as connections, I mean, to what was just shared, the connections change the roads or the land use changes the connections, which changes the roads. So um basically where do you want to transition from one use to another I guess is the the key part. I mean we can we can put certainly put drawings together on the the road connections but again they would change with a change in land use most likely. So would be nice to know if there's any sort of no goes in terms of where a road could be. you know, we think, okay, this this land use makes great sense and we want the road here. And then you say, no, that's it. And as council member Vanet, there there's not a lot of options left, right? I mean, you have you have road set, you have a big wetland in the middle. Um, you know, we're thinking one of two east west connections. Whether or not that connects to East French Lake Road probably depends on what you're doing with the land. Um, but that's it. Probably the the bigger variable is, is there an additional north south road? And again, if you're going to have a consistent land through land use throughout, you probably don't want a public road going through there. Um maybe you do, but probably not. But if you want to use that as a buffer, a transition from one use to say residential um to limit your access, maybe you want to introduce that road. But again, we don't know until there's a land use determined. So, um my question, so I have a question for the mayor and council and then for Jason. So, could the mayor and council put together each individual land use plan, then you put together a roadway plan based on those land uses and we can share all those together? That way we because there's only so many road uses that will work in the area. And so my thought is, okay, if every individual council member has a different idea for the land use, could Jason's team put together a road system based on your land use and then we can use them as options and we can see which ones work best and which ones don't work best. I mean, I don't know the best way to move forward cuz it's a small area in total. It's not the city. So, it's it's not a huge area, but I don't either. It's just it like what Dave suggested might be handy, too, because my understanding is, you know, there is some wetlands problems extending 113th. Um, and I know we didn't go up with the utilities. We kind of bailed on or to some extent on going up the edge of those properties on the east side. the the the business properties right now. We we at some point where we're looking at bringing utilities up that side and then we kind of shifted over to the middle. Oh, no. I think they're both still on the table. We're looking at I think part of the not to derail, but part of the reason for the hesitation on the east was the disruption to the existing operations there. But after speaking with the property owners, they didn't have any concerns. So, we're actually in process of evaluating those two options. So that that's still to be determined. So what does that do then to the road that we had contemplated coming off of the roundabout and going south like one lot later down 113? Yeah, that could still be a a connection regardless of utilities. In fact, that was that's more for the access for the existing property owners under 113th. Um that access could be shifted to the east. Again, there's going to be wetland impacts there as well. Not to mention, it's also a longer detour, if you will, for those folks to get to Dayton Parkway rather than going to the north there. Now, whether or not that connection from 113th goes directly to the roundabout or the roundabout connection goes to the east, right? And the connection from 113 TE's into that, that's still to be determined. I mean, that's that's a couple of the options that should be contemplated with this moratorum. Okay. And is there anything so is there anything we do here that could impact whether I I know we there wasn't much discussion with this at the time and maybe it's kind of totally outside the scope of this but having trucks sent around about there seems odd. Um if if in 10 or 15 years is there anything we do here that could cause a problem there with with restoring with putting that back to say a controlled a light intersection instead of roundabout or um if you ever wanted to remove the roundabout I don't I don't foresee it would be an impediment. Typically they're more compact and take up less less space so I would think it could be accommodated. Yeah. Okay. I'm just a little bit worried we're going to have five different layouts here and waste waste some time, but I don't know. Well, that's why I wanted I was hoping to get like a here are your road options and then from the road options I'd be like okay I like these land use. That was that was why cuz I'm also having that fear if we all come and be like we each have completely different land use then and half of them are just not even an option because there can't do a road like that but I've never done this before one one thing I would like to share also is no matter what we do that's not what's going to happen there just because it's going to be the developer that knows the market and knows what what can develop. So, I mean it again it's it's kind of for the concept level of let's figure out what we want there in the roads. Not necessarily this is the exact boundaries of everything if you will. Is it is it more a question of kind of a a industrial or not kind of question. Um that's east of the wetlands. Yes, it is east of the wetlands. Yeah. So there there's kind of a wetland I'm going to call wetland corridor that goes north and south. And so um you we've had lots of conversations in this area, but one of the directions that we've had is is have more industrial and so we've got to figure out okay where is