This transcript appears to be from a Hastings City Council meeting. While the council list you provided contains some names that differ from those present in this specific recording (likely due to a change in term or a special session), the staff members and Mayor match your provided context. [0:00] **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** other interactive technology and be considered present for purpose of quorum and participating in all proceedings a resolution enacting the emergency declaration will be considered by the council the city council tonight please stand for the pledge of allegiance which will be followed by a moment of silence for a former council member andy clement who served on city council 1980 to 1983 and passed away recently i pledge of allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for its experience [0:54] **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** welcome everyone and seeing that this meeting is being held remotely when i call your name please indicate your presence council member brock's council member folch president council member fox president come on council member lifevelt present councilmember lund who will be tardy and council member vaughn here let the role reflect that all council members accepting council member lund are present and a quorum has been established at this play at this point i'd like to add the resolution of declaration of a local public health emergency [1:41] **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** will have a vote to add it to the agenda followed by a vote on the resolution to add the resolution to the agenda clerk murtaugh please call the roll **Kelly Murtaugh (Assistant City Administrator):** council member brock's council member falch yes council member fox yes council member life held yes councilmember vaughn yes mayor fassbender yes **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** and the motion prevails on the resolution itself if there's council discussion please do so now councilmember falch [2:27] **Tina Folch (Councilmember):** thank you your honor i was i'm just opening up for a conversation how is it that we're going to declare if we're going to move to having meetings um fully again being virtually um it's interesting that we have two council members you know on virtual now and and i'm not sure where council member lund is but um we are in the next week um in the next week or two that uh this omicron variant wave is supposed to be peaking and so it will be for the next you know month and a half about that will be um under this duress and so um just what is our decision-making process going to be for moving uh meetings to be virtual there's a lot of things haven't have in the last couple of weeks just [3:13] been full out cancelled and other communities are starting to move some of these meetings online temporarily and so we haven't had an opportunity to have a conversation about if and how we're going to go about moving things forward to utilize this thanks **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** thank you councilmember folch dan would you like to speak to that [3:13] **Dan Wietecha (City Administrator):** although council can certainly discuss going to a fully virtual footing the resolution the emergency declaration tried to stay as consistent with what we had for prior activities so it really is on [4:00] an set up on an individual basis that if an individual council member is unwell or needing to quarantine because of exposure or even just a matter of personal concern about the transmissibility of kovid the resolution is set on an individual basis if council wants to discuss something broader it certainly could this evening or where at a future meeting **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** thank you dan any other council discussion council member vaughn [4:47] **Councilmember Vaughn:** thank you honor i just want to confirm that this this approval is till february 28 2022 and i would think it gives you as the mayor the opportunity to determine if we wanted a full remote meeting up until february 28 2022 i think the public needs to know also that this declaration is only about meetings today that's what you're that's what we're voting on is just only the meeting discussion of being remote that's the only power that we're giving with this resolution **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** and just to add to that it is council and commissions um any type of meaning that's held in the chambers okay thank you okay council then i would accept a motion to [5:32] approve the resolution declaration of a local public health emergency **Councilmember Vaughn:** so moved **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** council member vaughn councilmember fulch additional discussion council quick merchant please call the roll **Kelly Murtaugh (Assistant City Administrator):** council member broxs councilmember folch yes councilmember fox councilmember lifeheld yes councilmember vaughn mayor fassbender yes **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** and that motion prevails for the approval of the minutes council members are there any corrections to the minutes for the workshop or regular meeting on january third [6:18] seeing none they are approved **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** comments from the audience for public comments we have options for comments to be emailed prior to the meeting as well as interactive feature during the meeting for the email comments they have been forwarded to the city council and the receipt is acknowledged please recognize that item not on the agenda will not be discussed this evening for live comments they may be either through our zoom link or in person we ask that attendees either raise their hand in person and you or use the raised hand feature in the zoom and they will be invited to speak one at a time i also would like to remind people that public comment period is not intended [7:03] for an extended dialogue is there anyone in the audience that would like to speak to the council tonight yes you may come up to the counter and state your name please and your address [7:23] **Donald King (Audience Member):** donald king i live at 4146 shannon drive and right on the corner there of the development that's going to be developed there so i was just curious to will i be assessed because the street stops tuttle or thomas stops about 10 feet from the edge of my property going on to where the development would be so will i be assessed for that 10 feet of curbing and street **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** i guess i'd ask for some assistance ryan **Ryan Stempski (Public Works Director):** no **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** he uh ryan stemski is with our public works and he is stating no **Donald King:** okay that's all i just wanted to make sure **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** okay thank you anyone else wishing to speak to the [8:09] council please step forward and state your name and address [8:09] **Dan King (Audience Member):** my name is dan king 17 150 redwing boulevard i'm the forested area on the corner of this development and i was requesting a fence last time because i'm pretty sure the curious kids are going to find my property pretty quickly and i was curious about that i know that's a question probably for the developer not for the council but uh also i did not receive a certified letter about this meeting tonight so can i make sure i get all future mailings on this um dan king k-i-n-g one more time your address please stand 17 150 red wing boulevard i'm the first driveway to the left [8:55] outside of the city limits and it's the forested part of the the heavily treed area which is going to go right up