oh yeah that one just looks more like you know like stocking because you can see your lip belt line when you're that says 32 group looks 32 degrees we are on there good evening ladies and gentlemen it is now 5 30 and i will call this regular meeting of the burnsville city council to order it is our tradition to stand for a moment of silence followed by the pledge of allegiance and we invite you to join us i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands one nation under god indivisible with liberty and justice for all with the city clerk please note that all council members are present council member vince workman is joining us remotely but it would be good for you to take the roll call for all council members please with the clerk take the role council member gustafsson here mayor couts here council member keeley here councilmember schulz here council member workmen here thank you so we continue to creatively and innovate our meeting so that we can serve the public and do the public's work so tonight's meeting is being conducted in person all of our city council members well we have most of our city council members are in the chambers and we have council member workmen joining us remotely our staff is also present and the members of the public may attend uh in person if they like members of the public may also watch this meeting online at burnsville meetings or comcast channel 16 or 859 if you would like to participate during a meeting remotely you may call 651 372 or join a meeting online at zoom dot us slash join more information is available on our meeting web page and in the council agenda packet the next item on the agenda is our announcements and presentations we only have announcements this evening so our scheduled upcoming meetings regular council meetings are scheduled for tuesday august 18th at 5 30 pm and tuesday september 8th at 5 30 pm we have a work session that's scheduled for tuesday august 10 and that's cancelled because we now have a special work session scheduled for tuesday august 25th at 5 30 pm the next item on the agenda is citizens comment this is the opportunity for anyone that would like to address the council on an item that is not on the printed agenda and not an application form that will be coming before us at a future date is there anyone who wishes to address the council anyone who wishes to address the council seeing no one we will move on the next item on the agenda is additions to the final agenda and this is for emergency items only this mascara are there any emergency items to come before the body they're not madam mayor thank you council members okay thank you and we will move on the next item is the consent agenda items on the consent agenda are considered to be routine and will be enacted by one motion however an item and a consent agenda can be removed for a separate discussion and vote is there anyone who wishes an item on a consent agenda to be removed for a separate discussion and vote miss muscali no matter mayor members of the council okay may i have a motion to adopt the consent agenda please move to approve councilmember gustafsson makes the motion second um councilmember workmen then is seconding the motion uh if the clerk can take the role please councilmember gustafsson aye mayor couts aye councilmember keeley aye council member schultz yes council member workmen hi okay the consent agenda is now adopted and now we'll move on to the regular agenda and the only item that we have on the regular agenda is the covet 19 response update our city manager melanie mezcali is presenting miss muscoli good evening madam mayor and council tonight we have our standing coven 19 update and a couple items specifically that we'd like to cover with the council financial review and within your packet was a draft expenditure plan that we would seek council feedback on we'll have i'll ask finance director jenny rhodey to do a review of our current financial review within your packet you also have two requests one by the ymca of burnsville and one by fairview ridges for direct cares act allocations so we'll ask you to talk about that and the final item will be jenny faulkner our community development director will provide an update on our business grant program so with that i would ask for jenny rhodey to cut you've got a presentation this evening i think you can do it from your because you have a oh oh you need to oh okay um yeah i've just got a quick um relatively brief update but i'm going to go over a few items um the number the first thing on the on this slide we just thought it would be a good idea to kind of revisit where we are with revenues and what we're seeing as far as lost revenues or revenues that are going to be substantially different from from budget due to covid19 uh these would be part of what we're looking at right now as we're looking at budget items and and looking at where we think we're going to be and where departments think they're going to be this is not necessarily all-inclusive but these are the major items and there are always other minor increase or increases or decreases in 2020 we certainly are seeing that things are generally decreasing across all most revenue streams number the first item is licenses and permits we do have a small about five and a half percent we're predicting to be under in the permit area but generally tracking you know pretty reasonably on a five-year average with that licenses as part of that too and we do have some reductions as far as you know the um refunds or the reductions in the licenses for alcohol as well as other business licenses and other sign permits and things like that fines and forfeits are also down quite a bit they have been very you know about half or less than a half on a monthly basis since this started so that's that's the estimate um to be under under under where we had budgeted recreation fees is a total about two hundred and one thousand and this is actually a little better than what we had originally estimated we are able um softball a softball league is you know the adult softball league is running so we were able to have a season on that now we don't have the two seasons but that did help in that area for ems charges we're seeing we're predicting around 500 000. we had a very um slow uh the runs were down quite a bit in february and march or march and april excuse me which is those are usually pretty busy months they have come back and we are seeing you know these later months being more of more of what we would expect but we're also seeing kind of a decline in or a decrease in collections so that's kind of where that's tempering that a little bit and we'll continue to monitor that investment income we're predicting around 200 000 below budget interest rates are at you know