that industrial going to go? Can I ask where who who who says that? Um I believe it was I know it was the planning commission. Um more industrial Yeah. in this area. I I don't remember if that was repeated by the council or not. So that was more in relationship to discussions on the master plan. My only comment is I agree with Bill. I would not run a road a truck road to East French Lake if this goes into connected up. Yeah, you don't want the truck site connected. Not a chance be the dumbest be the second dumb. But then it it does seem like it it would kind of push the the thought of running something from the roundabout across uh to it. If Yeah. The idea of five different little maps would be kind of the only other map I've ever driven ever made you guys haven't seen. I will share it if you'd like. Salonic. It's I will share it just so that you can be entertained. Thought it was a great map. I kept it for myself. It's on my wall. What would be easiest for you? Not have an opinion with it. Let him draw it all. It seems like that's the question is is industrial medium density. Is that what it seems like? Well, but there's also mixed use, business, commercial, like they're all here. That's Yeah. And so I don't think it's just industrial, high density, or medium density. I think it is, well, what about the commercial that was here? What about the business park that was here? What about the mixeduse that was here? Are we still interested in those things? Like, I don't think it's just industrial, residential. I don't think it's just that. No, it's not because once that main road comes through and it's going to happen someday. Main road going crossing into Ramsey. That's Dane Parkway. Oh, but Dane Parkway. Yeah. It's all connected. I mean, you're going to have you're going to have commercial and business park all all through there. Again, we'll all be gone except Stephanie. But hey, but this not you. How old do you think I am? I know a kind birthday party on Saturday. I don't I don't know that was positive. We need to worry about that for that. No thank you. Is there any mean you know a lot has changed since that comp plan was plan was done but it's it's hard for me to unscramble the the land uses that are on that comp plan in this area and they don't usually follow property lines. They they don't there doesn't seem to be um to my eyes anyway, you know, obvious delineation of why you would stop this one here and start that one there. Is there anything historical that we can look to to say here's why we did what we did before we throw it out? I guess is Yep. So, um the original comp plan was done in 2030. 2030 comp plan is when we had the X pattern designed for what was going to be called Dayton Parkway Extension at that time. And that is when the X pattern was supposed to connect up the interchange to 129th Avenue in Dayton essentially at the at the turn on Fernbrook and 129th. Guess the straightest shot was directly across in an X pattern. And that's how the land use at that time was derived. But not this land use. but not this land use because that was then adjusted slightly to more line up with um we had supposed to go to the southside. The road was supposed to go to the south side of that wetland and then up towards Zanzibar essentially supposed to split through the middle of them from what I understand. Do you have a I don't think he has a map. You can you can see along where the commercial was that was where the road was supposed to go. Yes. And split split down the middle and the other curve there. So, we actually had meetings very similar to the the the city center meetings that we had where we had consultants come in and tell us all the good stories and everything was laid out and they there are probably some slides and some handouts from then somewhere. But yeah, it all had rhyme and reason back then. But you're going to beat then the big monkey wrench went into it and we straighten that road off. And that actually wasn't the problem. The problem was we took a road that was going to curve up to that to the intersection of 117 and and and French Lake and we ran it straight up. That was the issue. And so we didn't do that. Well, it got done. And and so that's why that's why the commercial stuff is so weird looking because there were roads on both sides of that. So at this point we just need a concept planet cil here. That's what we're looking for. I guess direction on how to start it would be good as well. note also I mean if you're not comfortable with the scope or you're looking for something different we can absolutely seems like adjust adjust the scope or go a different direction this was just based on the information we had that was discussed and to be honest it was discussions while I was on vacation so I didn't partake in them so this is the interpretation of others that were involved so from this you'll have two concept plans that will be revised into a third if you're not happy with. So, two drafts, maybe two drafts, which we then will consolidate down to a final. Final. And if you're not happy with the final, we we can come up with another plan. Are you not comfortable with that scope? I I am. I I just You can always spend more money. Uh-huh. Said you can always spend more money, come up with another plan. Yeah. My only concern is is do another study. Are are you thinking that you would just set the land use either or or maybe mix it up as you guys see fit? Is that I mean we'll work with staff. I mean there was some feedback from planning commission. I know that I mean I had made a you know $100 bubble diagram at one time and that generated some discussion on this is too much too much uh industrial or too much commercial that should be shrunk down. Um so I mean we can do some iterations on that for sure. a $100 plan only took about 20 minutes, huh? It