I know. I do. >> Just like that. You're by call to order the Roseville City Council meeting for Monday, September 8th, 2025. Mr. your city manager. Would you call the role, please? >> Council member Grath >> here. >> Council member Strong >> here. >> Council member Schroeder >> here. >> Council member Bower >> here. >> Mayor Row >> here. Uh and with us at the uh table we have uh by way of introductions our city attorney Rachel Tierney who's down the way around the corner from me on my right and city manager Pat Trean who's on the other end of the table on my left. We also will have other uh staff and guests participating in the meeting and those introductions will be made as the meeting proceeds. I would want to remind folks if you have a cell phone to be sure to silence it or otherwise assure that it doesn't disrupt the meeting this evening. Um do want to also note just from the point of view of housekeeping that we do have uh extra copies of the meeting agenda on the back table underneath the clock by the back door which are available uh for your use to consult during the meeting to keep track of what we're doing. Uh we also do have a a bound copy of all the meeting materials that are before the council uh and being considered this evening uh which is available to share amongst the members of the public uh at the back table as well. Uh and I talked about cell phones. Uh we'll talk about public comment as we get to that portion of the meeting and and the rules of the road for that. Uh but otherwise, if you're able, please stand for the pledge of allegiance. 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. [Music] >> Next on our agenda then is approval of tonight's agenda. And I'll check with staff. Are there any changes from a staff perspective this evening? >> No changes, Mr. Mayor. >> All right. I'll check with the council. Are there any items that the council wishes to change on the agenda this evening or one of our four items on the consent that might want to be removed for a separate consideration? >> No, does not appear to be the case. Uh and I will make a check with the public as well on those items in section 10 of our agenda at the bottom of the page, what's called our consent agenda. Those four items typically are taken up as a single motion. Uh they're usually felt to be fairly administrative and hopefully non-controversial in nature and they're at the end of the meeting. Uh but if you happen to be here to ask a question or make a comment on one of those items in section 10, uh this would be the chance to let us know uh and we'll move that item earlier in the meeting uh so that you can uh not have to stay to the end if you do uh have a comment or question on one of those items. Is there anyone here for an item in section 10 of tonight's agenda, also known as the consent agenda, items 10 A through 10 D. does not appear to be the case. Um, that means we have an agenda. Then is there a motion to approve the agenda as presented? >> So moved. >> Second. >> Moved by council member Sher, seconded by council member Strong to approve the agenda as presented. No discussion, I imagine. Uh, hearing none. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. Opposed. That passes unanimously. We have our agenda for this evening. That then brings us to our first opportunity for public comment this evening. Uh during the course of the meeting, as agenda items come up, we'll have opportunities for members of the public to speak on those items. Uh but we also at the start of each meeting want to provide an opportunity for general public comment uh from members of the public on items that are not on tonight's agenda, but may either be of interest to people in the community or be related to city business. And so we'll check now. Is there anybody here to speak under general public comment on items that are not on tonight's agenda? >> I'd like to ask a question if I could. >> Question. Um it it is an item on the agenda so it probably isn't proper but um you have an item considering beekeeping. >> Yes. >> And there are some of us here would like to talk about it and >> we will provide an opportunity for you to be able to do that. >> Well it's just it was like an hour away. We're using >> Yeah. You're unfortunately we'll try to move as quickly as we can but that's kind of what we we've thought it might time out at. >> All right. >> All right. So, right, if no one is here for general public comment and just to clarify for members of the public that may be watching at home, we had a question about whether uh comment could be made about an agenda item under the general public comment uh at that time and and uh that will not be available. Uh but we will make sure and move the meeting along as I said with that. Then uh we have uh next on our agenda a couple of recognitions and donations items. Uh these are proclamations. Uh the first proclamation relates to Hispanic Heritage Month. Uh and I'll read the proclamation and then uh it would be appropriate to have a motion from the council to approve that proclamation. The proclamation reads as follows. Whereas from September 15th to October 15th, National Hispanic Heritage Month is observed to celebrate the heritage, history, traditions, and cultural diversity of Hispanic Americans whose heritage is rooted in Spain, Mexico, Central and South America, and the Caribbean, including uh countries such as Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, uh Panama, Colombia, Venezuela, Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, Paraguay, uh Chile, Argentina, Uruguay, Cuba, Puerto Rico, and the Dominican Republic. And whereas the national observation began in 1968 as Hispanic Heritage Week, and was expanded in 1988 when the US Congress adopted a resolution designating September 15th through October 15th of each year as National Hispanic Heritage Month. And whereas this heritage month is celebrated mid September to mid-occtober to highlight the independence of several countries. September 15th is the date that five Latin American countries celebrate their independence from Spain. Those being Costa Rica, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Guatemala, and Honduras, and Mexico celebrates its independence on September 16th and Chile on September 18th. And whereas the Hispanic community has profound influence on our country through their strong commitment to family, faith, culture, and they have enhanced uh and shaped our national heritage with centuries old traditions that reflect the multithnic and multicultural customs of their communities. And whereas during National Hispanic Heritage Month, the United States celebrates the culture and traditions of Spanish-sp speakaking uh residents who trace their roots to those countries and areas. And whereas the city of Roseville invites all members of the community to celebrate 2025 Hispanic Heritage Month with the theme collective heritage, honoring the past, inspiring the future. This theme highlights the importance of recognizing the rich history, diverse achievements, and ongoing contributions of Hispanic and Latin uh Latina community, Latino communities, uh while also looking forward to their future impact and influence. Now therefore be resolved that the city of Roseville hereby proclaim September 15th to October 15, 2025 to be Hispanic Heritage Month in the city. >> So moved. >> Second. >> All right. It's been moved by Council Member Strong, second by Council Member Grath to adopt that proclamation. Any discussion on the motion? >> Appreciate ongoing contributions to our city from the people in this and many other um populations. >> There's no other discussion. We have the motion before us to adopt that proclamation. All those in favor signify by saying I. I opposed. >> That passes unanimously. And that proclamation is adopted. Our second proclamation this evening uh is related to Constitution Week in uh in the nation. and we would invite representatives of the Daughters of the American Revolution uh local group to have a seat uh and introduce yourself and uh make a few remarks uh in in discussion of the uh recognition of Constitution Week uh and any uh relation to what is being done this year. >> Mr. Mayor and members of the council, my name is Kelly Ferguson and I am the current president of the Harriet G. Walker chapter and we cover a number of cities in the northern suburbs. Our members live in Roseville as well as you know Shore View, New Brighton, White Bear, etc. I I just was going to make a few comments that it's a Constitution Week is important for the D and the D was instrumental in getting it to be a national celebration. I don't know if you knew that that this year is the 70th anniversary of Constitution Week. The a past president general of the national organization was responsible for the annual designation of September 17th to 23rd as constitution week. First the D made its own resolution for constitution week which was adopted in 1955. Then the United States Congress received the D resolution and it was discussed in Senate and the House uh to observe it and it was passed by both houses of Congress and President Eisenhower issued his proclamation on August 19th, 1955. So there's a little bit about the history and so every year we do what we can to get the word out about the importance of the Constitution. Last year we had um something for seniors. I'm a retired chaplain working with senior adults and uh we had a constitution celebration at a senior building. But this year we're going to have a constitution fair at the Shore View Library. Uh on se uh Sunday, September 21st from 12 to 5:00. There'll be uh there's going to be a video playing of about you know colon the colonial times and the writing of the constitution um educational information and colonial treats. So that's what we're planning this year as well as trying to get some proclamations from the the cities where our members live. And I have a few brochures of our chapter and I have some bookmarks that have the preamble of the constitution on them. So I can leave those for you to look at. >> Sure, Mr. Treasure. >> Okay. >> Thank you very much. Thank you for being here and and the work that the D does to remind people people about the Constitution. It's hard to believe that we have to remind ourselves of these things, but uh it is definitely important. So we appreciate that work. Again, we do have the proclamation here and so we'll uh I'll read it and then ask for a motion to approve it. And then after we presumably approve it, we don't know. The vote hasn't been taken yet, but uh don't want to presume anything, but uh then we'll have just a quick break for some photos. Uh with that, the pro the proclamation reads as follows. Whereas September 17th, 2025 marks the 238th anniversary of the drafting of the United States Constitution uh by the Constitutional Convention. And whereas it is fitting and proper to accord official recognition to this magnificent document and its memorable anniversary and to the patriotic celebrations which will commemorate the occasion. And whereas public law 915 guarantees the issuing of a proclamation each year by the president of the United States designating September 17th through 23rd as Constitution Week. Now therefore be resolved. The city of Roseville hereby declares September 17th through 23rd to be Constitution Week in the city and urges all to reaffirm the ideals of the framers of the Constitution in in 1787 by vigilantly protecting the freedoms guaranteed through its guardian through this guardian of our liberties remembering the lost rights may never be regained. Uh and that's in the city of Roseville. >> So moved. >> Second. It's been moved by uh council member Schroeder, seconded by council member Grath to approve that proclamation. Any discussion on the motion? I just do want to note that on the way in I noted the uh constitution uh recognition monument that we have out front of city hall here uh which was placed a number of years ago and actually went into storage for a while and then was brought back out and refurbished. And I noted that it may be in need of some more refurbishment again because it's very difficult to read. Uh so we may want to uh use this opportunity to see if we can rededicate our effort our efforts to uh restoring that monument as well with Oh, Council Member Strong, >> I would like to affirm if you don't know the uh jingle that goes with this. Every child from a certain age knows this as the Constitution song. So I would encourage if you don't know it, it really gets stuck in your head and you will know it forever. Um so which is I'm sitting singing now as I look at this. So I'm thankful for this because I think it's really important for everyone to remember how this wasn't a accident. This was very intentional writing and very intentional process that went um into making sure that our country was rooted in these um values. >> We should probably do give credit where credit is due to the Schoolhouse Rock folks for that. >> That's what I meant. >> That song. Yes. So certainly >> definitely look it up. >> Those who grew those who grew up in that era. I mean, if you have to answer a question about the preamble of the Constitution, you know exactly what >> you just have to get there. Just a second. I'm not there yet. Go through the Yeah, exactly. All right. Well, with that, if there's no further discussion, uh all those in favor signify by saying I. I opposed. That passes unanimously and rightfully so. Uh and I will go ahead and sign the uh document here. And we'll have a couple of photos. So, we'll just take a quick break. Hey, why don't we uh >> Do you want to move the chairs out of the way out of here? >> Just out of the center. >> Okay. >> You want me to come up there? >> Yes. >> Yes. >> He was going to take pictures, but >> please come to the center. >> Yeah, you can be here cuz she's going to receive. >> Yes. >> Yeah, we should. >> So, everybody good? >> Okay, perfect. Okay. One, two, three. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> And thank you. >> Thank you, ma'am. >> Feel free to stick around for this. >> Oh, that one's yours. >> I'm so sorry. >> That's all right. >> Before we start. >> Is this one yours? >> I don't know. >> I think so. >> It's fine. >> Not soon enough. >> If it's mine, it goes off. It's warm. >> You think it's mine? >> No. No. No. What? We >> all right. >> I don't know if we officially I'm not sure we did either went off for the break, but we're back for a break, I presume. And returning to our regularly scheduled agenda here. Uh we don't have any items removed from consent. And that brings us then to our business/d discussion items for this evening. We have three of those. Our first one is item 7A uh which is to consider uh an ordinance imposing regulations on excavations within uh so many feet of existing foundations. And we have our community development director Janice Gunllock as well as our building official David England with us this evening uh to discuss this proposed ordinance possibility. I guess I'll put uh and I'll turn it over to them uh for the presentation. >> Thank you, mayor, members of the council. Uh we're gonna kind of tag team this presentation, but I'll start off. Although I am curious about what a colonial treat is. >> Have to go to the event to find out. >> I guess I will have to tease. >> Uh so just a little bit of background information. Residents of the Enclave Homeowners Association have requested this ordinance. Um it would protect existing foundations within close proximity of new excavations. Um they are concerned about protecting the foundations of their newly constructed homes from construction activities at the remaining undeveloped lots. Um this development was approved with 10 ft setbacks between homes and the status of the Enclave buildout is still in flux. Um there are 20 total lots. Uh 11 are constructed homes. Two of those are in foreclosure. One is currently under construction. Three lots are vacant and in foreclosure. and three lots um are vacant with a bank/investor owner. I think this is you Dave. >> Okay. Um so the proposed ordinance would require a registered design professional to decide if mitigations are necessary or needed when an excavation occurs within close proximity of an existing foundation. Um the examples of mitigations could be underpinning, sheeting or shoring, uh bracing. Um and currently the residential building code only addresses the need for these if there are readily ele readily evident reasons. It's bad soils or other site conditions that would require it. Um and if there is a city ordinance, it would need to be provided with enough clarity for staff to enforce it citywide, not just at the enclave. Um these are pictures of setbacks typical of residential homes throughout the city as well as um some conditions that brought this um discussion to the council for this at the Enclave in the upper left. Um under the building code, cities cannot um enact regulations that are different from the building code. Um when we first contacted the state building official um he confirmed that and said that they the state would not support the city adopting an ordinance such as this. Um after the last discussion that the council had with it, we reached back out to them and his position did change um stating that the city could adopt it because it is technically different because current state code deletes it. the provisions that allow this type of ordinance. Um, but when he did that, he also moved it forward for um adoption into the state code through a tag group, which was relatively quick. It was under two weeks, I think, from the time that was submitted, which is really fast um in state work. Um, but if the state language that is proposed to be adopted in the 26 building code is adopted, then the city would have to uh resend any ordinance that would be considered or adopted here. Um, and we're hopeful for the new code to come out in March of 2026. Generally, when there is a new um code adopted, there is a six-month education period that we push out to contractors and permit applicants to allow them time to adjust to the new codes. >> And this isn't obviously um readable on the slide, but we did provide the language that the state building official has provided to that technical advisory committee for them to include. And that certainly is an option if you wanted to move forward. and it is available in the materials in the back of the room for folks in the audience if they want to look that up. >> You want to take the first couple? >> That's fine. Um the city ordinance if it is adopted could be included in title 9 of city code which is building maintenance and preservation options for ordinance language provided in the packet materials. Um same similar to what is in the IBC, the international building code which is considered the commercial building code. Um, there is some language from the city of Minneapolis that has been referenced that could be added or taken from and also the state's proposed language as submitted. >> Um, moving on, we do want to note that those different language options don't really define close proximity and so we wanted to engage with you further to get some clarity. Um, the Enclave HOA has requested 10 ft. staff does support clarity mostly because we need to understand how this ordinance should be implemented citywide. Um noting 10 ft we wanted to give you an idea of the reach of such an ordinance. Um we did use GIS to um try and understand how many homes were within 10 ft of other homes throughout the city of Roseville. And I want to say this data isn't perfect. It's not survey data. It's um data used uh through aerial photography where they digitize the roof line of a home. Obviously, the roof line of the home is not the foundation line. As is typical, there's maybe a 1 and 1/2 ft overhang. So that's why if you look in the key, we used 7 to 10 ft. noting that there was some playroom um understanding the roofs. And so that impact ranges uh from 200 to 600 properties if you're interested in the 10 ft being the definition of close proximity. Um there are some new developments on here. We highlighted the enclave in the bottom right corner of the map. Um Victoria Shores is highlighted. I want to note that practically speaking that's very like unlikely to happen because those lots are pretty big and so it would be unusual for the developer to come in and ask to build a house right at the 5ft sideyard setback and then for the lot next door to also be built right at the 5ft sideyard setback but it could happen. And then there's also a twin home development. Um it's kind of hard to see here. I think it's called Dannyboy Estates right here. Um, this was approved a year or so ago and that's one where this very likely could happen. And then obviously the orange and blue parcels are existing homes that range in construction age of gosh, I don't know, the 40s on up. As is required with any new ordinance policy or procedure, we did complete the equity and inclusion toolkit. The purpose of this toolkit is to identify benefits or burdens of an ordinance. um try to understand what the unintended consequences might get might be and then are there strategies to mitigate any negative consequences and then just taking a look at what engagement efforts we've done we could do or we should do. That toolkit is provided in your packet. And as we were filling the toolkit out and understanding the ordinance language and the issue better, a bunch of sort of questions came up that we felt were important to bring forward. And because our staff needs to be able to enforce an ordinance uniformly throughout the city in a fair manner and so um I've already alluded to this with the map. It could impact hundreds of properties given the 5- foot minimum sideyard setback in our existing low density, low to medium density, and medium density residential zoning districts. Um, having a registered design professional, and that term is used in the state's preferred language, um, make a determination of vertical or lateral support, um, could add cost to these residential projects. a registered design professional, could be a structural engineer, it could be a soils engineer, those prices could be anywhere from a few thousand dollars on up. And then most determinations we think will reveal that mitigations are not warranted. Um, this is because it's not in the building code currently and our staff has had years of construction inspections and experience throughout the city and we have never come across uh an example of where this was needed. Moving on, um, the cost of a registered design professional's determination may exceed the mitigation costs. Certainly, if mitigation isn't required, that is a cost that has been expended. Um, some of the information that our inspectors have gathered is efforts to implement mitigations may actually require that excavations occur close occur even closer to those existing foundations than would otherwise be needed in order to do some of the underpinning or sheeting requirements. Um it's also interesting because uh sometimes these mitigations might not be able to be implemented within the legal property boundaries especially if those homes are right at 5 foot sideyard setbacks. So it could um evolve into the requirement of temporary construction easements. Um, another question we had is do adjacent property owners or foundation owners, because in the instance of the Enclave, this is HOA property, do they have the right to review and or approve the registered design professional? None of the language options we provided to you suggest that the impacted party gets to review that information andor approve or deny it. Um, and then uh what if that party disagrees with the opinion of the registered design professional? That's certainly something we're concerned about with the Enclave because they obviously do have concerns and just given the state of that development being in flux and they're very um concerned about the builder's reputation that could become an issue as well. Um if close proximity is 10 ft, a lot of builders will just build at setbacks of 10 feet 1 in. And we want you to understand that and just is that acceptable to you? And then um some questions we have that will help sort of understand some of these issues um is in terms of the specificity of the ordinance. Do you want it to apply to all excavations? Um excavations occur for homes, but they also occur for retaining walls or for deck footings or for those types of projects. Um do you want it to apply only for excavations for foundations? excavations for foundations of new homes or would you like it to apply to additions to existing homes? Remembering there's 200 to 600 homes currently in the community that are at those 10 foot separation where if they built an addition onto their existing foundation line that if you want it to apply to additions it could be impacted. Um do you want to apply to accessory structures, deck footings? Is the age of the adjacent foundation a concern? Obviously, the older the foundation, the more risk it potentially has as being impacted by the construction of the new foundation um just because they're not built to current code. So, if you're interested in limiting the scope and and you certainly don't have to, there are options available as is. Um how would you like to do that? Some suggestions are implementing a distance, understanding if there's a age of foundation in close proximity that's of concern. Would you like to exempt certain foundations? Um would you like us to get input from a registered design professional? We are not registered design professionals. We are not soil engineers. We are not structural engineers. And so um we've tried to examine the ways that we could limit scope. Um but we don't understand the issue fully. We don't have that expertise. And so there may be additional unintended consequences that could result by lacking that opinion. So we could certainly seek the input from someone who does this. And then would you like us to engage with additional parties and if so who this is a pretty technical issue. So just engaging with the community is probably not going to do much but there are experts that potentially could provide input. So option for next steps we can certainly just bring an ordinance forward. We've provided you some language in the packet. um we are seeking whether or not you want to limit the scope of the ordinance, whether or not you want us to engage with registered design professionals, or of course you can just wait for the state to adopt language, whether it be the language that they've currently shared with us or something else. Um staff's recommendation is we would prefer that you provide direction to limit scope defining close proximity to 10 feet clarifying the types of foundations of concern and we would like to seek input from a registered design professional. And then just as a reminder um if you do adopt an ordinance we will be required to resend it once if the state moves forward with language and that would be sometime in 2026. So, that's all we have for the presentation, but we are certainly here to try and answer questions >> and we should have to keep that up for reference as we go through the conversation here. Um, I did have a couple of clarifying questions that I wanted to ask and I'm not 100% sure if it's going to be the attorney that answers them or staff, but uh I'll put them out there and then I'll certainly open it up for counsel. Um so we do have in our uh 901 permitting section we do talk about excavating requiring permits. Um and then we of course have our whole section under public works which is our grading erosion and sedimentation control section of the code. And I was just wondering is that is that public works one sort of separate from what we're talking about here or are do both types of permits occur in these say if you're putting a foundation in on a property next to another one? >> I don't know specifically what code sections you're looking at so I'd have to look at them. Are you aware? I know engineering requires separate permits for excavations and Dave and his staff probably have better experience with that. >> It is a requirement of a building permit. If there is going to be a foundation or soil disturbance of this, it does get referred to the engineering department for an erosion control permit. >> Do they do the inspections and the the checking to make sure that it's >> and so there's sort of a little bit of back and forth because obviously your department is handling construction and probably checking foundations and things like that. So, it's a team effort, it sounds like. And I know there's these two sections of the code and that's that's why I start wondering about because you talked about where to put this and yeah, it it you know, I guess that maybe even in the 901 permitting section might be a place to put it if it's going to be a short-term thing because I was I was having trouble with some nexus with the 906 code because that really talks about building maintenance and upkeep and standards for that. So, what you know once as always if there's