historically low low levels lodging tax we've predicted about half and that that could be even lower depending on you know what we have we are we are collecting some lodging tax but it is very very minimal and miscellaneous revenues those would include facility rentals and contributions and donations those are down as well about 41 000 so on the non-property tax revenue loss we're looking at probably about 1.4 million for the general fund right now we've got as far as property taxes we have collected from this county they have made all the settlements for the first half those collections are looking um you know pre about what we expect and i think um we didn't see too drastic of a decline while i think the second half will you know the time will tell i think i think that perhaps is where we might see more reduction as well as any you know anybody that's got property tax whether they're looking to reduce their taxes that might increase as well so a total of about 2.2 we could see in 2.2 million in lost revenues so i've got a couple other projections here ice center they are currently operating they are projecting around a net operating loss of about 178 thousand dollars for the year and that's pretty close to i think when we came in may to talk about projections that's very close to where we thought they might be with a three-month closure and i think that's down about 163 000 from what we had budgeted as far as where we thought they would be with a net they had a a very small net operating loss of fifteen thousand dollars budgeted aim center they are currently projecting a net operating loss of 338 thousand it's like during the recession it's about what it was during the recession yep yeah and i mean as far as these revenues um we're look you know when we're looking at 2021 i think we're seeing they're going to kind of remain or we're predicting that a lot of these revenues are probably going to remain pretty flat at least for the time being so but this is this is where these two these two funds look towards the end of the year as far as costs direct costs incurred by the city through july are about 475 thousand dollars those would include any overtime personnel emergency paid sick leave ppe cleaning and other supplies other you know public outreach or public modification of the buildings to kind of accommodate the public health requirements any equipment that has been purchased that's that is really through the end of july as far as staff time we've looked at staff time as far as public safety and any other dedicated staff time incurred through the end of july that's estimated to be about 5.4 million this slide just kind of talks about the assumptions um when we're looking at eligible cares expenditures what we've kind of projected for 2020 that includes any of those direct expenses that we talked about on the previous slide salaries for public safety and other staff that have been dedicated to the covid response any additional capital items necessary for response those could include i.t i.t equipment and any hvac or other type facility improvements that we will need right now we've got a couple of those projects that we're looking at and those could be i think the i.t that we've got that we're looking at is about 750 000 and maybe 175 000 for possible hvac improvements so that's equipment and also building the infrastructure to continue the work that we've been doing with remote yep to continue that and make sure the building is you know modified to to accommodate any or any requirements or safety measures are we hardening all of those firewalls as well it's all part of that i.t okay and grant the grant program for businesses that is also obviously included one note here um workers compensation expenses that we will or possibly will incur will be additional eligible costs but they may not be incurred in time to meet that november 15th time frame so those would be addition you know those would be additional on top of cost so that is kind of my brief update if there i don't i will stand for any questions okay any questions for miss rhodey uh councilmember uh gustafson on the on the public safety that 5.3 million is that above and beyond what we normally would have spent or is that just our total cost that's um our total cost thank you for that time period only and also i want to ask you a little bit about permits because i understand we're kind of exceeding or how we budgeted for fees coming in for economic development in our city a lot of good projects are going forward is that 178 kind of is that figured into there that 178 000 loss yeah in the in the reduction in permit fees yeah anything that we expect for 2020 is included thank you has a question councilmember workman thank you um ms jordy can you elaborate just a little bit on the work comp expenses so i can understand that just a little bit better yeah we know that we we could possibly incur some workers cup costs as as the pandemic goes along we currently those aren't necessarily included in what we think will be projected for the cares eligible expenses just because they won't they it's likely they won't be incurred before november 15th but there are especially in the public safety area if there are staff that do contract covid they would be eligible for workers comp edition and those would be eligible costs but we you know we're running into the time frame because those take a while to move through and before we pay them and right now we have to pay all eligible costs prior to november 15th in order for those to be eligible so if i may we're looking at actual claims paid or potentially claims paid and then possibly rate shifts as a result of those claims paid yes and most likely those would we would see those after november 15th and and the rate changes would be in our in our 2021 um premium payments as our as we renew thank you very much any other questions for miss rhodey and in our background is you see all of the other sub substantially dedicated staff and you can see who all the staff members and uh the cost and all of those are eligible costs in the background yes madam mayor and council in your pack it is a draft expenditure plan we pulled that together based on the feedback we heard from the council as with regards to your priorities as we respond to the pandemic as well as what are eligible expenses so within this document you will see the federal guidance that outlines um how these funds can be spent it's a little bit of an unusual situation in that we received the funds first and then we are slowly getting clarification and guidance on how those funds can be expended so when ms rhodey indicated that we had workers compensation costs in our preliminary estimates that was kind of earlier in the process as we refine and we recognize