would be Well, Yep. He did. He did have a whole diagram in 20 minutes. Um, yeah, it might be nice to get Yeah. their input on what you're doing, too. Um, but Okay. I'm I I guess I'm Yeah, I assume the two plans the two drafts would go to both planning commission and us for feedback and then it would be all of our feedback that would drive the final draft of the day. That's what the council would like to do then. That's that was my assumption. Good. Okay. Yes. You guys do I would have had fun drawing one making a mask. You can still do it. No one said you can't do it. Jason sending whatever you want to do. I will. I plan on doing that. I'm also going to send out his drawing that he sent me. So everyone can enjoy it. That' be good. And I'll do a bubble diagram with it. So I'll draw my drawing. So, I did ask Jason a question that he didn't have a chance to answer. Would it be helpful for you if we gave you our thoughts on land use before you started? It absolutely would. Okay. Well, then we can do that. So, you get the color, Scott. You do get to You get to make a decision. Come on. You did. So, I'll make a motion that we move ahead with this proposal. All right. Uh Dave, may I second? Second. Any more discussion? All those in favor say I. I. All those oppose say no. Carries 5 to zero. And we are on to item S. That only took 25 minutes. You guys moved so fast in the beginning cuz I wasn't here and I came and slowed us down again. I don't know that you had anything to do. [Music] Um, this item's been in front of council prior and been discussed even a little bit pass tonight. So, we're looking at signalizing the intersections on Dayton Parkway as shown um on either side of the Dayton Parkway interchange on 94 um between Brockton Avenue and between 81 um as indicated. Just a look for the development in the area. So the westerly intersection as was discussed earlier is currently not used but the intersection is set up for this to occur and it would support both the both the Dayton Creek and the Dayton Parkway neighborhood as well as the to be determined name but the the property to the north there as well. And then similarly on the I'll call it the east side of 94 north side um opus and quickrip both of which are under construction um and ready for for business or getting ready for business. Um this project was discussed back in June of last year um that these signals would be needed for these areas to develop further. There's already pressure on the easterly intersection and there definitely will be pressure on the west once development occurs. At the time we were going to use special assessments for the funding. Um with that direction we initiated a feasibility study which is a requirement for um chapter 429 of the state statute to be able to impose special assessment to benefiting properties. There was then hesitation if you will or coordination with the developers um and the developments themselves and whether or not special assessments should be used. So we paused efforts on it. It's a pretty significant effort to put together the assessment roles and and different components of the report. So, it was put on hold um I want to say this winter sometime. Maybe it was it was probably later winter maybe the decision was made let's not use special assessments but instead advance municipal state aid dollars so we could use uh state aid funds allotted to the city of Dayton. So, we went that direction. Um under that understanding we finished the feasibility report uh more as a technical report that does not have the fe the uh assessment role associated with it but it does give justification to the project and has the technical backing for the decisions made. So the report findings just to whittle them all the way down to the basics. Um feel free to read through the report if you want to know more detail. Um the project is certainly justified and just to note we did use projected traffic. Um not always done especially on county roads but we do feel that we should plan for uh future growth on these. So in other words the warrants might not be there today but they absolutely will be once at least even some of these developments occur that were proposed. Um so that does meet warrants. Uh we did look at the costs. We have the preliminary budget numbers. We just are are staying with those for now, but they still seem to be appropriate for the project uh cost itself. And just to note that the anticipated impacts for the construction will be minimal. It should be limited to um even single lane closures. There's multiple lanes out there. Uh that can be done off peak times. So there won't be any anything more than a single lane closure uh throughout the life of the project. So, not much for disruptions at all. So, just as a reminder, the budgetary cost is 750,000 per intersection. That should be for everything included with it for a total project cost of 1.5 million. The anticipated funding sources for the project um as I think has been mentioned uh in the DA for Quick Trip, it's not exactly 440,000, but it's very close to that um that they've agreed to contribute towards the project. We did get approval for the advancement of state aid funds up to $1 million on this project. I will note on there, I don't expect this to even be needed. Um, but we also did an advance for South Diamond Lake Road and with that one coming in as low as it did, there's unused advance dollars, if you will. We haven't talked to him about it switching between the projects, but we expect since they have been allocated to the city, we could use it on this project if we had to. So just just a note if we get in a position where that's needed. Uh I think there's been discussions with existing property owners on potential voluntary contributions. I don't know the status of that, but I I think we continue