against this development so i've got concerned about i know kids are curious but i just don't need the vandalism or the the kids running through or getting hurt or anything like that and i don't see it as a major problem but i'm i'm looking for some fencing and again i know that's kind of the development but i just want to be the council to be aware of my concerns and when the highway department gets involved i'm going to ask for a blind driveway sign things like that but i just want to make sure it's on the record that again i'm asking for some sort of privacy fence to protect my property **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** okay okay thank you dan for your comments thank you here [9:40] **Dan Wietecha (City Administrator):** yes just just for a point of clarification mayor do you want to take comments for the public hearing upcoming on the annexation or at this point or do you want to limit comments to things that aren't scheduled for public hearings **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** let's keep the comments for 316 with the public hearing and okay any others so folks we'll get an opportunity to speak to the to the annexation issue when it comes up on the agenda here thank you anyone unzoomed in for okay okay council members are there any items to be considered note that adding an item to the agenda tonight has to be a complete vote okay council i would accept a motion to approve the consent agenda [10:27] **Lisa Leifeld (Councilmember):** council member lightfield **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** okay thank you councilmember brock's counsel do you have any new discussion okay clark mercha please call the roll **Kelly Murtaugh (Assistant City Administrator):** council member brock's yes council member foltsch yes councilmember fox yes council member life health yes council member vaughn yes mayor fassbender yes **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** and the consent agenda prevails for this item tonight is the public hearing as we just stated for the ordinance amendment annexation best development trunk highway 316 and michael avenue for this item we will have an introduction by community development director director john hansman followed by a public hearing and a proposal to table the hearing for [11:21] completion as a future meeting welcome john [11:21] **John Hinzman (Community Development Director):** thank you mayor city council members tonight officially we have an ordinance for annexation for your consideration which requires a public hearing the ordinance involves this property here which is about 71 acres redwing boulevard highway 316 is located here and michael avenue to the west at this location the south pines development is to the north with shannon and tuttle drive and then we have other areas of martian township to the south here as i said this is scheduled for a public hearing tonight and i'll give you an update on what's transpired with this application since it was first submitted back in december we did we did order a [12:06] public hearing and consider first reading of the annexation ordinance again an annexation ordinance is to bring property in from a township into the city city of hastings corporate limits at that time it was we had a concept plan and a development agreement privately between the existing property owner best properties and summer gate development since that time the development agreement with summergate has ceased they're no longer involved in a party to this agreement and they're no longer an applicant as far as the the annexation application goes in speaking with best development the property owner they they wish to continue annexation consideration of annexation of the property and they're in conversations with another property [12:52] another property development firm that would ultimately enter into an agreement and propose development the issue we have right now is we don't have a lot of information we don't have a agreement yet between best property and this new entity nor do we know exactly what this new entity would develop so any action on this at this point is premature we need to be able to get that information in so that we can provide notification to people and we can have good discussion based upon the aspects of the development so at this time mayor what i'm asking to do is since we've scheduled the public hearing that we would we would follow through hold the public hearing tonight but we would not close it we would table that public hearing until the february 7th meeting as well [13:38] as any action related to this i'm hopeful at that point that we'll have more information from the developer including a concept plan and time frame for development with that information we would provide notification again to all property owners surrounding the development so that that people can be more informed so i can stand for any questions that you may have or you may open the public hearing thank you **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** thank you john at this time i will open the public hearing we ask that the attendees either raise their hand in person or use the raised hand feature in zoom and they will be invited to speak one at a time at this time i will open the public hearing if you wish to speak yes you can come up [14:24] and state your name and address please [14:24] **Chris Reuter (Audience Member):** uh chris reuter i live at 4134 shannon drive i'm in about the dead center of shannon drive um where the field backs up to my house in the backyard i guess it sounds like things are kind of not as far as long as i maybe thought they were which is good for us i can probably speak for most homeowners we probably don't like this as much as you guys do but uh some of my concerns are um you know obviously it's public private property but as you know the displacement of the wildlife on the property that's a winter feeding ground for deer i you know it's nice to see it but i don't know where they'll go they'll go across the highway there'll be a lot of car deer accidents i'm concerned with [15:11] and then obviously that roundabout stuff that we put in that's uh that's going to be a a nightmare with that development also and then along with the noise you know the noise and of the road conserve all the construction back there being right in my backyard so you know as this gentleman talked about fencing and stuff like that would be considered possibly for everybody along that back field that's all i got thank you chris [15:47] **Jason Angerman (Audience Member):** uh jason angerman 4130 shannon drive i guess my main concern is i live directly across the street from the park right there i've seen kids going to baseball day in and day out through the summer soccer almost every time a kid gets hit by a car there now we're going to add 150 some odd houses or whatever they're going to build there now and we just went and put in all these roundabouts which i don't know if you guys have driven them or not they're not the most practical things now you're going to put the same intersection down the road and recreate the same problem that we just tried to get away from so instead of going through the 316 [16:35] i could see the majority of these cars trying to exit through shannon drive through the roundabout and now we're adding i don't know let's say 600 vehicles a day to and from work you know a couple cars per house that are going to be driving past a children's park that where kids almost get hit daily that's one of my main concerns um another concern if we go back to fencing at least three or four of our neighbors that i know of have gates to the backfield we've had permission from the farmer who leased it to go back there and utilize the property in the winter time and stuff would then