a suggested place that staff thinks is a good place, I always have a different one, but Be that as it may, I'm not right in that regard either. Um the one thing I just in terms of the whole idea of rescending the language, is it possible, and this is probably for the attorney, is it possible to write our language where it says um for these types of situations um state building code, which we we adopt and we we coincide with applies. Uh but if it's not regulated in state code, then these are the standards that the city has. Um that's one question in that regard. And that way we would wouldn't have to necessarily rescend it. We just obviously the the state code would supersede anything if we word it right. I wondered if that's a good way to do it or just rescend it. >> My hesitation well first of all if if if state if the state passes regulations to the extent that they are different than your regulations you will simply be preempted. Your your your ordinance won't matter. Right? So there's always the option of just leaving it be. Um, but what I'm hesitant to do is is try to um anticipate what the state might do and craft around what we're anticipating. That it's not the best way to write laws. Better would be to wait for the state to regulate and then address what they haven't regulated. And so then we can think through the analysis of whether this is different than the state and we can have the opportunity to consult with the with the state as well. um because I think their opinion about what they are regulating is important. There could be an argument that their exclusions actually also preempt any regulation by the city. So, it would really just depend on what the state did. And I would just think that if if if you pass an ordinance and the state passes a regulation, we just kind of need to look at that and figure out how the two can work together >> rather than trying to anticipate it ahead of time. Got it. Okay. And then just in the regard, you said that the state when they put their regulation in place, there's like a six-month education period before they really start seriously enforcing it. I suppose >> that is correct. >> City doesn't necessarily have that. If we put something in effect, it's in effect right away unless we specifically say it like we did for our green to go ordinance or something like that. >> Could I offer one comment to regarding your question about um how we write the ordinance and if the state adopts something versus what's in our ordinance? One thing we've talked about is if the language that the state has put forward is actually what gets passed. It's very vague in terms of when they actually require it. Dave has reached out to Minneapolis and they've given some indication about when they require it and it's it's not as simple as 10 ft. It's really a a onetoone sort of thing. And what we were talking about is that sixmonth period is really the period where cities are like, "State, this is new. What does this mean? How do you want us to enforce it?" And a lot of times the answer we get is, "Well, this is the code. You guys need to make a determination about how you want to enforce it to make sure you're in compliance." And so I could if we knew what the state was actually going to do adopt there could be an opportunity where we're sort of formulating our policy of how we would enact a vague state regulation but we don't have enough information yet to do that but it is relevant to I think the intent of what your question was. And then just my my final question is in you know and maybe it's more of a statement at this point that to me it seems like we need to understand the impact of excavation relative to a foundation that's near it. Um, and this is where I think that expertise from somebody who knows what they're talking about is is important because it was it was easy for me to sit and say, well, okay, maybe what we do is we say for every, you know, foot of the depth of the joining foundation, you you have to be, you know, if your excavation extent comes within 6 in of that for every foot. That's where the the nearby category is. in the theory that you know as you have a 10-ft foundation if you're coming within 5T with the excavation that's probably where there might be some impact but once again putting numbers to it without any education other than seeing saying what seems to be right doesn't make a lot of sense but that was just sort of a way that I was thinking of addressing it is the relative depth of the foundation versus the relative depth of the excavation that's being done and or the extent of it too because if you're just drilling a hole to put in a 4ft sono tube to put in a you a support for a deck or something. I don't know that should apply, which gets to your question about when should it apply. So, those are some of the things that were crossing my mind, but I'll be quiet now and I'll defer to the rest of the council for questions. Uh, council member Bower, >> the codes being proposed um through the TG and through uh Dolly, that's currently based on what's already in the uh commercial building code. >> Correct. >> That is correct. >> Okay. So, um >> verbatim, >> not verbatim, but that brings me to the next question. We're talking about that you're saying that this needs to be more clearer and more detailed, but you already have this problem right now on the commercial side, don't you? So, how are you resolving it there? >> In the commercial side, we do require the licensed design professional from the beginning of the project to there's an architect involved. There's there's if there's needs to be a soils engineer, there is one. We do get a soils report on every commercial project where it's needed. Um, so it's >> how you determine that need or are you saying that you always require that >> depending on the the project especially with like the multif family projects that we've had it's right from the beginning and a lot of times the architect specifies that they want the soils engineer that'll come first so they can design the foundations of the building >> in this that with that solution then what's wrong with that solution for in this case being applied in this residential case if you already have something that's working on the commercial side >> there is really the only thing is false cost and time delay on the project. >> Yeah. On the commercial side, the engineers are already involved. On the residential side, they're not. So, they would have to become involved and that's an added cost. >> And then, you know, we've talked about this about this a lot where you know, in the in the building code, it states that we cities cannot put anything that's more restrictive, right, than what's currently in the building code. But what you're asking here is for us to kind of make it more restrictive. Isn't that the case? >> It it's asking for something different. that's already in the adopted residential code. >> No, I I understand that, but let's just assume that we say, you know, let's use the mayor's example of his foot to, you know, 6 in example. If this was to be adopted or anything adopted along these lines, uh, which it looks like it will be, uh, through there, then whatever we decide decide here tonight will be mute, won't it? >> Well, we would have to, you know, resend that or whatever we decide because it's more restrictive. Well, the city attorney corrected me in the packet that the state law says if it's different than the building code, we can't do it. There's other provisions later on in that same paragraph of statute that say you can't enact something more restrictive if there are geological conditions. And so, it's slightly different, but we're bringing this forward at your request. we want to understand how to implement it. Um, and if the state enacts a standard then this either stays or or it doesn't or becomes policy. But it it as in order to be able to enact it, it does require some restrictions. If you're assuming those the ability to know how to enact it results in a restriction that's higher than what the current code is. We just don't know based on the language that's currently in the code. So, we don't know if what we're proposing is more restrictive or not. >> Kind of in a unique situation, right? because we're out ahead of this, right? Because we've known this. But in a normal scenario, we wouldn't know. I mean, we would get the updated building codes as they always come through and nothing would have happened, right? We wouldn't be out ahead of this and trying to figure out in these concerns that you have what would have happened in that scenario. Um that's the that's the six month that we would we would develop and work with the contractors involved to and the state >> and the state to see >> because the state would put out like if you will notes or working notes or guidance. Do they do such a thing that like that goes like a supplemental with the building code? times. >> Yep. They they do actually print a a supplement called a commentary to the code which is twice the size of the code which is it's very helpful uh just to kind of get to the intent of why this was put in place to get to what the state's thought is on that >> when looking at this because since this is in the commercial side of things uh what is the commentary state for that for on the commercial side for the same kind of ordinance? Um it's it's pretty vague on that as well because it's it's an accepted practice because generally commercial buildings are larger, deeper um built with more robust foundations. Um and again the licensed design professionals are on board from the beginning through the design process all the way through. So it's and can you clarify like what you mean by licensed design professional? Would that be like could an architect fulfill that? could a builder because I mean if we're talking about foundations of homes being built obviously you have an architect and a bunch of other things because you need these things in order to get permitting from us anyhow >> not from not on the residential side um a licensed uh building contractor can submit plans um they do not need to be drawn by an architect >> in that case a licensed building contractor would that be sufficient >> not in my opinion it would not it would have to be an architect or a soils engineer or a structural engineer >> according to the law state. >> I believe it is somebody who is licensed under the architect's soils and geotechnical um there's a agency within the state >> because I'm just thinking if if the licensed building or contractor or builder can vouch for it then they can you know we mitigate that cost they're already paying you know the homeowner would sure >> for that person. doesn't sound like they're adding an additional one and the burden then goes on to their license. >> I guess in that case I would really want to see that that licensed building contractor has that qualification or that skill or experience to state they understand what is in that soil which most of them you know really the excavator is is the expert in the soils in my opinion. So we would do like some additional checking or that >> if if we were to remove the licensed design professional part of it. I mean it can be stated however you would wish it would be then you know we require a soils report or we require a um basically something from the excavator you know a a plan a mitigation plan should something arise. I just I I found that a little bit strange that we would do this additional investigation when we didn't do that for the enclaves of McCarron's and ended up in the situation we're at. >> I would note for the Enclave, a soils engineer was brought into that project and the soils engineer noted that there weren't additional mitigations that needed to be done in the area of these homes. The report did indicate that mitigations needed to be done in a different area of the development where the storm water ponds were, but the builder elected not to build homes in that location. >> I agree that the plans that were done for there were correct. Just I'm just noting that fact that was not implemented correctly and that what we're talking about is doing invest further investigation on these contractors and uh you know that just wasn't done. But I'll deal my time to uh somebody else. I might have more questions. And I suppose just before I recognize council member Strong that it's possible maybe that in the state regulations beyond the language that's here there might be some say definitions that define some of these things that are fairly vague although maybe not because our experience may tell us that that doesn't usually happen. >> I usually tell the building official you need to decide how you want to implement it. which then gets to then we could put something in our code potentially that clarifies maybe what our version of the implementation of that is >> or our policy directed toward that specifically. Got it. >> Council member Strong, >> thank you. Um since I live in one of the neighborhoods that had a lot of colors and it's kind of curious to me. Um, do you foresee something like this would be in fact even something as simple as somebody wanting to build a fence that they would have to um they would have to pull in a an engineer because of the proximity to the neighboring home. Okay. >> Well, depending on how you would >> clarify what excavations you want it to apply to. >> Sure. Um, do you anticipate that the state, if they adopted this language, would put um would pull into the situation a registered design professional to u make their decision as you're requesting that they would have someone of that caliber who would be part of the decision-m process? >> I know they haven't yet. Um, from my discussions with other staff members at the state, they are not aware of um they were not aware of this going through the tank committee. Um, and so they were kind of shocked that it went through and it went through this fast, but it's still there's a long way to go with it. Um, I know this fall they'll be having several more meetings on it to hash all these proposed new requirements before they go into code. >> I'm surprised that there's I in other aspects of regulation which I work in with the state of Minnesota, the FAQ portion is pages and pages and pages long. And so you read the definition of the actual process and you're like I had to learn nothing but you know 20 pages in on the FAQ oh there's the what I need to know. So I would assume that there'd be some element of that in that 6 months where those type of things would be hashed out