that luckily we're not having our staff contracting covet and incurring those workers compensation costs those would be future costs if and when our staff are impacted by a positive covid19 test so those are costs that would not necessarily be eligible um under the cares act programming the guidance that we have right now is the that our funds need to be spent not simply incurred but spent by november 15th and so we are going to be meeting with um mmb um at the state level to try to get some clarity and some a little bit of an extension because the federal deadline for the ex for spending those fair cares dollars has been extended 90 days so with that we've tried to articulate what are those direct city expenses what are those staff expenses to council member gustafson's point um the guidance provides that staff time that has been substantially dedicated to responding to the pandemic are eligible so what that means is that our payroll costs a significant portion of our payroll costs now follow within that acceptable expenditure guidelines so with that we would ask for counsel the consideration on this plan does it meet your kind of goals and expectations for how we would uh prioritize cares if there's any changes you'd like to see or further discussion happy to do that or if you'd like to this to come back at a future date as well council members we're going to be coming together here um in about the 25th to look at our uh max tax for that we need to vote on in september so i think we need to take a look at the budget first and what we have here according to staff is um meets the federal guidelines my my um conversations with our city managers that i want to make sure that when we come to with a single audit that we are in compliance with everything with the federal government so that we don't have any problems when we have to do the audit and so this is the reason why i'm saying let's wait on some of the other discussions with regard but the budget needs to be adopted and so they're getting more and more information from the department of revenue on what is federally accepted council member keeley thank you madam mayor to address city manager's question as far as the priorities the burnsville cares business and nonprofit grant program is the number one priority number two is direct city expenditures et cetera i'm comfortable with that priority list and the estimates that we are looking at nothing is firmed up yet but i'm i'm in agreement with the priority list and the estimates that are presented so far no qualms there okay uh council member gus simpson yeah i'm good with it as well okay council member schultz that is my priority list yes got the member workmen i am in agreement with my colleagues this is looks good okay very good okay uh so um you and staff have direction to just move forward with what it has been presented presented and then we'll continue on india madam mayor we will continue to work on the 2021 budget and as we've mentioned it in the past this is kind of an ongoing iteration and the numbers continue to evolve so we will continue to do these regular updates as well as our budget uh work session later this month okay very good so next thank you madam mayor members of the council i don't have any slides to share with you i just have some information that is current as of noon today so um we have received 22 applications for our grant program totaling 416 000 um we have three grants that were less than 20 000 our marketing efforts uh last week were pretty intense we mailed out 2 900 postcards to our businesses our business list we sent out email lists to several different groups including some of the biggest i'll call them landlords but commercial property owners that have tenants letting them know to share this information with their tenants social media and our stats on our social media digital marketing combined so we've bought some paid ads on some popular websites that you may have seen places you go and we've made 97 000 impressions with our grant program and we've received 200 clicks or 200 folks that went to the website so they they not only saw the advertising digitally but then they took the next step and clicked that they wanted to learn more so we're off to a good start and we'll continue to do marketing as long as the application process is open for folks we have received several questions of course in the first week so we have updated our faq to try to keep folks informed and to reduce the amount of phone calls that we're getting and so folks can self-serve and know up front what's needed generally from what i've heard things are going well we've received a range of comments i think as you have too from this application process is easy thank you to this is challenging why are you asking for all of this information so we've received the whole gamut of comments on the process this evening i'm looking for some direction from you on a couple of items and the first one has to do with the number of grants per business so we have a couple applicants and there's probably more to come where they own multiple kind of related businesses and let me give you a scenario so we may have a restaurant that owns their building and their building may be in kind of their real estate holding company that's based in burnsville and the restaurant may leave space from their land holding company that's a second business and then their business may be a catering company that runs out of that kitchen so they could have three different businesses in in burnsville at that one location you know my goal based on your comments is to keep this as open as possible so other grant programs have restricted it to one per business one separate and distinct businesses certainly have have have come up as a potential but i want to check in with you and see what your thoughts are if you want it wide open so anybody can apply their business as a business as a business or do you want to put a restriction on it two per related business or the businesses have to be separate and distinct which means we can look at them and if they're kind of related maybe the real estate holding company one in that example wouldn't apply but the other two would something like that but just looking for some guidance for you and kind of the number per related business and i'll stop there before i get into my other so question uh these businesses if i understand correctly just using your example are also filed separately with the irs so they have different ein numbers and tax numbers so that they would be separate and i would say that that business would be a legitimate business but we're not looking at all of it it may be owned by one or two individuals but it's a separate business exactly and so i would suggest to the council that