to work towards that and if agreements could be made that could offset some of the city expenses on the project. And then just to note if there's any uncovered balance, uh the city transportation fund would be the source for that. So the next step would be to complete the plans and specifications uh such the project could be bid for construction. If those are authorized tonight, we expect they could be presented back to council in July. Bids opened in August and then start construction in September. Um I would like to point out um and I don't know if this got in the proposal itself. Uh, one of the I don't want to say common but not uncommon occurrences on these projects is there will be long lead times on some of the components for signals. Often the cabinets for the electronics and then the mast arms for the signals themselves um can be extended. So we're hopeful this could start in September and be constructed throughout. I don't think construction takes maybe one to two months for it. However, if there's long lead times that might get stretched out to when um they could be actually put into service, we would like to still follow the schedule because a lot of the work is underground and using concrete bases and other that we'd like done before freeze up. So, is there even if there is a long lead time, we'd like to get the work started sooner. So, um just to note that caveat that this might not be up and running in October, um if there is lead times, hopefully not, but in case there is. So the recommendation would be to I guess accept the feasibility report or the technical report on it uh and then approve the uh engineering services for it. Included in the proposal is the design and the bidding. Um we do not have costs accounted for construction services on this project at this time. Part of the reason for that is we have initiated but haven't fully discussed uh having Henipin County perform or complete some of the services in the field for us. The expectation is at some point Dayton Parkway will become under their jurisdiction. We want them to want them to be part of this design and project delivery such that we don't have to redo anything um when that jurisdictional transfer occurs. So our hopes is that they might be able to use their staff to perform some of those um at a reduced or maybe even no cost to the city. So we didn't include anything in there. I don't know how that'll pan out. Our conversations have not got far uh yet, but we'll continue those discussions and and hopefully work towards something that can benefit the city through the construction phase. That's all I had. So, it seems to me that the the one is needed sooner than the other and quick trips, we have a problem, right? Yes. the apartment buildings are not well. So when this other thing this can go, but that that traffic doesn't materialize for a couple years. And I understand what you're saying that by 2029 everything justifies all of this. I'm just wondering given the head scratching we were doing earlier around the the get the directions right, the not quick drip one. um that is there significant um disadvantages to moving ahead with the one and not the other and maybe that only means that the construction of it not necessarily the design but I I can look I mean your your economy of scale would go down certainly so your overall project cost would likely be higher how much higher I'm not sure um and as you mentioned I mean if it is just the construction and we're buying all the equipment up front. Um, you know, maybe a lot of those cost savings would still be realized. We'd just take the equipment and store it. Public works, for example. What is the equipment versus labor? The cost of the equipment. Uh, that's a great question. I don't I don't really know the breakdown of it. It I would say it's probably, this is a really rough guess, 250 to 300,000 for the equipment for the whole thing. For each intersection? Well, for each for each. Yeah. Generally, together gives savings. Generally it it is. I mean just the more you buy of something the cheaper it is. Sam's Club is cheaper than Well, depends. But well, yeah, sure. It's more expensive total, but maybe a bad example, but usually the larger projects do have some advantage because you're only paying one mobilization for for more efforts. It it does [Music] seem like this this there's a lot of questions about the the Western Light including funding. Um I let me ask you this about the 429. Is the documentation such that you could go through and complete that on just the western line or is it kind of a Sure. Yeah. Okay. In fact, um that was the intent. Um I don't think we were going to assess because it's a it's a lot easier. So again, not to derail, but the the difficulty or the the challenge with the 429 is distributing and proving benefit. You can only charge property or impose assessments in the value of benefit they receive on the I'll just go to the so it's makes a little more sense. So the one to the west it benefits very clearly Dayton Creek, Dayton Parkway neighborhood and the the future to the north because that's the only access point for those. So that's very clear that's the benefit and they're the only ones who are going to use it. They're the only ones that need to turn on today or their future users. But if there's nothing on those properties, the signal is not needed for any other reason. The other one becomes much more challenging because you have all the users along territorial. I'm not too concerned about because we we do have a kind of a split. You got a lot of the funding for that one already. Well, yeah. In the 250 makes sense for the city. I my concern is really the west one. Yeah. Um we have no funding figured out and the the the advanced state aid is in place for use. Um yeah, but that takes away from other