and figured out along those lines. Um, I know that I'm in no way qualified to make a decision about uh proximity and you mentioned this uh bringing in a registered design professional to help you make that um kind of decision. Um what would you um what do you foresee cost and a timeline that would be and making that kind of consultation? >> Um well, we have reached out to a soils engineer just preemptively just to discuss all of this. Um we haven't been charged yet. Um but uh it they were very forthcoming in their answers to the questions we had when they had very little experience on residential projects because there's very few residential projects that require this type of work on the individual homes. Um, I think City of Roseville is unique where we don't build a lot of homes, you know, one after another in a development such as this. Most of ours are, um, demolition and rebuilt. Um, currently, um, but I mean, in the last 5 years, I think we've built over 60 new homes. um not all in developments but um so it's I think that's this soils engineer's hesitancy is how infrequently they do that and then that was his main comment to me is we don't know what our time frame would be if we're asked to come up with a report how do we get on site how do we start that and come up with a cost and then they would then have to refer it to a structural engineer to design any type of shoring or bracing and then that would have to be put into place, reviewed and approved, then they could start building. >> So, I think the the question was about the time frame for that consultation with the city as opposed to the working with the the the property owner or developer or whatever. Just to clarify, I don't know if that affects the answer. I think we could probably and if you're interested in us engaging with a registered design professional or two, we could probably do that within the next couple of weeks and come back to you with what we learned from those meetings. Is that a month maybe at the most? >> I I just two things that come out of that. One of which is as we get closer to March um and the possibility that whatever work and costs that we put into this to do this process is now negated or we have to look at it from a whole new point of view um in a tight budget. I'm concerned that we would spend money that would not be used well. Um if we like the attorney mentioned, we knew what the an what the questions were, we can answer them. We're guessing what the questions are right now. And so that causes me concerned. I'm also concerned about your mention of the infrequency of use in residential and what kind of time frame that might add to um an individual homeowner who might want to have some type of work done. So if you wanted to put in a fence or a or a deck, then you have to find someone. And if they're so infrequently accustomed to dealing with residential, what kind of um additional timeline are you adding to that person for them to be able to do something which could seem rather, you know, rather rudimentary. You just go out and you, you know, slap the fence up in a couple weeks. And so are you adding 6 months or longer? And I think that's one of the biggest concerns of builders is, you know, they know which cities make it impossible for them to operate in. We want to protect our homeowners. We want to protect my house, which is in there, but I also don't want to make it so ownorous that someone is like, "No, I don't want to do that." And we lose people who might want to upgrade their home or do other things because they've now had this um thing put in place that we don't even know is going to be valid in 6 months. So, I have a lot of res reservations. >> Thoughts for the council members who haven't yet spoken maybe just to check. Um yeah, I I guess you talked about um the scope and and um you know, maybe you know, I'm thinking about I don't think we'd want to make this so broad like putting in a fence that we would require this. I think that would make no sense. So, I guess if if we were going to do something like this, I think I'd want to make sure it's narrow enough that it would actually make sense because obviously what we're trying to do is deal more with similar situations that might develop like you know at the village over there versus I you know you know like like said too if you're just putting in you know a post for a a deck or something I I don't think you're going to have quite as or putting in posts for fence. I don't think that's we don't want to add a burden to that. Um and and I you know and of course and I agree with council member Strong that I don't have enough expertise around this to to tell you exactly what we should be doing with this. And so I and and it sounds like you can reach out and have a few conversations with some of these experts to see, you know, their thoughts around narrowing this down and maybe even asking about some of these questions you're asking us, saying, "If this was in front of you, what would you think might be a good way to to address that? Say, hey, this is what we're we're wrestling with. What what would you think?" That would help me have some more information because again, I'm not an expert in this area. And before I recognize Council Member Bower, I that was one of the things I was thinking about is even with if we don't adopt something between now and March or March plus 6 months, um I think we're probably going to want to have something in policy that relates to how we do interpret whatever gets put in place in March. And I think it makes sense to start some investigation of around the questions that have been brought forward here. I think that does make sense. Um, you know, perhaps a discussion of all right, if the adjacent excavation is such and such a percent of the length of the the adjacent foundation, you know, if it's only a foot wide and it's a 20ft deep house, probably not going to have as much impact on the adjacent foundation, especially if it's more than some distance away based on the depth of the foundation that's next to it. So those are the kind of things that that expert could probably say here's here's where you're going to see impacts. Here's where you're not likely and it's going to be somewhat dependent I'm sure on the soils. So that's the other piece of it that's always a part of it. So there's generalities maybe that can be used to to create the likelihood of the need and then the specifics of actually looking at the soils and stuff. Council member Bower >> is wondering you can go first if you wish. Um I wonder if we could just I agreed that uh don't wish to spend time and effort for something that the state's going to end up doing. What we do know and the reason for bringing this up that the enclave mechanics brought it up is home owners insurance doesn't cover you know uh damage due to movement of earth or soils. I've got the exact terms which is why this whole thing came forward because they're so close. um that whole HOA has agreement that they want this. I wonder if we're able just to scope this down to so it only affects them. We could maybe put together an ordinance as such as um I don't >> not worrying I'll leave it to you but like you know foundations you know actual homes being built or foundations being excavated and um what is that zone it's light or medium to >> yeah MDR you know parcels we could write it the or in such a way that really only affects the enclaves at McCarron's and that serves gives that those the HOA uh what they want without affecting the rest of the residents without us spending time, effort, and money um figuring out what the state's going to end up figuring out in that 6-month period. It doesn't affect, you know, any of the other developments you're talking about um as well. So, I think maybe that would be a good practice. And that way, we just limit um if you will this ordinance to those that actually desire it, those that already asked for it, that are in agreement with it, and lessens any other work or possible damage we would do. council. >> Uh, I'd like to ask the attorney what that what you think of that what was just proposed when you do it for just one property is that >> I'm not sure whether that is something you could do. I need to think a little harder on that. Um, there certainly are a few issues I would need to resolve. Yeah, I think we could maybe change the word because we have like certain things where they have certain different have different setbacks or things like that to do it. I agree like that kind of spec up to the city is probably but I think there's something that we can do the scope. It doesn't make we you know it doesn't make sense in some areas that we have zoned it does it only for certain areas. Um >> what I will say is this is that is that anytime you pass an ordinance you're subject to what we call the rational basis test. It has to make sense. And so a challenge would be if you so narrowly crafted an ordinance that you excluded other very similarly situated properties, you you might fail a rational basis test. That's my first djerk that there are some other concerns on my mind. But >> the owners or developers of that property could consider themselves >> right like so anybody building a blue house next door to a yellow house, right? At some point it isn't it isn't really regulation. you're not really regulating in in the way that you're supposed to be. But like I said, that's just kind of a knee-jerk reaction. I need to do a little additional additional thought on that. >> That's why I was thinking just excavating foundations as you mentioned 60 houses and how many areas I mean we're not exactly building many homes here. So, >> and how many of those have the the narrow closeness, >> right? That's why I think if you just did like foundations and five, you know, within 10 ft or whatever, you're probably covered. But I think we still want to have some understanding of some of the technical questions that we've just been discussing that that we would need that expertise even even if we applied something fairly narrowly. I would still want something that that can be enforced and that we have an understanding of how we're going to deal with it and and that the people on whom it's going to be enforced can understand what they're what they have to meet because I think that's as much of a part of it because they've got to plan their project, they've got to budget their project and all that sort of thing. Council member Gra, I we we kind of took it over. That's okay because I did ask the question. I wanted because that came up in my mind, right? Um my concerns are of course obviously we want to resolve this situation where we have a problem here. But also I don't want to you know have a pro solve a problem that isn't a problem for most you know how many you know years have you been here? Many years. And I have been in the real estate industry for many years and have not seen that happen before. So, it was kind of a surprise to me. How do we craft something that's, you know, carefully crafted but does not have unintended consequences for 600 homes. Uh, so I definitely don't feel like I know enough about it to say who the experts should be or what I would want more information from that before I would move forward with anything. >> Council Strong, >> again, I bring it back. We're here for the common good. And if we craft something that's just for one group of people, then what's to say that we don't get asked in the future for to exclude someone else? Again, I just feel like I get it. We want to be helpful and this is an unfortunate situation for these people, but I I want to make sure that we aren't unfairly assisting or making it harder for one group of people, no matter what that is. So if we are saying okay we're going to craft this just for so it impacts this one situation well we're going to get in that situation again where someone else is going to say okay I want you to craft this so that my situation benefits me and we're going to open ourselves up to all kinds of people being requesting things that we maybe should or can't do. And I I just think we have to make sure that what we're doing can be more equitably and more universally applied and not just cherrypick the things about it that we want to do with one person. And so I I think this is a very unfortunate situation and but I'm also concerned that there was a registered design professional at the villas and they didn't find this. So what other situations would we go be going in and addressing where still we would pay a registered design professional who wouldn't catch something then what like >> I should just clarify I don't know that it's that somebody didn't catch something there's no regulation of it on residential developments right now so something to catch >> they didn't mention this >> correct and the design professional was at the very beginning before the homes began construction they they went through the soils of the entire site So >> I think uh I tend to agree that that we want something that can be because certainly if a situation arises in the city where we have this adjacency and there's excavation and there's the potential to impact a foundation. I think it is part of our responsibility to have some sort of regulation in place. You know you look through our extensive zoning code and we probably don't have a lot of instances of some of the things that we regulate, but we regulate them for a reason. And so I think it's important that we're thoughtful about it. Um, and I think once again I think we're going to have to we're going to have to have some understanding and knowledge going into even after the state puts something in place as to how we're apparently as to how we're going to be enforcing it. So I think a lot of these discussions make sense to do um you know if we can have this come back in another discussion perhaps at the end of a period of time when some of these questions can be answered or some guidance or advice can be provided that raise more questions for us to try to answer on the policy side. I think that makes sense. Um, you know, does it ultimately mean we pass an ordinance between now and March? I don't know. I think that the council still is needs to know more as well as staff. Uh, so that's that's kind of where I'm at. Council member Power. >> Uh, no, echo what you said. I would just note that we also kind of created the situation when we put the five foot setbacks in uh, as well. >> Well, probably more importantly, the zero setback. >> The zero, sorry, the zero setback. Um, so a little bit maybe on us not