we look at the businesses separately and not the owner of the business because they are filed separately as an llc or an s-corp or so or something of that sort uh council member keeley thank you madam mayor uh i would agree the the example that i thought of is there's a lot of circumstances where a person might own multiple restaurants and we had a gentleman in town some years ago that had i think three restaurants um and it's possible that he was the sole or maybe he and a partner were the sole owners of all three but there were three very separate uh establishments and i wouldn't want to penalize the successful owner precovid for having multiple locations during covid by saying sorry you have three separate restaurants or bars or whatever but since you own all three you're only allowed to have one loan i mean there's three businesses the ownership doesn't seem to matter to me there's three separate businesses that are suffering individually there's three separate uh grant applications in my mind so i would i would concur with the mayor i think if they are filing their own tax return for each of those separate businesses they have the same case to make that any other single owned business would have to make they just have to meet our standards and it's simple so but it's members of the council your thoughts council member gustafsson um i agree with my colleagues but but i have a clarification are real estate holdings part of what will do this so the landlord the buildings can now come in and file for grants ms faulkner members of the council yes you did not prohibit those types of businesses i went on to be sure because i think at one time it was out and i just correct and and um you know for those of us that are um reviewing this and and making the best open-ended judgment calls as we can we also want to make sure that we pass audit requirements and if we have someone who's a landlord verifying that their tenant themselves was current on rent it certainly can raise a question of um of it just can raise a question when the owner certifying their own business is current how does that look feel smell right we'll pass the smell test and that's why i bring that that's why i bring that to you this is a policy question if we don't get all the applications you could have one person getting 60 80 000 in grants because they happen to have these multiple entities and another business isn't set up that way i believe in council member keeley's example where they're separate businesses across town those are separate locations right and so that make that's very very clear to me but when somebody owns the real estate that their other businesses are operated of and that's a separate business and they're certifying that they're up on their rent that's kind of where the question comes up for me more than anything and i'm not saying it's it's wrong but that's where i need policy direction from you on what you would think is acceptable okay uh councilmember workman and then i'll go to councilmember show thank you i agree with jenny that is kind of a peculiar circumstance because you've got a business operating with or not operating with losses which then can't pay the rent to the other entity that owns the building but if we're if we're substantiating this with records which is the framework with which we've set um it it makes sense i'd be curious to know how many situations like that we've seen or when we get you know another couple weeks down the line um how many of those have come through other than that i agree with what's already been said if we've got individual listings with the secretary of state and we're verifying through documentation that there has been a loss i'm comfortable with what council member keeley and gustafson have said but i would be interested to see if that situation has happened that jen was just referring to or how many times it's happened rather miss faulkner did you wanted to comment on that well mayor members of council we have at least one person who submitted three applications with a very similar it's not a restaurant but they do own the land that their two businesses are and they are otherwise all the businesses are eligible they do have the right filings and everything it just certainly raises the question does it meet your your objectives of this program to have that type of an application well they do have to file file all of the financials so that's part of the reviewing documents so that's correct yeah councilman bishop uh i would ask for businesses that strike that for a business owner that has multiple businesses if we need to go to a lottery system because we have more people coming in more submissions we do not put them as one submission those are three submissions and they're in the lottery as three submissions not grouped together as one so that that would be my preference well it's a difference they're different entities they may be owned by the same person but they're different entities they have different um tax id and so forth so but it's a lottery system so maybe only one or two one gets it and not all three but yeah because i remember gustafson i was just gonna it's not uncommon in the restaurant business and actually many other businesses that the operating entity has a holding company for their real estate holdings and except it protects them if something happens to their operation that they don't lose their real estate and so on and so forth and in the restaurant business also if you're on a catering company it's not unusual to have that separate because if that fails you don't want to take down the restaurant so it's a tax thing that protects the investors and what they're doing and everything but i but i do think sometimes you know if you're if you're going to kind of pile on and just i mean you have some people out there that can come in for a hundred you'll go wait why not yeah but we do have a lottery system we do and they and uh we do have more times my name's in that lottery the better chance i get to get right our application process is simple but they do have to meet that standard council member keeley thank you madam mary well i think to to miss faulkner's point and council member gusman gustafsons and even my example i think the spirit of this is really different locations not entities all condensed into one building and one location you know which is the actual business and which is just you know tax motivated segregation of the business um and so for me in my mind it's always been really the locations like a single owner having you know a place a b c d in different addresses maybe they're in the same strip center they still have different addresses and they're different you know different types of businesses so i i would i i mean i think the lottery