be replaced or fixed because i mean obviously if there's a neighbor i don't want a gate to my yard [17:20] you know what i mean that's a concern um yeah i guess that's about it and i guess i don't know what it would do to my property value as well you know kind of and i know it's just i'm just one person but as you look at it i got a park in my front yard and a field in my backyard i live in town so i just kind of concerned what it would do to my property value as well so thank you for your time **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** thank you for your comments sure [18:03] **Katie Wortzma (Audience Member):** i'm katie wortzma and i live at 581 tuttle drive um we actually me and my husband just moved there in october so we are a little disappointed within the first month of kind of settling and adjusting getting our our information about what was going to happen in the land behind us um we we have some of those similar concerns and we've only been there for a little bit i i understand the need to expand and that you want more families to come to hastings we've lived in hastings for about eight years now so but we are really looking when we are looking for our next piece of property we are looking at land outside of hastings um but we also wanted you know a very [18:50] nice comfortable home we have four children younger children um and so we wanted something that was either kind of right by the countryside like we have right now or out in the countryside and so we settled on this um in tuttle and so just to try to give you kind of our background why we picked was for that land in the back and um we've seen up to 20 deer at one time in that backfield so clearly the deer use it i mean they're there almost every night our kids just run up to the windows and start looking out there so the wildlife is very evident we've seen four or five pheasants together sometimes there are kind of clumps too i have multiple pictures and videos too [19:37] just because we've really enjoyed that um but also just i can see with the traffic people would be cutting in all the time even with the construction the way that it was i had to go around because i um i worked part time at treasure island down in um welch and so you know i had to take a lot of the detours and some of the people that were trying to cut through different ways was very dangerous so i could see where as this is getting developed if people are trying to cut through that nice little neighborhood that we live in it could get pretty dangerous for my kids whereas right now it's nice and kind of quiet and we we're really excited that we're kind of on the end of it so and then one thing that i did want to ask too [20:22] is since we don't have the developer person this might not be the time but um if we do continue to go through with this is it possible for us as lando as property owners to purchase the land that's right behind us and not build on it if that was a possibility or not or if that can be an option where we could try to at least purchase that extend our own home but then also be able to still enjoy a little bit more of that nature that that's half the reason why we bought this property so **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** okay thank you anyone else wants to sure [21:11] **Steve Angstrom (Audience Member):** good evening steve angstrom 17162 red wing boulevard hastings concern is the we need to focus on our traffic study for both highway 316 and for the neighboring areas the current roundabouts did not address this situation there there are going to be two points of concern wherever the access would be toward uh toward the new development and adding that many more vehicles back into 316 where 316 and 61 are right by the uh right by the uh civic arena would back up in in town also also uh would like to see a plan [21:58] addressed for for parks in in this in this area **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** thank you thank you steve anyone other in the audience that would like to speak anyone on zoom okay at this time i will close the public hearing and open it up for council just **Councilmember Vaughn:** council member vaughn i think we have to leave that public hearing open until next week oh i'm sorry one and i just wanted to clarify you're on a john with that will the public hearing can people email in from now tell the next one their input **John Hinzman:** they can yeah they can email in any comments give me a call i've had [22:46] the most updated information at the city when it comes in here but yeah email me at my email address we have p uh city council comments section on the website as well where comments can be emailed in **Councilmember Vaughn:** so it's the longest public hearing we've ever had for us **John Hinzman:** well it's a longer public hearing absolutely but hopefully we'll have more information this year when i when i get the information uh i'll certainly share with council and with the public as well here so we know what we're looking at **Councilmember Vaughn:** and then i just have a follow-up since you're there john um you know originally we've seen some concept drawings from the developer today that's a null and void so they're we're reacting to land today we don't know is that drawings [23:32] not used anymore are they gone so the road connection or where we move traffic is still not known we are we're having a public hearing on land more or less **John Hinzman:** yeah fair question council member uh well yeah we the concept plan that was mailed to folks in the public hearing and shown previously to the council i don't know where that stands at this point that was done by the previous developer would the new developer use that plan or a portion of that plan it's yet to be seen but one thing i can clarify is that what we're doing what the application we're looking at right now is the annexation which is the bringing the property into the city that would be the action beyond that we would need to look at the specific plans for development the preliminary plat final plant that's [24:18] where we specifically take a look at at roadways traffic impacts storm water a whole variety of different items that would be a separate application from the annexation another public hearing would take place reviewed by the planning commission and ultimately actioned by the council on that **Councilmember Vaughn:** okay thank you clarification **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** thank you john any other councilmember folch [25:04] **Tina Folch (Councilmember):** thank you your honor see john um since the majority of residents brought up the issue of of the roads and um just so that you all know that our preliminary conversations were that we're all very concerned as well with 316 access there and how that's going to work and i was just wondering how um and in those conversations um [25:04] staff had reported that they would work closely with mndot and determining how it is the intersections would work there but just for timing not knowing how long that this is going to take john how long will it take for those discussions with mndot staff go i mean you kind of know approximately where it is a new road outlet would come you know out onto 316 and so um so i have to imagine it would just be you know moving an access point just you know 100 feet or something like that it wouldn't be like a huge it's not it's not that big of an area and so um just to understand where how long would it take for those conversations with mndot to happen because it seems to [25:51] me that we shouldn't be approving the development necessarily the layout without really having a fuller conversation about how the access point comes in um at the same time i i would hate to see for the development to be approved and then the um