thinking all the way through this. Um, but I do agree with your comments that it would be good to come back and I do think um I would like to have something probably before March just because as you noted in your presentation there's a number of lots there. Um there's one home that just went up this there's a lot of stuff is going to happen before March in that uh area. So having if we can get some clarification and if you can put together something hopefully this was helpful for you to give you some direction. Um if not do speak now so we'll we'll try to help >> or follow up on >> follow up. Um, but hopefully we can have something come back sooner and further this discussion and see if there is an ordinance that we could um bring forward. >> Does that make sense? Do you have enough? >> I think what I'm hearing is you'd like us to engage with the experts in this area and luckily Roseville is the headquarters of the builders association. So, I'm sure we will have no problem finding um the expert of a registered design professional to get feedback from and we'll do that as quickly as as we can and bring it back for you. >> That sounds good. And just a note on on budget cost of community development budget at least is funded by building fees and so we've got hopefully some reasonable reserves that we can call on to to pay for this type of service to the extent we need to do that. >> Yeah. And if it's the builder association, we may not incur any cost, but we'll just we'll see what they require. I'm sure they have sort of an interest in trying to trying to uh control costs for builders and so they they're they have some advice that we'll have to we'll have to take with the appropriate uh understanding of that scenario as well. >> Okay. >> Very good. Well, thank you for bringing this forward as we requested and and it's it's an interesting topic and and one that we we all know we need to know more about. >> All right. Uh with that then that brings us to um the very appropriately named item 7B which is to uh I don't know if anybody else noticed that uh to discuss the possibility of beekeeping regulations in the city of Roseville and I think Mr. Tre item that you'll be introducing. Mr. Treasure >> Mr. Just for I should have checked. Was there anybody in the in the coun in that chambers who wanted to speak to the item that we just discussed related to the the excavation and the distance setbacks and all that foundation that fun stuff. If you do have a question or comment, feel free to >> one quick comment about it. >> You have to come up to the table >> and you just uh state your name and either street or address for the record. >> Uh feel free to have a seat. >> Jamie Jensen. I'm at 1499 Clareire. Been there for about six and a half years. Um I was very impressed with your staff bringing all of that information forward and I don't think I have ever seen an object come to a foreign city council that needed less action than that. When the state's about to do something, I'm a land developer, so I encounter this all the time uh adjoining properties and it's always my duty to make sure that they have vertical support of their property. So that's a that's already a duty of mine that I look for. So, but your your staff was very clear that this may not help. We don't know what design professional is. And by the way, if you need I I'll tell you who a design professional, Jamie Jensen, design professional. That's who's going to be, you know, until something else is decided. So, that's all I had to say on that. That the the staff did a wonderful job and I don't see any need for action. Thank you. >> Thank you for your comments. >> You never know what you're going to run into at a council meeting. should come more often. >> All right, with that I just double check anybody else that wanted to speak to that item. I I forgot the reason I'm opening it up is because I forgot to ask for public comment before we end this discussion with that. Now we are starting item 7B which is once again to discuss those beekeeping regulations. So once again, Mr. Thank you for allowing. >> Yeah, no problem. So uh uh Mr. Mayor, members of the council, we're really here tonight just to begin discussions about any potential beekeeping regulations. As noted in the case, uh we did have a resident come forward at the May 19th council meeting asking uh for the city to consider adopting some beekeeping regulations. We currently do not have any regulations uh in our code regarding beekeeping. It's uh not something I've typically heard of uh over my years as being an issue one way or another, but uh so we really don't have anything on the books right now. So just for your information, I have provided through the help of the city attorney just some regulations in other cities and how they uh do regulate beekeeping. I know since uh the case went out, there's a lot of interest uh from folks in the community about this and about potential approaches uh how to do that. So, what we're here tonight to do is really discuss and this is an opportunity uh after hearing from that resident for the council to discuss and give direction if any to staff about uh any potential beekeeping uh regulations. As I said, we're not looking to approve uh anything here tonight. Just having discussion and looking for direction on there. So, that's the extent of my presentation. And there's a lot of materials both in the packet as well as bench handouts from several folks uh in the community that talk about um if there are regulations uh here are some approaches and how to do that and I imagine they're represented here tonight as well. So with that I'll be happy to answer any questions here initially but I think it's really about a discussion for you. >> Right. Right. And I do want to clarify too for the members of public as Mr. Treger noted uh the proposal isn't this evening to adopt any kind of ordinance about beekeeping regulations. In fact, we haven't even met the statutory requirement of 10 days advanced notice of publishment publishing the proposed ordinance before an action language at all. >> We don't even have language. Right. Exactly. So, this is very early in the conversation. And I think a legitimate question before the council is do we need to do anything? That's sort of the the default is the do nothing approach. The alternatives are all in the range of of if we do something, what might they be? So, I did see a hand from Council. trying to get clarification. Looking at the um email that came in that started this um is this a St. Paul resident or Roosevelt? I note that uh you know it completes all these all these violate my rights as a St. Paul homeowner. So I'm not so sure. And they state St. Paul everywhere. They know that their neighbor maybe is in Roseville. The uh u address given uh by the person that appeared was a Roseville uh address. Um, so, um, >> I was confused about that. >> Yeah, just I didn't even look. I just assume >> I'm not sure. I I could I I don't know why it says the same is speaking on that person's part. Okay. >> Especially with the address. Are there actually questions for uh staff at this point to to start the process and we'll certainly hear from the public which may generate more questions or thoughts. Council member Strong. >> Thank you. U when I reached out to Mr. Trean, I was like, why are we bringing this forward off of one resident when usually these things come to us? Um, because there's been a collection of people bringing things forward and concerns. A lot of the questions I had based on the the initial email were answered really well in um couple of the uh responses we had gotten from residents um namely uh Dietrich Anderson and Mike Cornel which we just got a little bit ago. I was trying to read it at stoplights on my way here. admit to that. >> I was I was sitting um but I do think that some of the questions and some of the concerns um and then there was some you know people making assumptions about the person who sended I I don't know what their situation is but I I just wondered if we haven't addressed a lot of concerns in the past in looking at some of the ordinances that were provided I thought they were pretty restrictive. I think that having education is helpful, but the size of the yards in Chanhassin far outweighs the size of any, you know, they have to have a third acre or more. You have to have um you know, I didn't know that we needed based on one resident who possibly didn't have accurate information to make a restriction on beekeeping, if not to maybe just make it as a as an educational piece. And I know they do some of this work at Harriet Alexander Nature Center to do more items for people. Um, but in my neighborhood, I have a a rooster and goats. Um, and those seem a lot more um loud than bees. Um, and so if I think if we're going to start regulating some of these things, we can't take comment from you in the right now. um that if we're going to start making regulations that we need to maybe look at it as a bigger topic than just one off here and there um based on one person's concerns. I think we maybe look at all of our wildlife um restrictions if we're going to make one, >> which we don't have many other than the general prohibition on certain things. >> Yeah. >> Um I did want to note too that um now I've lost my train of thought. I apologize. Oh, I did have a question and I wanted to kind of return to questions. So, um, in this case, this is a zoning question, so it's very good that we have our building official here perhaps. Um, so if somebody is installing a beehive on their property, is that anything that's regulated right now in terms of looking at setbacks for structures in backyards or anything like that? >> It is not. >> It's not. It's not something they have to get a permit for to build. >> If it was a shed, be a different story. If it was a deck, it would be a different story. But not not a question, too. Um, how many complaints have you gotten about these to to go and inspect property? >> This is the only one that you've actually ever gotten that. >> Was this even the one? >> This was one I I can't recall. If it would be related to a beehive or a keeping of bees, we would say they are allowed. So, we wouldn't respond. We would Right. Well, thank you. Council member, >> as a new member on the council, I can't remember, but I was going through it. I believe we've discussed like chickens and bees previous council meetings once before. Is that true or not? >> Really long time. Yeah. >> Neither in my time. >> We don't have any regulations in >> Wait, there are none. I saw that. But >> it's five years with none. >> Somebody brought up roosters. >> Yeah, but we never made a decision. >> That's the conversation. >> Maybe it was just roosters. >> Yeah, it was rooster thing. >> Um, yeah. Right now, our code just has a restriction on keeping farm animals essentially. I mean, goats may be an exception there, but I mean it was that was the kind of thing that that was in there. So, I certainly don't want to have the goat patrol out in your neighborhood next, but >> I haven't heard them in a while. I don't know where they are. >> Other council questions. I mean, you know, I guess if the council is not inclined to pursue this, this might be a very short discussion. So, maybe we need to kind of do a check of the temperature of the council here. >> I'd be inclined even to not prescribe. I mean, I had bees for many years as well and started worked with the UF M's bee lab and got the Woodbury aperary going for them and um yes, they have classes there, but I would note that there's a large amount of education available online as well. So, I'm really hesitant to prescribe like you must take this class. Um, it's also I think a bit of favoritism that we're doing by, you know, granted it's not a for-profit thing, but for that and many other reasons, I'm extremely hesitant to put forward kind of um restrictions that we have going forward. I think what we have right now works fine. Um, as you can see, the beekeepers are uh that are present here are very passionate and buzzing and care very deeply about uh their craft as well and are well organized and take care of each other as well. Um, there are situations where you might get a little bit of an angry hive. That does happen sometimes, but it's a pretty not that common. I mean, sometimes common, but easily resolved as well. >> Is would you say from that point of view that there is is something we may want to do? I mean, because we we we have quite extensive ordinance language in relation to um dangerous dogs. I mean, it's pages and pages and pages and there's lots of definitions and because that's a concern that it that's out there and certainly people can be harmed very severely by by dangerous dogs. Is there like a paragraph we could have related to certain situ or is that something that we're just not able to >> There are a couple of reasons why you might end up with a angry hive uh for those things. I think you would have a hard time being specific enough to actually write to write yeah to to write something to be able to legally enforce it. Um and then whatot and honestly u beekeepers don't like angry hives and they quickly resolve them as well. So we would we would never get to that point. They were to end up resolving them themselves. They recqueen them or split them or you know if it comes down to it um kill them off. >> Uh check in with the council. I mean, is is is there any objection to not pursuing this any further? This might >> just to play devil's advocate a little bit. I mean, there there are people who are worried about being stung and have medical issues with it, >> but it doesn't sound like we've had a huge number of those in Roseville that we know about, >> and it's mostly wasps and other, you know, they say >> and honey bees, I think, are more docile than even >> wild bees. So I I don't want to say dismiss someone's concern about medical things, but it doesn't seem to happen very often. And I guess you have to have an EpiPen if you are. I mean, you should anyway because the honeybees are not going to be the thing you should be worried about as the wasp. So >> I was just going to say walking through a Roseville park is is, you know, there's potential for being stung. And you know, from what my understanding is exactly, the honey bees tend to be very non-aggressive other than right around their hive. And if you're tr if you're, you know, if you're right around their hive, you're probably trespassing on somebody else's yard. >> Exactly. >> Um or your own or maybe >> And if you are, you should