system helps balance that but i do i do see the concern and agree that um it wasn't meant to be um you know a conglomerate all located at the same in the same building where it's highly integrated within the same really the same establishment all right so yeah miss faulconer is that clear then is that we're going to uh because as long as they file they send us their financials and they have different ein numbers it's a legitimate business no i i think what i'm saying madam mayor is that separation is there yeah um i mean for the for tax reasons or separate ein but we're also looking for separate locations uh so separate physical addresses and so we i think we can avoid that compiling of multiple you know uh corporations all with the exact same address all with the same you know like all the businesses right there yeah um i think to to ms faulkner's point that isn't necessarily the spirit of but the question is can we create a program that has a filter for that right i don't know so what you're saying is that if you have a an entity that owns the strip center but they have a restaurant there and within the restaurant is their catering service yeah that's to me that's it's it's the catering and it's the restaurant but it's not necessarily the building okay so is that clear then council yes i'm miss faulconer madam mayor members of the council um i did talk to city attorney jam nick about this when this application came in so we haven't deterred anyone from applying we let them apply we're in the process of reviewing it and one thing we can use is is add to our clarification the faq is that they're separate and distinct businesses yeah now you're going to have to trust me and joel that we review these to make them separate and distinct but the whole point of that is is we don't i don't want us to have to pay back any money right yeah in an audit that's that's also the goal here and so when something kind of looks peculiar maybe something that we're we're not used to seeing um um it just it just raises the question and so um joel had suggested if we use language separate and distinct and so when something does come in it can it will be left up to interpretation and we do have in our acknowledgement forms that we can reject an application for any reason we will certainly let the applicant know why we're rejecting them and perhaps if there's a separate round they then we can change that determination depending on the outcome but um if you're comfortable using separate and distinct businesses it follows the business not the owner it has to do with all the businesses are related okay come to my bikini you you write your secretary yeah that's a good way i think describing it and trying to get to what we're trying to get to yeah councilmember gustafson uh oh did i separate and distinct yes separately i'm sorry yes okay councilmember schultz has a thumbs up uh councilmember workman separate and distinct okay with you you're here okay okay thank you very much i'll move on real quick um we also have the request before you tonight from the ymca to add them as an eligible non-profit business under kind of track yeah with the other three correct and so you have that letter and you've received the resolution to um we'd have to amend the previous resolution that we adopted to include them but in addition to that i also have we also have received an inquiry about other nonprofits and you talked about this a couple weeks ago when we talked about kind of the framework and the variety of nonprofits from churches i think came up and other groups and decided not to include a blanket non-profit we wanted to be very specific about which ones provided known and a lot of support to our community so i'm comfortable responding to that question but i wanted to bring it up to you in case you wanted to include more profits you make more non-profits and you may get more requests for them maybe you save them for a future round i'm just looking for direction on the nonprofits uh government i'm okay at looking other at other non-profits after we figure out what we need to do here in the city if there's money available to help out but i think it's paramount that we get this under control for our budgets that are coming up and figure out just what we have in that area and and as far as the y going on is just part of the three that can apply i'm fine as that's part of the resolution but i don't want to just throw open until we know where we're at with money right now because we just we don't okay anybody else any other thoughts shall we leave it the way it is add the y into the other three and then we'll um the other part is the hospital we can wait for the hospital until after we take a look at our needs in the city because we we it's now extended 90 days no matter mayor the the non-profits would go through the application process similar to the business grant program for the hospital that is carved out separately in the cares act and that could be a direct allocation as far as the extension that has not been um allowed for cities to have an extension so our our timeline remains november 15th november 15th and that is when we have to release the money if we are going to be um looking at the hospital's requests as of today's guidance that is a true statement so um right now the hospital is asking uh for 161 thousand so and we need to make sure that we take care of the citizens of burnsville i agree okay uh were you asking for yes feedback yeah if everybody subconscious member key leader um i'm oh i'm perfectly okay with the ymca request to go as the other non-profits and i'm perfectly fine supporting our fairview doing it today or in the in the near near future um and i'm hoping and encouraging that all the communities that they've reached out to will do the same because collectively uh we can each put a uh a contribution toward helping that hospital um you know they and i did want to ask for some clarification the fairview system has received um significant and substantial amounts of money but that's they have they have facilities all over the whole right twin cities i'm really interested in what our burnsville burnsville fairview ridges hospital has received and what they have incurred in costs and losses so we can get a handle on not that our hundred 160 000 is going to make their day but it's going to help and if every community contributes something in that neighborhood depending on their uh the amount of activity they get from those communities it's it's definitely going to add up to a lot and it'll it'll make a difference for him i did ask miss muscoli to reach out to her colleagues um in our south metro area and see what their discussion is about and whether they're going to be uh considering mhealth bridges request and i'd like