the highway access to come much later it seems to me that they should be coming together and there should be agreement at one time so um thanks if you could let me know that'd be great **John Hinzman:** your council member yeah and with mndot has looked at the previous concept plan and made comment on it uh so we we have they are knowledgeable of what's coming up here understand the impacts that were proposed with that development when we get the new concept planning we'll share [26:37] that with mndot ensure that the comments that we've previously received still hold or if they're modified in some way in generally speaking i would suspect that the main access to this development is going to occur at michael avenue in 316. and so that's going to be the busiest intersection likely and mndot's preliminary comments were that that intersection improvements were needed their turn lanes and so forth to accommodate that i suspect that that will likely follow through with this development but they haven't seen the revised concept either or have i at this point **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** okay council uh councilmember brox [27:23] **Councilmember Brox:** thank you mayor john my question is about the size of the next proposal and i know you'll know that right now but is it possible that the development proposed could be smaller but would not be larger than what we have seen so far **John Hinzman:** yeah council members it's hard to say what the development would be last plan was for about 160 single-family home lots i'm not sure if that would follow through with the new developer or not if it would be that many few or more how it would be laid out i'd have to to see what comes up on that **Councilmember Brox:** and i guess as a follow-up to that my question is more about size of the piece of property that we're annexing we can annex this much property but the development that's proposed can't be larger than what we're announcing right now correct **John Hinzman:** understood councilmember yes the annexation application right now is two properties we cannot amend that [28:11] application to include more so it's really it's limited to these properties it's a matter of how it's developed **Councilmember Brox:** okay thank you **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** any other discussion council okay then council i would accept a motion to table the public hearing **Tina Folch (Councilmember):** councilmember folch moved your honor the table by the discussion **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** thank you and council member lifefelt um at that time it's not a it's a non-debatable motion so council do you have any new discussion if not clerk flattened please call the roll [28:57] or sorry i knew i was going to do that clerk murtaugh **Kelly Murtaugh (Assistant City Administrator):** councilmember brox yes councilmember fulch yes councilmember fox yes member leifeld yes council member lund councilmember vaughn yes mayor fassbender yes **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** and that motion prevails thank you for your comments tonight tonight we have with us public works and a resolution to approve the amendment to resolution number 8-09-08 prevailing wage on city projects for this item we have with us ryan stamsky welcome ryan [29:44] **Ryan Stempski (Public Works Director):** thank you mayor city council members i'll just jump right off that title and jump into the amendments to the resolution on the prevailing wage policy on city projects so really what we're here to discuss tonight is is two amendments to the resolution um on file since 2008 uh one is the increase in the limit to which it applies from a hundred thousand dollars for a project up to 175 000 dollars for a project and then the second is to allow the city council an exception to the policy for those unique projects that that may um may arise from time to time so a little background on both of these [30:30] amendments one the prevailing wage policy like i stated it was instituted in 2008 since then due to inflationary reasons it's time for an increase in that minimum dollar amount also the recommendation from one hundred thousand 175 000 that 175 000 mark does align with the state's competitive bidding laws so the policy would align with that in those projects that would be required to be publicly bid so that's that's where that 175 000 threshold comes from secondly just currently the policy doesn't allow any exceptions to it it's all city projects apply so for some flexibility [31:18] in that policy the city council would have the discretion for those unique and specialized projects to give exception um from time to time so those are kind of the two pieces there were committee discussions on both on these elements one on the december 21st finance committee meeting the recommendation was provided to increase that dollar amount from 100 000 to 175 and then furthermore uh the operations committee on january 4th of this year we talked about both the increase to 175 got that recommendation and then also allowing that exception to the policy um for those unique pro [32:05] projects both those elements of the resolution were recommended out of the operations committee so a little bit on the financial impact the prevailing wages are typically are they are required for all federal and state projects so when we use federal and state funds on our projects the prevailing wages do apply so many of our projects do already incorporate prevailing wages most municipalities do not have a prevailing wage policy unless those funds do apply so just a little clarity on on municipal projects and and kind of where we sit so in your packets we do have [32:50] uh attach the original resolution from 2008 and then those amendments that would apply to the resolution that are up for discussion tonight so with that i'll stand for any questions thank you mayor **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** thank you ryan counsel any discussion any questions for ryan councilmember fulch [33:35] **Tina Folch (Councilmember):** thank your honor um i would just like to say that i'm supportive of increasing the dollar threshold for the prevailing wage policy from a hundred thousand two hundred seventy five thousand dollars because it does make sense to have an alignment with the formal bid law i think other municipalities that do have it generally it's just the really large cities like minneapolis st paul [33:35] probably ramsey county hennepin county things of that nature and so um i think that it's awesome that we do have a prevailing wage policy um to begin with i'd like to state that but it from a practicality standpoint i think that it does make sense to make this move so um thanks for bringing that forward ryan **Ryan Stempski (Public Works Director):** thank you councilmember falch **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** councilmember brox i do see your hand is still raised is that yes it's current okay thank you thank you um thank you mayor and ryan my question is about exceptions when do we what's an example of a situation where we need an exception when does this come up [34:22] **Ryan Stempski (Public Works Director):** that would be a good transition into my [34:22] next item but um it does come up from time to time i'd say just to summarize it it's when we have specialized labor specialized equipment where the prevailing wages doesn't really come into play so um a lot of times you know typically we see this on our neighborhood project right large project a lot of different labor involved variety it's a good application uh like council memberfold said where whether we're using those dollars or not we're requiring prevailing wages um but on some projects we just have you know one labor category or very