projects. Yeah, other projects. It's money we can't use elsewhere. But do we we anticipate that that Dayton Creek one's going to get done? It it will it will be needed when something develops there, but we we don't know if it's a year or two years or 10 years. Well, and the other thing we don't know is what are they going to kick in for this? Either they are or they're not building. And that's that's the bottom line. Yeah. Um, yeah, it almost seems like I don't know what the economy of scale would amount to, but it does seem like we should go forward with the east one and sit on the west one. But we we could and I I'm a little bit nervous of giving this option, but we could do the base bid as the easterly one or that's what I'm thinking. Do it as an alternate. Sometimes that that can kind of skew your bids and cost you more if especially when it's such a big I mean we'd be doubling the project. Um sometimes they'll pad their numbers because they don't know if the likelihood of the second one. So kind of like taking change orders out of the equation, huh? We can write there would not be appreciated. mobilization would change if they're not getting doing the second half of it. So, they might spend more. That's a good example. So, they would probably put all of their mob in the base, but then if you add the second, there's probably going to be more mobilization in there because it's gonna that you wouldn't see otherwise. So, it it's hard to say, but it's it's probably going to add some um I don't know, but it is a good way of controlling how much you need to award. So, there there is some benefit from that standpoint. It's just a little more. It's usually easier if you're if you're bidding something that's a million and you're looking at adding like 40,000 versus work of something because there's not really any markup with it. But when you're doubling either giving them a half half a month of work or a month and a half of work, for example, are they possibly going to like frontload it or east load it? Is that is that kind of what you're thinking that um if we just said it it can be. I mean, there's I don't want to say games, but there's a lot of things that they can do to incentivize you to award the second one so they can put their money up front or um Yeah, there's it just seems like that one's the funding to me bothers me and we have we don't have it laid out and just at least getting this smell that there's going to be a problem with funding on this one. And yeah, we could use MSA dollars, but I just again that's money we can't use anywhere else. And clearly they're going to use this. And this is we're just authorizing the preparation of plans though, correct? Or Yeah. So, does it harm us to get the plans made? No, I don't think so because the design I mean looking at the road and I drove over there just to see with my own eyes. I mean there's that's where the intersection's going. There's going to be a light there. Mhm. So it's that's really unlikely to be throwaway. Yeah. You know, when it gets built and who's paying for it, that's a that's an open question. more of an open question with that one certainly than the east one which seems like a certainty and we've got that more in place in terms of how we're take you know we're going to pay for that but this design I call them north and south more than east and west but at this point what we're approving is the preparation of plans and specifications and we can do that now and then later decide if we want to go for bidding on both or one. So like we don't have to decide the bidding question at this moment and that might get us time to hear back from our our trouble spot before we have to make that decision on bidding. Right now we're just saying plans or no plans and I say let's do plans for both while we're at it. That'll be in July plans. Yeah, that's a that's a formal step that's required. So yeah, we would not go out for bidding before coming to council again and getting authorization, you know. All right. So we we have plans in July. At that point, we still have the ability to decide what path we're taking in terms of Yes. how it'll be packaged for bidding. Yeah. Yes. I mean, there would we would presumably we would prepare it as a base bid for everything, but you could decide at that time and say make it an alternate. There would be a little bit extra effort for that, but it's a pretty minor adjustment at that point. I mean, that's a few of the forms and some notes on the plan sheets. So, it's in the scheme of things, it's a small effort. You good with that? Yeah. You good with that? Sounds good to me. Okay. We need a uh I'll make a motion to approve it. Motion second. Second. Any more discussion? All those in favor say I. I. Those oppos say no. Motion carries 5 to zero and we are eight minutes behind. We have to stall one for 15 minutes. That's not kind. It's not kind. Um, okay. So, the next item we have, ordinance 2025-14. So, we're just going to go through the city code and slowly update it, work way at it. Um, we did hear back from our attorney. We did have a couple questions of staff. So, if you want to look at um specifically 31.01 01 in the meetings for um whatever reason. Um it says that all meetings of city council shall adjourn by 11 p.m. unless the majority of the quorum presents and agree to continue past that time. We've never followed that. Um that can easily be struck through and not part of the code or you can put whatever time you would like in there and follow. Was there a problem with midnight for some reason? A different last time this code was updated was in 1979. Yeah. No five or nine. So hoping there wasn't a problem at midnight at that time, but maybe it's before my time. There was some state statute that kicked in or something with midnight meeting until the next. Yeah. So we