know what you're doing. So, >> right. You know, um and you know, and exactly the the ground bees, the wasps, all those things are definitely very aggressive and can be on your own property. >> Um and so that's where if if the danger is there more broadly and generally should we have regulations about this particular corner of the world here, council membersh? Well, and one thing I do want to say is we we really promote ourselves for being a pollinator friendly uh community. And so I think we'd want to promote uh bees more than restrict them. And again, um, you know, all these concerns, you know, so you're going to regulate this this small segment of bees when most of the problems are in this larger population of other types of bees that aren't being um, you know, domesticated. So, I guess I I I would have a tendency to not want to put in regulations to um to stifle it, but I'd u I know we have some um beekeepers here that, you know, maybe they feel that they want some structure, but I I would have a inclination to um not do it. >> So, it it sounds like we have a fairly good consensus on the council that that we probably wouldn't pursue any any regulations On the basis of hearing that, is there anyone from the public who would like to speak to this item this evening? Uh, and and feedback. Yes. >> Just briefly. >> And once again, I'm going to do what I >> had prepared. All this, uh, I just wanted to make a comment about No, just to talk. Yes, I'm Dietrich. Uh, >> all of you have received emails from me. Um, I just wanted to comment on just listening to your conversation around beekeeping and how um exciting and how amazing and how like actually more versed that you all are on the importance of beekeeping is. Um, so yeah, I had a whole thing written and I was going to read. I don't really need to do that. Um, Matt, knowing like your extensive background in beekeeping, um, being a a passionate beekeeper from 9 years in Roseville without incident, living most of my 49 years of life in Roseville and probably will die here and just being part of this community and hearing that we want to be the promoter of a pollinator community is awesome. Um, I'm also connected with the Alexander Heritage or Nature Center already. I do education stuff with them on beekeeping. I also sell my honey there. I'm also a big prominent um vendor here at the Rosa Holiday Craft Fair each year. I'm in that room right there. I use your guys' whatever room that's called. Um so I'm very engaged in the community here when it comes to beekeeping at all different levels. Um I have lots of resources if this ever comes up again uh of contacts, things like that that can help like really navigate that, but also to TR Trojan. Am I saying that right? Mr. Trojan's comment. This is the first known like one person and that was telling to me. That's why you all like got a lot lot for me, right? Because I always think local politics we might be moving that direction. So it might have sounded like I somewhat wanted regulations. I do not. I don't think we need to regulate this at all. I think if anything, this is educational, right? If we have a a community member that's unaware, I'm more than willing to have them to my bey yard in my house at any time. I'm more than willing to do personal education even for the city of Rosal. I'm also offering my services at any time to come and educate the public at any type of event or any type of forum they ever like feel feel that that's necessary. So, uh yeah, I just yeah, everything I have to say is obsolete. I just wanted to say um yeah, just some of my connections and also we've got beekeepers here very uh in the audience as well and actually a soon to be beekeeper here in Roseville who actually came today too. I want to highlight this is the importance piece of it right here is that new beekeeper right that wants to beep. Um I have volunteered many years at the state fair. Jamie is our superintendent of the bee and honey exhibit at the fair in the audience here. Um I've done multiple demos demonstrations educating people at the fair. I've won many ribbons over the years at the fair. Did very well this past year and I always like to promote and being proud that I did that in the city of Roseville. People are like you're an urban beekeeper and I go yes. And so, um, I'm very proud of that fact. So, just wanted to let you all know that that you have some really like and there's a lot of knowledgeable beekeepers. I'm always learning. I tell anybody new. This is a hobby that is not exact science. Like, you know, Matt, like I will do everything I can to have a hive do what it's going to do. And sometimes they just have they'll do what they want to do. There's all reasons why a hive can get kind of angry. The only time they ever get really upset is when I'm coming in for their honey and they're really localized around that. They target me. They they mark me with scent. They're not going to neighbors. They don't attack like that. I always tell people like two things to do. If if you're having your picnic, you're out in your deck with bees and you get very anxious, right? And a lot of times we like swat. Don't swat. It's just like, don't worry, I would never do this to you guys. If I was to swat at you, hopefully you defend yourself, right? But bees are just doing the same thing. The most common thing is walking through our garden, right? And accidentally stepping on one or, you know, this accidental stuff like they're very docile. So, I tell people, one, just let them do their thing. They'll leave. They're just interested in what you have. Or two, walk away slowly and you'll be just fine. They're very docile. So, anyways, you can tell I could talk about bees forever. Um, and Jamie, you've hit your 3minut time. >> And, uh, and J and Jamie knows that um, as well. But yeah, I just wanted to make sure that you know and you all have my contact information that I'm very grateful to hear just the thought process here at this table tonight and just very very thankful that we will be leading the charge and leading the way of like you know being a pollinating uh uh community. >> Thanks for offering your expertise. Is there anyone else from the public who wanted to speak to the potential for mentions? >> Once again, we just ask that you need state your name and and address or street for the record and the threeminute time limit that I forgot to mention. >> 3 minutes. >> Mike Thomas, 2552 Beacon Street. I uh would just like to state that I am in favor of no change in this policy. I am a beekeeper as well and I guess I've never known that there was issues that arose but I would like to continue with uh the policy that it's going as is. Thank you. Thank you. >> Anyone else wish to speak? >> Tell her to come to you. Hi, I'm Eric Livedown at Lexington Avenue, Lexington 36 and primarily your name is >> Oh, I'm sorry, Eric. Eric Norn, 2214 Lexington Avenue. Got it. Thanks. >> Uh, I moved here for two reasons. One, it was the house that I could afford. Two, it was the exact property that I wanted. It is extremely conducive for beekeeping, which I have thoroughly planned, which I usually don't plan things out. So, when I saw this today, I was like, you've got to be kidding me. So, I came here just to see what's going on. I'm sure you've maybe remember me from I come here often and I was like oh no because I've engineered designed and fabricated thing for beekeepers honey extractors and all this stuff. So when I saw this my big thing was like she said she's from St. Paul. Okay. But now I now I know differently but that was the information I read and I was like but from St. Paul? What do you Okay, whatever. I must be confused. So anyways, I'm glad that there's well hopefully no restrictions cuz I'm in the middle of the U of M's beekeeping class and I made a lot of friends and I'd like them to come over and be like, "Hey, isn't this delicious?" Okay, now go away. I have other things to do. >> So I just I've had other challenges within Roosevelt that that's what I've been here before, but today I when I saw this I was like, "Oh no, I didn't want my plans to go Ari." So, thank you for your open-mindedness and keeping us busy. See, you had to say Joe, right? Was there somebody else who wanted to speak that was writing? Oh, feel free to come on up. No need to wait for my permission. >> Yeah, my name is Alyssa Purdue. I was the one who sent the original email. Yep. So, I am from Roseville. I had um looked up the guidelines for St. Paul and that was the only thing that came up for Beregulations. So I was sad to see that we had nothing for Roseville when every surrounding city has their own regulations. So including Shore View, Mountains View, Circle Pine, St. Paul, um, every city surrounding us has their own regulations of bees. One minimum thing being a permit being required. Education, like we had all talked about, it's very important for bees. Um, so I'm just a little disappointed that we're going to be the only city that has no regulations on bees, especially because families are we were worried that day when we all were stung and chased inside on a beautiful day um just by like the poor education that was done. So apparently there wasn't a queen of this hive. So the the bees were erratic and very aggressive. Um, all of us in our family got stung. Um, I have videos of the hive. It was terrible. Um, the only thing I would say if there is no regulations, I have a very small lot. Like we like to play outside and this hive is like on my fence line which is like almost in my property. So like the one thing I would suggest would even just be like 10 ft or something like I don't it's literally on like on our property line. So if we're saying that they're really aggressive when you get close to their hive, right? So like how can my kids play in their yard then? Like that's where that's where I'm hesitant is we also live next to a hospice house. Like people like to sit outside in their last couple days of life, you know? So like I don't understand why we're just going to have like no regulations at all if people can't like I could just go out tomorrow and start a beehive. You know what I'm saying? Like there needs to be education in place. So that's why I'm just a little disappointed that we're going to be the only city without anything. Is there >> anyone else who wishes to speak? We'll go ahead and close public comment for this item. Um, and I I do want to do a couple things. I I appreciate that Miss Po is here. I do want to apologize because we did accidentally release contact information which we didn't intend to do and that that probably created some contacts that were uh not uh not looking forward to on your part. Uh so I wanted to apologize on the city's behalf for that. And the other thing is certainly I think the point of bringing this before the council was was um to learn about something that I don't think we knew very much about as as the issue was brought to our attention. Um and so I think this is a something we've definitely all of us have learned probably more than we knew going into it about beekeeping uh and bee behavior and things like that. And I I think this is an opportunity perhaps to to look at um how we can work with neighbors as to their locations of hives and things like that as part of a process when we hear about issues and not to say that we're going to dismiss them, but also say that we're not going to put a lot of regulations in place uh to deal with what may or may not be issues and and because I think the challenge is as soon as you start putting regulations in place, you have to implement some sort of registration or permitting system as a means of enforcement and things like that. I don't know that that's where we we sound like we want to go, but I don't mean I don't mean to say that that means we don't we don't care about issues that may arise or conflicts between properties. So, we we have these types of things happen in the community from time to time. uh you know it can't always necessarily be the city to resolve a lot of neighborto neighbor issues but certainly if there are things we can do in terms of bringing people together you know bringing um an expert in contact with a neighbor that that is perhaps not understanding what they need to do or should be doing related to to keeping bees on their property. I think those are things that that we should help to facilitate and I'm sure that's something that our enforcement folks will will take advantage of whenever these types of uh conflicts uh come up. So I did want to state that too. Um, so I don't I I I don't think we mean to be dismissive of this by any means and and certainly there are legitimate concerns that people have for their own health and the health of their families and and that's that's important to understand, too. And and I think there is just a lot of general lack of knowledge about bees in general in the public. I mean, I have family members and I constantly tell them when we're on a picnic and they're they see a bee crawling on the table or whatever, they're constantly swatting at them and swinging at them and things like that. I say just let them do what they do. then they go away, you know, and but I think people also have a fear of of bees. Nobody wants to get stung. It hurts. So, I get that too. So, we just have to work through those things. >> Yeah, I was just going to echo that. I would not be surprised if uh you know, some of the beekeepers here, you know, make some effort, try to reach out to help. I mean, all beekeepers are very helpful and it is a lot a lot of heavy work and it's messy work, dirty work, and uh it definitely takes a number of beekeepers. I would not be surprised if uh some members of this group work uh to try to help that beekeeper out. uh going forward there, you know, maybe a better spot for that hive to help them out as well, but I don't think it's something that we need to regulate. >> If we if we we could think about in terms of our zoning regulations, if there is something about setbacks that makes sense for that particular use in a in a yard that we could consider that as part of zoning regulations um and leave it at that. But I think somebody needs to get a essentially needs to get some sort of interaction with the city in order to have the setback checked unless we treat it as a as a nuisance enforcement type thing where it's only on a complaint basis. >> And it's such a heavy move when I think it's um you know the community can help the community in this case and I think that'll probably resolve this issue. >> So if it makes sense to look