specialized labor where it doesn't really those companies aren't you know unionized they're not going to change [35:08] they're just going to increase their rates and and to comply with our minimum so it's not really doing it's not changing the bid environment and it's not changing who's working on the job does that help council member **Councilmember Brox:** yes thank you for jumping ahead that was just a burning question in my mind **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** thank you councilmember brock's council member was actually fox say that as well **Jen Fox (Councilmember):** thank you ryan um in our committee meeting we talked about this being a specialized project and why this uh moving the prevailing range makes sense specifically like councilmember welch said for this project for this style of project and since it is consistent with the minnesota competitive fitting i'm i'm in favor of it and we work as a [35:53] committee as well so thank you mayor **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** thank you councilmember fox councilmember vaughn [35:53] **Councilmember Vaughn:** it looks like we kind of lump these two together so i'm going to ask a question about the item coming because it relates to this um unique who determines unique or specialized i i would hate to i want to set up a framework so staff has the opportunity do they use a consultant that says that's unique or that's what's going to make it easier so staff's not caught saying well i checked around and it's unique there's nobody else doing it i want to make sure it's very clear for staff so we're not guessing and having wavering from one to the other because examples there's projects i know that [36:39] like a water park that i run that is unique you can't find it i searched and searched but part of the policy maybe should include staff just needs to keep those records on hand in case someone asks us tell me what's unique about it i just want to help staff get protected but also give you some solutions i noticed that the next item you had a consultant that said this is unique i think that's important that we have that included with our new policy that someone helps us determine what's unique is thank you **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** thank you councilmember vaughn any other discussion okay and council i would accept a motion to approve a resolution amending resolution 8-09-08 of the city of hastings [37:26] establishing a prevailing wage policy councilmember lund and council member lyfeld counsel any other new discussion clerk merchant please call the roll **Kelly Murtaugh (Assistant City Administrator):** council member brox yes council member foltch yes council member fox yes council member life held yes council member lund yes council member bond yes mayor fassbender yes **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** and that motion prevails ryan imagine that so a resolution tonight to approve the 4th street water tower reconditioning plans with exception to prevailing wage policy and authorized [38:13] advertisement for bids thank you mayor senior ryan [38:13] **Ryan Stempski (Public Works Director):** yeah so this is a good transition to what we just talked about we do have a specific unique project that we are working with a consultant on and so the formalization of this uh to your point council member vaughan is we do have included in your packet a resolution that helps clarify those rationale and we can record and document why did we choose this project to be special and unique and so that that did help in this instance um expert in tank industry and and a resolution to to document it so very important um and we're putting that into [38:58] play here so a little background on this project this is um our 4th street water tower this is a reconditioning project so this includes structural repairs and and replacement of the interior wet interior dry and exterior coatings of that tower so so pretty significant that's a 750 000 gallon tank so it's a lot large tower very specialized work not a lot of companies do that but we'll get into that here um the the plans and specs were prepared by klm and as i um alluded to they're a very experienced um uh specialized themselves uh engineering firm in in the tank industry so very well respected and they're kind of the go-to [39:44] so they not only prepared our plans and specs but they also will provide full-time welding inspections and and overall inspections of of the water tower work of of any contractor we you know bring on board so that's important to note uh in discussions and preparations of the specifications with klm they did note that bidding this work uh really wouldn't change regardless of the wage implications so they they noted it first to us in in our discussions they said that there's really only four or five contractors that can handle a tower of this size across the nation so they historically have good relationships with these folks encourage them to bid on this size tower [40:31] and that's because the work is very specialized itself for the labor involved and then also the equipment's very expensive as well so they don't see a lot of new companies jumping into this line of work so they kind of have those relationships and experiences to share and so with that that's where we kind of um evolved with with the specialized and unique project itself and that's where it came from klm further explained to us that they work with all municipalities in our state or many of them i should say and they don't see the prevailing wage application on these reconditioning projects they just flat out don't see it it's kind of a unique thing so they started to talk about and ask their [41:18] contractors what would this impact uh be to the city of hastings and they thought up to about a 200 000 increase to the project so we started talking about the engineers construction estimate and it would increase from the 1.4 million dollars to 1.6 million dollars so that's when it started to catch staff's attention of we need it we need to talk about this we need to discuss this and bring this forward to council as we just did we also brought this specific conversation to our operations committee at the january 4th meeting and due to the uni unique nature of the project the specialized labor involved the limit of approximately five qualified contractors and those potential cost implications [42:03] the operations committee did recommend that we provide exception to the policy if the policy were amended to allow that action obviously so that was a discussion at that meeting in your packets you'll find the resolution approving the project with that exception to the prevailing wage policy and authorizing us to go to ad for bids we are this was kind of this kind of last action on it we're trying to get out to bids to position ourselves to get good um bids for the summer work so we'd actually go out to bids tomorrow um start that three week week competitive bidding project and bring this contract back hopefully with good results to you guys [42:48] second meeting in february so that's kind of where we'at tonight and what the request is in front of you thank you mayor **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** thank you ryan ryan i have a question how long does a project like this take **Ryan Stempski (Public Works Director):** we anticipate this project starting in probably the end of july and wrapping up mid to end of october so it takes a while before that we do have to remove all our wireless antenna that when you look up on the tower and see so that project will probably start in the spring not by this contractor but all those wireless carriers will have to take down their antenna and equipment so you're gonna see action over the whole summer i guess