to have that information and i also want to know how much of the 128 million was allocated to m health bridges right just to the right so we understand that they're supporting m health uh bridges i'm trying to get used to um um health rather than that fairview bridges yeah comes from my shows yeah before we take action on anything with the hospital i would like to see that information just so we know what it is and and that type of thing i think that's important that we get that information both are other communities contributing um how much of that larger portion of karex money that they got how many how much of that went into into our fairview and what are the economic impacts that they're they're facing and perhaps if that information also got out to the other communities they would be more likely to assist yeah i think they sent the letter that we received um councilman schultz is the same letter i think that they might have sent out to the other communities as well but i'm not quite sure if the amount is the same that they sent to us because each community is has a different cares act allocation right yeah so miss muscoli and you're going to have that conversation with your colleagues indeed madam mayor um councilmember workman would like to provide a comment okay councilmember workmen okay the benefit of going last is that you've all covered essentially what i was seeking i just like to urge our neighboring communities to get involved to assist fairview and ask that melody get in touch with their peers maybe we could find a way to work with our neighboring communities and create a number amongst all of us that is helpful you know by working and collaborating with their programs that they've established as well okay it seems like um the clerk has uh there's a unanimous understanding that our city manager will reach out and that will also get some information on the 127 million and how much was allocated to m health bridges okay jenny manny may are members of the council if i could have a motion to adopt the resolution um that would include the amended resolution thank you for the amended resolution for eligible costs up to thousand dollars that would treat them the same as the other now may i have a motion to adopt the amended resolution uh putting uh the ymca into the other three non-profits may i have a emotional proof council member keeley makes the motion i will second second by councilmember schultz the clerk take the role please council member gustafsson aye mayor couts aye councilmember keeley aye council councilmember schultz yes councilmember workman hi okay it's unanimous uh miss faulkner is there anything else no matta mayor thank you very much and i'll be back at my next opportunity if i've got more questions so i also have one question that i'd like to bring before us and this has to do with if an individual because we talked about it but i wanted to be clear about it does not live in burnsville or does not live in the state of minnesota 51 of the time i think it's the business that we are interested in saving and it doesn't matter whether that individual lives in minnesota 51 percent of the time or 49 of the time miss faulconer madame are members of the council um the way our program is set up it does not use the language permanent resident it just says it has to be a resident of minnesota so that means they have to have a house here yeah um we don't particularly care how long they stay here okay right and but as long as they have a residence here i was asked that question so i wanted to make sure that it's they just have to have a resident in minnesota councilman schultz on that particular issue um i care about where they're where the business is located yeah oh and burnsville has to be in burnsville right no but like that's it like for me that's what i care about um perhaps i i don't know yeah no that is the requirement of our grant application is that the business has to be a burnsville business she's referring to the residence at all making any residents the requirement that if they own a business here we really don't care where they live that's right even if they don't have a residence here in burnsville they could live in scottsdale arizona but own a business here and run it and visit it and that still should be qualified we have quite a few businesses in this city that are in burnsville but the owner lives outside of burnsville yeah and even outside of minnesota in some cases but has a resident in minnesota miss faulconer madden members of the council the challenge with having ownership living purely outside of the state is that they may be eligible for other cares programs in their state that we may not be able to to track and then things get complicated so it's it's much easier to administer and get the money out the door quickly if we know that they're in the in the state we're able to verify those other cares funding sources through the state of minnesota um like just like just like we could but dakota county uh locally it's just um and and that's following the guidance that the deed adopted when they adopted their program in the county that's that's why we honed in on that because one of our hospitality facilities in burnsville the owner i think lives in savage madam mayor that's yes and that's fine yes i live in savage we have one i think that lives in uh southwestern part of the united states but also has a home here in minnesota and yes and that's fine too so yeah and that's what i just wanted to make sure it's clear for those who are watching this evening okay councilmember gustafsson and then councilmember keeley are we done with this subject here i don't know okay then i have mine's for next another subject is yours for this subject yes okay council member keeley pressure button again i'm curious uh miss faulkner my glasses keep fogging up i know so while i'm talking i'm gonna take it off and i'll put it back on if i lived in scottsdale arizona and owned a bar restaurant here how would i be able to apply for cares funding in arizona when i don't have a business out there i just have a business here madam mayor members of the council as i understand it each governmental entity can create their own parameters for their own cares program so they could potentially allow a business owner that has a business located outside their jurisdiction to receive funds it's not a federal requirement that would be i could see where it's a possibility i think it's a stretch to say that a city would i mean look at it from our perspective oh we have somebody that lives in burnsville and they own the business in scottsdale and they apply for our grant program to fund the business and i mean clearly we're not gonna i mean common sense would dictate you're not gonna do that but yeah