at it as a nuisance code and or zoning code, I think staff can can noodle on that for a little while and they see if that makes sense to to look at uh just in that specific issue of locations on lots and things like that. I think that would make sense because I think if you did I think having them right against a lot line is probably not appropriate to have your hive right next to it. It's an odd place to put a hive to. >> Yeah, I I think it would >> that may be more for the convenience of the property owner than it is for the convenience of the bees. I don't know. But >> we don't we don't allow other things to be on that. >> So yeah, so I think we'll I think that's something we could perhaps ask staff to take a look at and see if it makes sense to bring back something in. >> So just to be clear, you you do want us to bring something back about setbacks for beehive. consider bringing something back related to setbacks and how >> bring it back to you guys for you to consider. >> Well, yes. I mean, if if the recommendation is not to enact something, that can be the recommendation at that point as well from staff. >> Okay. I just I just want to be clear what we're doing and what we're bringing. >> We're not asking you to bring back regulations. We're asking you to consider whether regulations are appropriate and what they might look like specific to that area of placement in yards. >> Council member St. Just to follow up on that, I feel like um in as a result of this conversation, pe other people talk um I was a little bit thrown off by how much um activity there was on the Facebook page yesterday about this and and people were pretty up in arms about it and I was like, "Oh no, it's going to make it interesting." Um, I think if if we learn of more issues, if we become aware of more hives where the people don't know, maybe we need to do more. But I I again I struggle with a one >> off and I and not to say that that's not a problem for that one person, but again trying to look at the whole community and try to to governor govern for the whole community and not just for one or or two people. But if it's something that comes up, people, you know, there becomes a pattern or we do see this on lot lines because people say, "Well, if that's not good, then I'm going to call the city." Well, then we know then we have more data. But right now, we I don't feel like we have quite enough data to really decide if we need to do anything more because right now, I think our feeling is it's not enough to to make a whole city decision based on this um unique situation. also concerned about we say bees but then like what about goats or chickens or like these other like it just goes down a very >> setbacks for goats. >> Well, I don't >> actually don't know that goats are officially allowed. I know in my head I just I enjoyed that example though. >> I think I think we need we should wait. >> I think we should be I'm not really in favor of doing the setback thing just because I think it goes down a path I don't really >> No, I understand it. I think I think it's it's worth having staff take a look at it though and just provide some feedback because staff may say, "Yeah, no, we don't want to do anything." Our staff may say, "Well, here's here's a small thing we could do and it's easy to enforce or whatever." But we don't know the answer to that tonight. So, I just want to pose the question. We'll get some response. It may not even come back as an agenda item. Honestly, if there was just a memo, >> sure, if it comes back as a memo, but I I don't think there's support here on this council even if it was to come back. >> Yeah, we don't want it >> come back. We don't know that we know that. So, but let's ask the question. >> Let's ask the question. We get an answer, then we can decide what we want to do. >> All right. Thanks again everyone. I appreciate all the insight and feedback and and learning a lot about bees over the weekend as I said. Uh but that's a good thing. >> I always teach you a lot more about these. >> All right. Uh with that then we'll move on to our final business item this evening item 7C uh which may also have some interest from the public uh which is to uh take a look at considering uh closing down the operation of the Roseville Leaf Recycling Center on Dale Street. And for this item this evening we have our public works director uh Jeff Fryhammer with us uh to bring this before the council. Mr. Fryhammer is getting his presentation ready. I know this police office. >> All right. Uh, thank you, mayor and council. Um, the right button here. My back's too. So, um, staff tonight is uh, considering bringing this forward to council to consider closure of the Roseville Leaf Recycling Center. So, I'm going to do a quick presentation. Um, everything I have in the presentation is more just to show some slides or show some pictures as well as just to kind of summarize what's in the packet. Um, so really no new information what's in the packet, but just real quick background. Um, the site from what we could tell, we don't have great records. Uh, so looking back at council minutes and what we did have, but site's been around since about 1971. Uh, it's located on Dale Street. It's about 2 and a half acres. Um, it originally was used just for maintenance from the from the staff end. Um but then when the leaf pickup program was used in the 1980s, then the gates were open seasonally to Roseville residents to to bring their leaves in. Um it is really supposed to be for residential use only. Um it was staffed in the past by police reserve officers and then also some former maintenance staff in the past, but it's been well over 10 years since uh we've had anyone regulating the site. So basically it's uh it's it's kind of a free-for-all more or less during the 10 weeks that we're open. So current operation um it is just a leaf site. So that is the number one confusion. Um we've corrected Google and numerous other places. It's not a yard site. So that's the the big issue is Ramsey County has yard way sites. We have a leaf site. A lot of people don't understand that. So they bring their leaves, their brush, and everything else. And when it's un monitored, we we do have a lot of issues. Um the walk-in gate is open year round. So there's just a gate you can walk in, bring your leaves if you have bags. Um, so if you decide to rake your leaves in uh uh you know, July, you can do that. December, you can do that. Um, but it is open seasonally, four weeks in the spring typically once the the snow melts and people are out doing yard work and then 6 weeks in the fall. So, typically we start opening up first week of October um and then till the snow flies or usually our cuto off date is um Thanksgiving. Um, and then what we do with the leaves, we do turn the leaves and make it into compost. The city does have a compost turner. Um, we do turn the leaves about nine times a year. So, it is pretty intensive work. And then we do have we bring the the the compost outside in the bins outside the gate that residents can pick up for free. Um, and then currently we also do provide delivery service on Fridays in the summer. You can uh request it to be delivered and we get rid of it. And then whatever we don't have, we do to sell to some vendors because usually we have excess uh compost. Um, so reasons to close the site. So staff is proposing this to close this uh for a variety of reasons. Um number one is a duplicative service. Ramsey County offers the same service and more at their yard sites. Um like I had mentioned before, we only do leaves. They do uh yard waste um leaves um and other other stuff. Um residents can also get mulch at Ramsey County. Um the only service that Ramsey County does not provide is they will not they do not have the delivery um of the compost. So that's the only thing there is. Last year we only did about 65 deliveries, so it's not a huge service, but um certainly that would be impacted. Um the Ramsey County site is open year round. Ours is technically open year round, but it's the walkthrough gate. Um their site is open in April through November is basically closed only on holidays and every Tuesday and Thursday and then December it's basically only open December through March is only open on weekends. So there's the site has many has numerous issues with the site. um site location. It's really undersized for the volume of leaves we get. Um once you get all the leaves in there, there's just not a lot a lot of maneuverable. If you've been to any Ramsey County ones, they have a lot more maneuverability. Um we have to bring staff in on the weekends during the leaf season to push up the piles to make room. Um the site was basically is filled in wetland, so it pumps soil. So we get any rain during the leaf season, it becomes a big mud bath. Um a lot of we get it's a big complaint the the site isn't maintainable. people can't get in there if you don't have a you don't have a four-wheel drive or a truck. We get complaints that they can't do. We can't do much. Um in 2019, we did try to regrade the site as best we can, but um short of doing a large improvement. There's only so much we can do. Um access vehicles do stack on out on Dale Street either for people picking up uh compost or delivering leaves. Uh and there's not much we can do to modify that. It's just in a constrained site. Um and then illegal dumping. This has gotten really bad over the years. um much more recently um people bringing in dirt, grass, clippings, garbage um utilizing the site for basically dumping ground because it looks like a dump to some degree. Um and then non-residents and contractors using it. This has really picked up in the last few years. Ramsey County closes every Tuesday, Thursday. Every Tuesday, Thursday, we're kicking contractors out or or seeing an increased use of people using them. They're when it's an increased use on a Tuesday, Thursday, they're not Ramsey. They're not Roseville residents. their outside residents and then vendors. Um Ramsey County does not allow dump trailers or commercial vendors in theirs since we don't regulate it. Guess where they go? They don't want to pay for their tipping fees. So, um and then we do get odor and noise complaints. I will say that's gone up mainly because of the the senior housing next door. Um but we do historically get them throughout the years. Um we don't most of it's during business hours, but when the compost turners out, there's a lot of backing and forward. So, you hear the backup alarm going constantly. Um, and then, um, the order, that's more of a perspective. Um, but certainly we are making compost, so it does give a little bit of an order if you're not used to to that. Um, and then just some pictures of some of the label activity. A lot of people just dump stuff right at the the gate in the bins. Like I said, just dump their trash, dump their logs, dump their garbage. Uh, the picture in the bottom left, um, we're pretty confident. We one of our staff saw someone trying to offload something in the middle of the day and we said, "Nope, this is not a dump site." uh that night that showed up. We're pretty confident that was uh that that same person just dumping their stuff cuz they just didn't have a spot for it and they thought we would deal with it. Um garbage stuff that we have to dispose of. And then the picture on the right is uh the the dump trailers that are pretty much commercial vendors. Um like I said, they can't go to Ramsey County. They come to us since they know we're out there. So that was submitted from a resident last fall who wanted to make us aware and we're aware. We just can't do anything after the fact. If we do get a name, we do usually work with code enforcement to see if we can um follow up. Um otherwise, some other reasons to close the site. So um one of the big things is is some budget savings. So the biggest item in the budget is this. So the whole leaf site is managed in the storm water fund. Um so it's not a general levy uh impact, but it is in the storm water fund, but uh the big thing in the CIP is a compost turner. I've been here for 10 years, and this has been on our list to get replaced for over 10 years. We just keep delaying it because it works. Uh, but it's a 1997. Um, it's actually an attachment that goes on the front of our front end loader. Um, but it was purchased in 2006, so we've got a lot of life out of it, but it had a previous life, so it's well over uh almost 30 years old. Um, parts are getting hard to come by. It's really starting to see its better days if we don't replace it soon. We're going to have to reshoot all the sheet metal. Um, so currently in the C the 2028 CIP, we have $375,000 budgeted for that. Not sure if that's the right amount or not because there's not a lot of these available. Um the uh like I said, we do have an attachment. You have there's other ways you can buy standalone equipment. Um the attachments, we're not confident we'd be able to buy the same size one. If we do buy a c a bigger one, we actually may need to upgrade the size of our front end loader that we use to do it. So there could be additional costs, but we haven't explored that too far. But since this is coming up on the CIP, it just seemed a good time good time to talk about that. Um equipment and fuel. So, we do about 720 hours of equipment use at the site. That's mainly the front end loader and and the the compost turner, uh, turning the leaves. We do it nine times a year. It usually takes well over a day to turn all the compost. Um, we have to push the leaves up in the fall. We have to move all the compost from the rows into the pile. So, it's a lot of labor. Um, so the the 58,000 that's not really out of pocket cost, but we we assign an equipment cost, an hourly equipment cost. So, that that's what that is. Um, but we do spend about $8,700 in fuel every year. So that is not a pocket cost. And then staff time, it's about the same, 7 or 20 hours. We usually have one operator. Um so it's about 18 weeks of work. Um certainly if we weren't doing this, we'd have um 18 weeks of other staff of other work we could do. We have backlog of plenty of stuff on the storm sewer system that we could do or other street repairs that we would just reallocate them and that could save money from us having to hire a contractor to do sim similar things or just do more preventive work so we we don't have major repairs down the road. Um, other potential savings, um, Ramsey County has changed their the how cities, and this isn't just Roseville, but all cities in Ramsey County. Traditionally, we could bring any wood debris