i should say and then do [43:35] you find another place for them to **Ryan Stempski (Public Works Director):** yep we we had to give a six-month notice um to these folks and so they're starting to work on their plans collaborate amongst each other sometimes they put a temporary antenna up and they share that or pull up and they share that for their services so um yet to be determined but that's exactly what they do **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** okay thank you councilmember vaughn [44:22] **Councilmember Vaughn:** thank you uh ryan you just brought up a good point that it's gonna be a lot of activity starting in july and i'm assuming it'll go into fall who owns the property that the water tower sits on is that the school district or is that the city good question have we talked to the school about using their property for staging **Ryan Stempski (Public Works Director):** it is an interesting project from that [44:22] standpoint um we own the property around the water tower we actually own part of right field and a couple tennis courts um if you if you dig into it if you look on a map if i had an aerial i'd pull up um so we actually own that entire water tower site um but there is a gap from 4th street to that site so we're partners with the school they've been brought on board since the beginning unfortunately they are resurfacing that parking lot um so that's off limits in our contract or in our specifications we'll actually be creating our own access off four street through the green space and staging equipment out there rather than in the parking lot like we'd like to but we don't want to ruin the [45:08] school's improvement nor do we want to provide that conflict so yes we've been in a lot of conversations with them thank you your honor **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** thank you councilmember vaughn councilmember lund [45:53] **Councilmember Lund:** thank your honor um so you touched on this a little bit ryan and i just want to kind of emphasize and highlight it that this is i mean it's a fairly sizable project cost wise and it's really it may seem very aesthetic or a surface kind of type of project but can you go in a little bit more detail about i mean you don't have to go super deep but just you know this isn't just making the water tower pretty [45:53] or updating a logo or something like that you know we're not um we're not doing it because we're bored so um you just give a little bit of context so that people understand why this carries such a hefty price tag **Ryan Stempski (Public Works Director):** yes uh council member alone first and foremost it's it's dangerous and unique and um specialized work first and foremost so keep that in mind it's not like you're painting the side of a building or something like that it's it's uh it's it's dangerous work but as as far as uh our tower itself um with with all the wet contact on the inside we get a lot of failures um rusting we get uh brake and structural bonds we have a 50 to 75 page report [46:41] with photos identifying every failed structural element now they're not completely busted open and water's not spraying out of our tower but significant deterioration is observed in those joints and so those all need to be um disassembled uh and and re-welded together with new parts and components and every square inch of that interior needs to be um strategically recoded and and we have a lot of things to move out of the way to make those structural and coding repairs and then you move to the outside same thing you if you look up on our tower you'll see the visual rust marks up the tank um side and and and it's just those are just the the things you can see with your own eyes same things there just a [47:27] lot of a lot of blasting and and removal and preparation and coding and layering so um i'd say the little structural in repairs are the biggest things that people don't realize and then uh the following up with blasting and cleaning and coding on top of all that hopefully does that help okay **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** thank you councilmember lund additional discussion okay council then i would accept a motion to approve a resolution approving plans and specifications with exception for the prevailing wage policy on city projects authorizing the advertisement for bids for the 4th street water tower [48:13] reconditioning project councilmember lightfeldt councilmember vaughn sorry councilmember vaughn any new discussion counsel clerk murtaugh please call the roll **Kelly Murtaugh (Assistant City Administrator):** council member brock's yes council member falch yes council member fox yes council member leiffeld yes councilmember lund yes councilmember vaughn yes mayor fassbender yes **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** and that motion prevails thank you ryan thank you tonight under administration we have a resolution special assessment deferral policy for this item [49:00] we will have an introduction by city administrator dan watica [49:00] **Dan Wietecha (City Administrator):** thank you mayor this discussion actually began last spring but was brought through to the finance committee just this past december and they recommended it minnesota statute state law allows the city to defer special assessments on homesteaded property under certain circumstances if it's occupied by a senior citizen somebody who's disabled or somebody in military service and in each case a matter of the special assessment would be some sort of financial hardship that they'd be unable to [49:46] to make those payments but although state law allows that it requires the city to have a written policy which we've not had in the past and i don't know the providence if there's been discussions in the past or not but finance committee this past year said it's something we should consider and they recommended this new policy just last month in december so it would affect new assessments going forward whether it's a tree removal for emerald ash borer or you know one of our more extensive neighborhood projects but defines eligibility as 65 years or older retired by virtue of permanent or total disability [50:32] or serving in the guard or military reserves and and called into active duty per some statutory definitions and the fact that they have a financial hardship to this which in the policies defined as that one-year installment of the assessment being greater than one percent of the applicant's adjusted gross income so it's it's really a fairly low bar uh but putting forward a a benefit to some people that would have some financial difficulties with with these assessments um a couple points interest still accrues um obviously they can pay it at some point in the future if they feel that their circumstances have changed um [51:19] but otherwise the the deferral ends and the payments are due including interest when the property owner dies when the property is sold or transferred or subdivided if the property loses its homestead homestead status or in some fashion if there's a determination that there's no longer a hardship in that individual's case to a certain extent we don't know what the financial impact would be to the city if these are deferred the city is carrying those costs but some real rough numbers looking at our neighborhood project last year [52:04] 15th street far into 15th street it was about 750 000 of that project was assessed if it's assessed over 10 years principal only roughly seventy five thousand dollars uh per year granted we don't do it on a a straight line a set of amortization but but it helps for for uh illustration here seventy five thousand dollars plus interest if all the assessments were deferred so if it's some portion of that let's say one in 10 were eligible under this and took