checked and there's no legal requirement. I'd strike it because all we're going to do is just say we're supposed to end at 11:00. I need a vote to go forward and we're gonna do it because we're right there. And although Scott will say no, but the other four will say yes. Okay. Exactly. Insist that we meetings. I'm okay with striking. I don't care. I mean, and then the only other um that we were wondering legally wise that we didn't hear about until after the fact is 31.06. Um and it says every ordinance and resolution shall be presented in writing and shall be read in full. Um so there is no requirement. Sometimes in chart charter cities there's we're required to read it in full. Um so I would just suggest striking that as well. And then um which where was that? 3106 31.06. You do not need to read it in full. Ordinance resolutions motions petitions and communications. um just to strike the part where we're supposed to be reading it in full. You do not have to read it in full essentially if you've strike that from the record. You are not required to do that. So we've never Yeah. Other than that, it's fairly simple. Um just updating the code to meet what we're doing currently today, unless you notice any other changes that you would like. I have a math question on 3109 A1. It says that it will be populations um populations of a thousand people both larger or smaller. But then the example is 5,300 and it says so we'll look at cities 4,000 to 6,000. Shouldn't that be 4,300 to 6,300 if we're going 1,000 higher and 1,000 lower? There is that. Yes. I mean that's generally speaking how that works. And then a follow-up question of we've grown a lot. Should we push that to 10,300 since that's actually closer to our current city size? Um, isn't this an example? I understand that it's just an example, but if we're going to go through and change the numbers anyway, should we? Yeah, we can easily change it. That's what I'm saying. If we if we're going to fix the math because math is wrong more of an example of what we have. That would be my vote. No matter what, please change the math because my math teacher brain is dying a little bit. It's just I cannot 5,300 plus 1,000 is 6,300. It's not 6,000. I think it's just rounded to make it an easy number. But then why did they use 5,300? Why wasn't that just 5,000? Are we uh we good with these so far then? Cuz then it was 5,300 time. That's my thought. So I'm good with everything other than my math, my little OCD need. We'll make we'll make we will make that change. Thank you. All right. Um it doesn't so to that one um we haven't looked at uh stipen for a long time at least not in my time and I don't know about 5 years ago um 200 2011 is the last time you guys had a stipen race no I'm pretty sure it was after that um was in 2016 I believe I don't think it was happened in 2016 I I think it was 2011. Yeah. Well, we reviewed it for sure. Well, you may have reviewed it. Yeah, you might have reviewed it, but I don't think you gave yourself an increase. Oh, no, we didn't. I mean, so I don't think the I think we talked about changing how we do the math. Yeah. Your last increase was like in 2008 or 2011, something like that. But so there isn't in in here uh I mean it's sort of a description of how how you would do it, but no mechanism on what triggers it. And that's the part I will would be requested by council from what I understand. So I think in the ordinance it reads after every election and I think it's been failed to be followed. Um so I think that just needs to go on a list of someone's responsibility then to follow and it kicks in after the next election, right? Yes, it's it's in here. City council stipend amount shall be recalculated and go into effect the January following a general election. So it's just it's supposed to be checked and it hasn't been correct. Well, it was checked once in 20 16. I was on so I think it must have been 18 or 19. Okay. Maybe it was 19 in fact, but it wasn't adjusted. It's never been changed to 40 something. Yep. For 10 years. Yeah. And it's done. I know some cities have a base pay and then it's you get paid per meeting and it okay ours is pretty simple. Yeah, I I don't need to make it more complicated. It just seems to me like there should be a periodic review and it's not sure clear. I mean I guess what you're pointing at kind of says that we just haven't done it. We said that you know that it wouldn't go into it'll be recalculated and go into effect with the following the next election. But I don't know. That wasn't clear to me to say that before the election then that review would be done and we can have to the budget process too. That could be something we can do in the budget process. Do we want to change language in there that says it will be done during the budget process? Is that what you want to do at a specific date or something? It is more consistent with the budget process obviously. That's what I would think just because Okay. Okay. So instead of after November after the general election, change it to I would say the following year budget process after a general election. Yeah, that would make sense. That way it was one last year. So likely this budget season we'd look at just everybody but then it would go into effect after the next after election elections which would be in 2026. Yeah. I think the intent was not to change your own pay. Correct. Yes. That that was covered under statute. That is Y. Yes. Yeah. And that's all I had for additional otherwise just the strikethroughs and underlines that you see. All right. Any motion? I'll make a motion. A second. I'll second. Any more discussion? Steph one. All right. All those in favor say I. I. All those opposed say no. Carries five to zero. And with that, there no objection. We're adjourned. Why are you smirking over there? We're fail.