but we have no control over the common sense of other cities that right okay but we do have our standards in place in our policy with regard to that councilmember schultz i understand that there might be difficulty in ascertaining if they've received cares money from another place could we not have them sign an affidavit that they have not received cares money and then if they do that's a fraudulent action on their behalf we've done our due diligence yeah miss falcon madame members of the council i'm going to need some help from the city attorney here on answering this question and i think our staff can take a look at that uh controversials and make sure that uh our standards out policy addresses those issues we put a language like that in the agreements yeah then i see no problem with allowing as long as the business is here even if they do not own a home in the state of minnesota with allowing them to apply that's how i look at it but i need the rest of council to say how they're viewing it okay i agree i don't think it's a concern i guess we're deferring i mean i i think there's enough vetting involved that if the business is here i don't really care where they live they own the business that's here they're filing minnesota tax returns uh for that business that's here and paying minnesota taxes et cetera their residents can be in europe for all i care i mean the business is here yeah and we're we're saving the business and the jobs yeah okay councilmember gustafson it it's about this one or that's another subject well i was just going to say you can incorporate your business in another state and do a dba in minnesota and yeah your corporate taxes will go out state that happens a lot they'll pay some tax here on the entity but they can put it all together but that's uh so yeah there is there are those that can be in the they could be in the virgin islands and put a business here and avoid paying anything avoid paying any taxes any taxes on the state for example that's why that's why they incorporate some of these states yeah that'd be a stretch okay it's not a stretch at all it's all the time well i know so miss popping are you clear with what you're hearing um members of the council if you want to allow non-residents of the state um then we need to further amend the resolution because that was a criteria in the resolution that you had adopted when you created this program so i believe we have the flexibility to do that under the program because it lets us decide for many things how you want your program to be so if that's okay with you then i would just ask that we further amend the resolution where we included the y to also strike the requirement for a majority owned by a resident of minnesota from our program council member gustafsson oh did i not turn that off and i apologize okay councilmember schultz steal this uh this idol i will now know that you won the next item is yours i motion to amend that the applicant does not need to be have a residence in the state of minnesota to apply a second um there's a motion in a second and there is a discussion council member workman thank you so we're we're saying that the individual does not need to live here doesn't need to have a residence in the state of minnesota but would just need to be the primary owner of the business um if it's a partnership well i guess that's moot point um again i'd be curious to know if we've run into this and in a couple weeks if this is something that um it'd be nice to quantify if this is something that is some uh if this exists frequently in burnsville i'm just not aware of this um so i apologize that's not really a question um i just needed some clarification on that okay and you know there's a motion already on the floor to amend the resolution to say that this is about the business and the resident of the owner does is doesn't matter then it is i guess it is about the business is it about the employees um and all that other stuff and i would hope that um if there are other states implementing programs like this they would have some type of check that they're not awarding money to business owners that live in arizona for you know a business domiciled in burnsville um but again i don't know that we have a way of checking that so i think we only have control of what we do right and we already have um policies in place to address the because it is about the business and they're going to be sharing their financials yep okay thank you okay so the motion on the floor is to amend uh the resolution to include oh to say that the resident of the owner doesn't necessarily have to be in the state of minnesota are you are you okay with the amendment i am um right now but again i'd like to know if this is something that we've bumped into if we were you know review this at our next council meeting okay we're going to be taking a vote here i'm going to ask the clerk uh to take the role okay are you ready i'm ready okay it's a cloak please take the roll council member gustafson no mayor coutts aye councilmember keeley aye councilmember schultz yes councilmember workman aye okay and the clerk has a division of the house thank you so much all right council member gustafson we're moving to the next item well it's not the next item well that's the next item within the cares act it's something that is under the program jenny you have to have been in business by the end of 2019 to qualify for this program am i correct in that oh yeah thank you for bringing that forward the mayor members of the council um no you had to have been in good standing with the department of revenue and the state as of march first so much first okay the reason i bring it up i was thinking about los grandes over here the poor guy was open two weeks and got closed down and i'm not sure what point he was actually in business and well he was pre-coped because i was there for lunch before then yeah then it shut down okay so so if they're in good standing as of march 1st they're good all right that's thank you i feel much better about that okay and that's good because i i've forgotten that you need to check on that and and i remember pre covered going in for for lunch so it's march march 1st yeah okay that's so good is there anything else miss faulconer on the cares act madame members of the council no i have nothing else miss muscovy is there anything else i don't believe so madam mayor unless there are further questions by the council okay um members of the council are you okay with what we have done tonight with the update on the on covet 19. okay uh come to my shows uh on the other non-profits i would like to just keep that open um for evaluation i know that our time is short but depending on how our funds are the number of businesses that apply and that type of