advantage of it we're talking 7 dollars plus interest that the city would be carrying so uh there is a [52:49] financial impact it certainly adds up over time um but it's something that uh on in any individual year uh it to be manageable for the city to to carry those costs after we have some practice with it for a year or two we'd have a better idea at what those what we might predict for the number of residents that would be eligible and assume that from one year to the next it's similar and could better plan it on future projects but it certainly seems manageable but in a nutshell that's the the proposed policy i can certainly take any questions and appreciate uh presenting this **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** thank you dan uh councilmember lifefelt [53:37] **Lisa Leifeld (Councilmember):** thank you honor dan so just under the termination piece of it are there any circumstances where the special assessment would be put on to like the new owner of the property like where the city would place a lien against something in the case of an elderly individual the property gets sold it's not worth what it what they whatever is there any circumstances where something like this could go on to the individual buying the home **Dan Wietecha (City Administrator):** not really uh where where it it may carry forward it would be if there was a married couple and um maybe the house was in technically in one's name uh and that individual passed and the [54:24] uh the surviving spouse inherits it if that surviving spouse still meets the eligibility requirements it would pass on but if it's sold and you're bringing in a new owner uh at that point the the assessment would come due okay thank you dude **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** thank you councilmember life help i'm the additional councilmember folch [55:11] **Tina Folch (Councilmember):** thank your honor dan justin follow up to what you were just saying and and perhaps to uh attorney land is that something that we would need to clarify within the current language so that um and you know as a for instance you can have an elderly couple and perhaps the the home isn't just the husband's name and if he passes and it goes to his wife i mean does there need to be language in there about the home passing [55:11] to a spouse or even a child so that that that the assessment doesn't suddenly get re-triggered at that point if there's not a financial transaction that occurs just looking for clarification **Kori Land (City Attorney):** your honor members of the council if i could respond to that what happens upon death is there still needs to be a deed and a conveyance and the assessor's office will catch the assessment at that point so regardless of whether or not we have anything in our policy the assessor's office knows this deferred assessment is out there because we have to file it with them and so they keep it annually we remind them that we have it on record or that they have it on record and so upon a conveyance it will be triggered [55:56] so even if it's not a financial sale they will not transfer a deed without this being accounted for and resolved **Tina Folch (Councilmember):** oh really okay all right so there's not what i just heard you say is there would be nothing that we could do about it okay all right and so and then my second comment is just um to thank staff for doing the leg work on this um this conversation arose as we were looking at the emerald ash borer situation and having to have property assessments for the removal of the trees and and then to help folks who may have several uh of the trees on there just another tool in the toolbox you know to help and i think it'll also uh you know assist you know further with uh with property tax assessments for the [56:42] major you know street uh reconstruction projects in case folks need to use that um you know it i think everyone is really startled with how inflation is going up and and so uh budgets are getting tighter for a lot of households and um and so if this is one more thing that we can offer the disabled our you know folks in military services their um an active uh status and you know the disabled and such i think that it's just a wonderful asset and i hope that we're able to continue this into the future so thank you **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** thank you councilmember folch council member fox did you have a comment [57:27] **Jen Fox (Councilmember):** it was disappointing clarification regarding council member filch's previous question okay the determination section that says that provided that the surviving spouse is otherwise not eligible so they could be eligible for the for the different as well sorry a little too late now it's okay thank you council member fox **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** any other discussion okay counsel then i would accept a motion to approve a resolution authorizing deferred of special assessments for senior citizens disabled or military persons **Tina Folch (Councilmember):** so moved your honor **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** council member fulsch council member vaughn any new discussion council clerk murtaugh please call the role **Kelly Murtaugh (Assistant City Administrator):** council member brox yes councilmember falch yes council [58:15] member fox yes council member lifeveld yes councilmember lund yes councilmember vaughn yes mayor fassbender yes **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** and that motion prevails tonight we will uh hear from city administrator dan maticha on the interim wage adjustments dan [59:00] **Dan Wietecha (City Administrator):** thank you mayor emphasize that these are interim take a step back for several months we have been talking about doing a compensation and classification study and anticipate that very soon we will have a consultant under contract for that our [59:00] recommendation to have a contract there probably our next council meeting um and that is the primary goal is uh looking at all of our positions throughout the city i think there's somewhere around 80 different positions that we have that that competent class is the number one goal but as we looked at the 80-some positions and many of them are appear to be underpaid and that's the reason that we're doing the the comp and class studies they appear to be under under the market rates we want to get them up where [59:47] the market is that we're competitive but there's a handful a few positions that are further off than the rest and more of an outlier type position so they're they're at roughly eight to fifteen percent off of the market rate for these five positions and really that's what we're trying to address here is bringing those five outliers in line with the other positions and then having everybody be patient wait out the process for the comp class study anticipate it being done early summer target date is june 30th trying to in the process [1:00:33] minimize the amount of changes we're making in our pay structure so although we see a few positions that do appear to be extra extra significantly off and wanting to bring them more in line with the others trying to keep it to a few positions rather than a lot trying to keep the adjustments to a an increment bring it from say 10 to 7 rather than the full 10 percent uh trying to minimize the the differences that the confident class study would be looking into as well as the compton class studies not done so our preliminary numbers might be often a bit hedging our bets on that [1:01:20] so anyways that's what's proposed is trying to bring these five positions in line with the rest bringing it so that no position appears based off preliminary data appears to be more than seven percent off the market rate and then anticipate that this summer with completion of the comp and class study all positions these five and the the other 75 positions uh would likely have some sort of adjustments the rest of the way this was talked about at the discussed at length at the administration committee in december and earlier this month in january which supports and helped come up with this proposal the other piece just on a financial impact [1:02:05] on these five positions for six months retroactive to the first of the year through through june 30th would be a little over eight thousand dollars plus fica and para expenses about another 15 percent on top of that but with that i can take any questions i know it's it's a difficult many pieces to the topic but i can certainly take questions on it thank you **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** thank you dan any discussion council councilmember vaughn [1:02:50] **Councilmember Vaughn:** thank your honor i'm still um still scratching my head on this one we we we approved hiring a consultant to do the study but then in staff we did some [1:02:50] preliminary checks and we found some positions and we want to move them up somewhat and then hope the study confirms that and probably moves them up again i don't know why we just don't wait till the study's done it doesn't make any sense i i i'm not going to get involved in the day-to-day operations but if i was in the staff mode and say well how did you come up with those five and i get we got reasons why but do we go through every 80 positions and get some preliminary data if so why are we hiring a consultant we're kind of doing the work that i thought we were hiring a consultant to do to determine do we are we paying the right salaries for our employees that that's why i'm hung up i don't know why we would make an adjustment [1:03:37] because the study is going to prove that they should be moved up versus us using our own solution i just think we're missing i don't understand why we're just doing a few if if we're going to do it and we and if it is correct if the study says they should go up why don't we just put a retroactive in or something that says go back and get whatever they worked today but i'm i'm not happy with just these positions i think the comp and class studies should be done and that's the numbers we should be using not us doing preliminary numbers thank you **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** thank you councilmember vaughn councilmember fulch [1:04:24] **Tina Folch (Councilmember):** thank you your honor i concur with councilmember vaughn and um we have already been making some [1:04:24] adjustments to a few positions that have come up in the last several months as hiring opportunities have resented so i think that it does make sense just to be consistent you know for all staff as they're coming on board and i agree if um if something retroactive um seems like it a fair thing to do but you know i think that in general going through this process is really stressful for all staff and and i have to imagine that they want to be treated in a fair and consistent way and so i think that we should um stay the course as well and and be transparent and very communicative with the with the staff and and helping them understand you know [1:05:11] the process and what impacts are and and you know i haven't been involved in the committee conversations um about this but i know that there's a lot of moving parts because i've gone through it myself and uh and it's and it's painful for staff and so i don't think that we should be um confusing them and and just making it more complicated i think that we should be straightforward and i think it'll also help with the unions as they're moving forward also you know with negotiating their contracts and and how it is everybody goes into an acceptance mode here and so i would too would rather just hold off and and for i know that maybe doesn't seem fair for the five staff that you're talking about right now but um i just think [1:05:57] collectively as a whole that it's a fairer thing to do for all the staff in the end thanks **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** thank you councilmember fulch council member fox [1:06:42] **Jen Fox (Councilmember):** so just from our committee discussion uh we had pretty thorough and long-winded conversation about what this all entails and in both of our committee meetings um we went back to what the contractors that we're talking to would recommend as well and that's where some of this comes from and dan will let you speak to anything that i may be less informed than you on here but this just brings some of the outliers into the fold [1:06:42] so that we're not expanding these wages so dramatically once we do get into the coming class evaluation finalization and we think it's a valuable tool to move forward with so that the company class study can start without these major outliers so just so there's a little bit of clarification there right **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** thank you council member fox council member rox did you want to comment **Councilmember Brox:** my question was to hear the admin committee's discussion which which council member fox discovered so thank you **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** okay thank you councilman any additional discussion council [1:07:33] okay council would accept a motion to approve the adjustments to wage scales as provoked as proposed council member fox and council member lifefelt additional new discussion council clerk uh mercha please call the roll **Kelly Murtaugh (Assistant City Administrator):** council member brox no councilmember folch no council member fox yes council member life held no council member lund no council member vaughn no mayor fassbender yes **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** that motion does not prevail thank you dan [1:08:35] honor clarification **Lisa Leifeld (Councilmember):** well councilmember life clarification so with us voting that piece down this all just continues in the comment class study **Dan Wietecha (City Administrator):** okay thank you yes **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** counselor um any announcements from council [1:08:54] okay i have a few i recycle your old lights with the hastings holiday lights drop off collection residents can drop off their unwanted lights strands at the joint maintenance facility 920 10th street west during the holiday season through february 1st we will have a virtual kickoff meeting about the new community investment fund on monday january 24th for an overview of the program and to answer questions from local partner organizations so snowshoe guided hike on sunday january 30th at jc park registration is [1:09:41] required snowshoes poles and instruction will be provided the event is free and offered in partnership with dakota county parks the state of the city will be presented virtually again this year on wednesday february 2nd i'd like to wish dan would teach our city administrator a birthday at the end of the month january 31st and meetings moving forward are wednesday january 19th the public arts task force is at 7 pm thursday january 20th public safety advisory commission meeting via zoom at 6 30 and monday february 7th 5 30 city council workshop for police department [1:10:26] overview and 7 pm city council regular meeting council i would look for a motion to adjourn council member lightfield and councilmember vaughn clerk murchile please call the roll **Kelly Murtaugh (Assistant City Administrator):** council member brock's yes councilmember fulch yes councilmember fox yes council member life held yes council member lund yes councilmember vaughn yes mayor fassbender yes **Mary Fasbender (Mayor):** and we are adjourned thank you