thing i would like to keep that up because we do have some really fantastic non-profits in burnsville that are servicing our communities in so many different ways which also includes some of our adult day programs for developmental disabilities and and that type of work and so they're also really struggling and at the same time that we have people with increased needs so just not saying we take any action tonight just saying we keep this open and this is something i would like for for further evaluation probably at our next council meeting well i i think we talked about that we will evaluate after we do the budget yep and do the max tax for 2021. councilmember keeley thank you madam mayor i just want to point out one um some verbiage that i thought was a little um could be interpreted in the wrong way and earlier city manager lee sent some language that she pulled from the deed addressing this and i think we have a fix for it so i just wanted to note that item 6 under our eligible businesses where its states may include businesses that have applied for received other covert related federal funding such as the small business administration economic disaster loan or paycheck protection plan and that's followed by note only federally qualified unreimbursed expenses are eligible and my my um issue with this is it's using the idle loan in the example and it's okay that a person did get an idea loan and a paycheck protection or even an idle loan advance which was a grant much like the ppp is a forgivable loan and so i think the language that city manager lee came up with helps clarify that where this might this this might send a person who did qualify for night alone thinking oh well i already i got that funding and that was all of my expenses for the year so i don't have anything left unreimbursed per se but the idle loan is treated differently because it is a loan that has to be paid back and carries an interest rate it is not a grant as our program is or as deeds was or as ppp is turning out to be right so thank you to the city manager for getting that new language okay with that uh staff come to member of the council member ms faulconer if i can um to council member keeley's question um the language that we have is coming from the federal guidance and so again thinking of the audit if someone's receiving federal funds for the same expense they can only get that one time whether it was a loan or grant is our understanding so we can change the language on the faq but um i'll use the term double dipping you know is is prohibited under the the federal regulations and so um we just want to be cautious about what we're approving for with someone who has already received funds so that we don't end up in a situation where we have to pay the money back because we didn't do our due diligence on that part so that's good i always want to make sure that we are in compliance with the federal regulations because that single audit is very important and i don't want it to have a direct impact on our aaa bond rating i'm going to be very vigilant about making sure we don't get uh into trouble with that because it's important to the uh residents and and businesses of burnsville that we continue to hold that triple a bond rating okay so are you okay with the the way that the language is because it meets federal guidelines council member keely yeah the recommendation that uh city manager lee sent me i think was much better in clarifying it and i think to ms faulkner's point it might be beneficial to to really vet out that um that qualifier that includes the idle loan not the idle grant but the idle loan because it many businesses went after ppp and an idol loan as well so they can be combined but one does not discount the other and for all the same reasons the clarity really is the idle loan doesn't actually ask for the types of specific hard expenses it's really looking at a more higher level umbrella of was your business negatively impacted by covet a you know a governor's order to shut down or just people stopped shopping or stopped eating and and it asks for your total years revenue and your total years gross profit and then they asked for a tax return and they basically plugged in a formula and gave you an offer for a loan which has to be paid back at a 3.75 percent interest rate over a period of time either 15 or 30 years which is a very good program but that was very very separate from grant related type stuff like the idle grant which was up to ten thousand or even deeds grant you said if you if you got the idle grant for ten you can't come to us for ten so it was very grant to grant tied together but the idle loan was not really part of that qualifier because many businesses got both a bpp loan which is going to be a forgivable loan and they also got an idle loan right alongside it madam mayor okay uh miss muscoli yeah madam mayor and council we we've crafted the program to be as broad as we can under federal guidelines so we would be certain that whatever vetting is done by ellers that it complies with those federal guidelines regardless of the specific program parameters that's ultimately what we want to make sure is that we're not subject to any um clawback of any of the funds that have been distributed to a business so with if that's a clear expectation by the council then we can perhaps massage the language in there to for to council member keeley's point all understanding that we need to comply with those federal guidelines that's the that's the foundation of it okay everybody is okay if there's nothing else uh to come before the uh body this evening oh council member workman indicated he wanted one more comment please this is the reason why i need the city manager next to me because i'm trying to manage the diet i said to the same time she's helping okay uh yes councilmember workman i won't drag this on but i just wanted to mention how proud i am of this program this is a very friendly program probably the most friendly program in the state and um you know we talk about boldly leading um in fact at our last meeting greg had made a comment that has kind of resonated with me that um that we should be proud of this and i just wanted to make sure that we all recognize that that we're really here trying to help businesses and this is good work we're doing okay members of the council if there's nothing else or any other comments on this particular item a motion to adjourn is an order move to adjourn councilmember keeley makes the motion second second by council member schultz the clerk please take the role councilmember gustafsson aye mayor couts aye council member keeley aye council member schultz yes councilmember workmen hi okay very good and we stand adjourned thank you for joining us and have a good night you