we had to their yard waist sites. They would chip dispose them, um, just like they do with residential debris. Since 2024, their costs have gone up dramatically. How they cut their costs was don't let cities go in there. So, since 2024, we've had to regulate our own chipping. So, we do a lot more chipping, but that can be time inensive or we have to haul to a commercial site and we have to pay a tipping fee. Um, we have talked with our our our main tree vendor we use for our our tree maintenance program. Um, they've indicated if they had a spot that they would have to haul to, we could probably potentially save 20% on on their costs in the future. And then certainly from staff, if we do uh cleanup events, storm debris, we don't have to chip. we can we can just bring the debris and chip as as fill-in work more or less. Um so it allows us to manage our time a little bit more. So more or less we could use if we could use the site as an internal um um uh tree tree management site um that could save some costs in the future on on overall tree management within the city. Um kind of some reasons to keep it open. So, we did kind of just want to document um so 76% of the the residents in Roseville. This is their closest site to disposal of leaves. Um the other sites are Ramsey County sites. So, if you're on the far northwest corner of Roseville, there's probably Ramsey Ramsey County, the Arn Hill sites closer. You're on the very south edge of the city. The the St. Paul ones can be closer. Um the average distance for a Roseville resident currently is 1.33 miles. Um if we close the site, that distance would go up to about 2.79. Now, the majority of people are using this with a car. So, um another mile and a half is doesn't seem to be too uh big of an issue. Certainly Ramsey County, they have different hours that we currently operate. So, that that would be a change. Um but like I said, the services are all all still available. So, just just less little less convenience. Um future use of the site, as I mentioned, if if we did close the site, we'd still want to use it for public works and park staff um for maintenance. Um even with the new proposed maintenance operations center there there there would be some more use more space at that site. But um just general space for uh wood debris storage, storm damage um which we do from either storm damage, boulevard tree maintenance, pathway tree maintenance or parks doing a lot more of their natural resource management uh that we're typically chipping buckthorn stuff like that. That does create a lot of wood debris. But if you can just collect it um store it there, we can we can chip it at a later date or over uh a certain period of time, we rent it with a a tub grinder and grind significantly. Um back in um when we had the the really predates me, but there was a large uh storm damage I believe in 2011, uh Ramsey County allowed the Kent site to be used for that. The Kent site is not near as big as it used to be with the new environmental center. So that's really the only site in town. Um we currently have a little bit of use in that site. We have a memorandum. So we have about a 200 by 200 foot space for water breaks. Um which is adequate for what we do, but we we we have used this site currently in a pinch, but we don't have a lot of room. But we would also use that for temporary water breaks. And then um the other thing we would potentially use this for is um if we have a contractor, sometimes they just need to store stuff like just a a job trailer overnight or storm pipe for a job. um we don't have a lot of space within the city. This could be a spot for that pretty pretty low low use and that could help save some money on construction costs if we put in our plans that hey they have you know we have 1 acre if you need to store something here for a couple weeks um versus them having to go rent space from a a vendor cuz there's not a lot of open space within Roseville. Um otherwise the organic drop off bins. The current plan if it was if this was closed there's organic bins behind the gates um once the compost was gone um we could repurpose those bins by just moving the the bins outside the gates. Um that would be a twofold benefit. One for residents they don't have to walk through the gate. Um right now it is kind of awkward. You don't really see them. You have to go behind the gate and then it actually makes it easier for the vendor mate to maintain. um we we have it locked, but we constantly fight them with losing keys or not having the right access. So, it having it outside the gate would make a a little more easier control. Um I guess the proposed phase out plan that staff proposed would be uh to to have this year be the last year of the leaves uh collecting leaves. Um so, no collection in 2026. Um we would use this fall to educate the other Ramsey County sites. we already have a sign on the gate showing people where the other sites are. A lot of that has been historically to educate, hey, I'm bringing wood debris. Where can I take my wood debris? Um, but this would be doubling down the efforts and saying, hey, instead of just bring your wood there, also bring your leaves or with your GL grass clippings and whatnot. Um, but certainly if we if we if council does choose to close this, we would work with communication staff on newsletter articles, um, additional signage at the site um to communicate that it wouldn't be open in the future. Um obviously we created compost this year so we have compost to get rid of. So we would propose keeping the compost to get rid of it and then we would be making compost in 2026 but the plan would be to try to get out of the compost managing compost business at the end of 26. So most likely push up on a pile and reach out to vendors to actually sell what we made this year cuz basically we we just finished doing our last turn and we're pushing the pile up. So it wouldn't be till this time next year that we would finish creating our our new batch of compost. Um then as the P in the packet um we did do an equity uh inclusion toolkit kind of the summary on that there is a slight burden um to res users because they do need to travel further but most users drive so it's not a significant burden. Um there is a little cost savings so that could lead to a reduction in the future of uh future rate increases to the storm water fund. Um and then reducing this cost does align with the strategic plan goal of ensuring resources uh resource allocation meets operational needs. So with that uh certainly open to questions uh from the council but uh otherwise uh we uh the recommended action would be to consider approval to close the Roseville lease site at the end of the 2025 lease season. So right thank you Mr. Famer for the presentation uh and the proposal. U member this uh council members this is a chance for questions from the council. Council member Grath. >> So, what I'm hearing, just to clarify, is that it will save money. It'll be costefficient to close it and it will be more efficient for your operations in the system. >> Yes. >> Reading through it all, there seem to be several notes that were saying that uh in different ways. Um the other thing I guess I would ask is how many residents do you think do use it? Do we know that? >> We don't have a true count. It does get used. We we fill the leaf site up every year. That's there's no question about that. Um it it varies, but I don't know what percent of it are residents. Um the volume generally has gone up. I would say the volume going up though is probably commercial vendors and outside residents coming in to bring their leaves in, but um we do fill the site up every year there. >> So we we create the same amount. >> I heard you say that. Uh the other thing is if those go to the Ramsey sites, are they going to be able to accommodate it because they're larger? >> Um they should the the you know I I go to the one up in Arn Hills. Um I've been to the Energy Park one once. I've been to Ardin Hills once. So they are large. Um I would hope Ramsey County would accommodate them. They're Roseville residents are Ramsey County taxpayers. So they they should be able to. Um, we have not reached out to Ramsey County uh on this because we want to bring it to council first, but um, you know, maybe there's some lines to get in at theirs. I I know the one up by me can get really busy on certainly on the weekends. >> Um, but so is the Rosal one >> the Midway one. >> Yeah, there, >> you know, there's certainly a need for for that service. So, thanks, >> Council Member Schroer. >> Um, yes. Well, I do know that that can my husband uses the site a lot and it gets the but when it's muddy I'm surprised there's more people get stuck in there. So, it's really not set up for residents to be using. Um, one of the things you mentioned here about the organics outside the gate uh for people to use. I guess if we were going to close it, I'd want I I think we'd want to close it for all use because Ramsey County's got a beautiful organic place just right here, you know, on on Larpenter and Dale that people could drive through with the organics. And then, of course, we're going to eventually get our green bag so we can just put it there. But I I would say if we're going to close it, I the less um actual traffic from, you know, residents going through there would be better. So I think I would also encourage you to then have have people go for their organics to the new uh location. And that if you haven't been there, it's beautiful. And the way they have it set up to drop off your organics, I think is far superior to what we have. So, and then because you talked about duplicate not having duplicate services, that's another duplicate service. So, I would I if we do close it, I would say try to get rid of all of that. >> Yeah, I I agree. Staff would be support of that. We we do have to look. We do have a memo with the the Ramsey County that was approved when they put that in. Um it doesn't say specific about a location, but it says we would provide a location. Um now, the leaf the the environmental centers here though, that's a good point. Can that be the site? So um we can certainly we can certainly work with with >> the council needs to designate that as our site has 200 by >> we can do that. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> You have 200 by 200 ft. Uh >> we have a site >> at the site. So >> well the site that the part of the site we have is is not public access. But we we can certainly reach out to the county and and see if that's an option >> because I think the last few residents you have going >> absolutely because we um I didn't include some of the pictures in there because they're really bad. Um, but there's been a lot of illegal stuff dumped in those organic dumpsters. Exactly. >> So, um, any, like I said, the less you get people to want to dump, I I agree is helps will help solve more problems. >> Council member Strong. >> Um, thank you. I I think that, as you say, 65. Um, >> the last time I got it, it was really dirty. Um, lots and lots of bags and trash and everything, tons of weeds. um it just wasn't hot enough to burn everything because there was so much other stuff in there and it just took eons to get all that stuff sifted out. And then the concern people have about jumping worms and other things. So I mean I think I would I would support that um removal, but I also agree um that I was concerned about the organics being left because it would be contaminated and then it's not useful to anybody. So, if it's possible for us to utilize their state-of-the-art system, that would be really wonderful. I was wondering if um there'd be a possibility of using this as this education period to provide some home compost bins. You know, a lot of other cities provide um lowcost or um kind of community based um items where they have a community like a cage that people use for compost and classes on how to to use them because if we're going to take away that opportunity for it to be maybe in their backyard, maybe they can put the stuff at the greens and the browns in their own. And I think in the past we have had opportunities where we partnered with somebody to county. I think I think it was Ramsey County. >> Yeah, I could check with Ryan. He would know. I I know we've done like the rain barrel thing and we might we might have done the the compost bin in the past. I don't recall. >> A compost bin and a rain barrel at the same time. And >> so I I don't know if we might have been a while, but we we can we can check on that. >> My compost bin had fallen apart >> because I got both of them. >> Customer, did you have a >> I had a question, but it's answered. >> Okay. Um, and council Strong, I Were you finished with your question? Okay. All right. Um, I did have a couple of things. Um, one, I appreciated uh staff providing the information about if we were to keep the operation open and address some of the issues about staffing and things like that. There was an estimate about 8,000 or so of of staffing costs to to monitor it better and it would be limited hours at that point. Um, so I appreciated that information. I did have question and I think this came up. I was I was just new on the council or just about on the council I think in 2006 when the decision was made um to to get that used Turner because that was a big discussion at that time because of the capital cost for the Turner. Um and actually that was part of the reason that the city got out of the leaf pickup business was because of the that cost. But anyway, um I thought at that time we might have discussed the possibility if or even if it was a possibility to like contract with somebody else to come in and turn the compost or is that even >> Yeah. So that that is an option. The problem is our site is not big enough for them. Um it's a lot of money to move the the compost turner to and from. In fact, we have to rent we have to basically pay like we keep the compost turner stored, but if we do have major maintenance, we got to bring it back. we have to rent equipment to bring it back um or have basically pay a trucker. Um but so that's a big cost because you'd be moving that 9 to 10 times a year to and from the site. Um but the major problem if if if we had one cuz I believe that's how Ramsey County does theirs. The sites are not they're all really big and they're not on a front end attachment. So they can't make the turning radius for how they would do it because most of them are pull behind. So, um, our site, like I said, is not was never designed for a proper site. >> And then, uh, in followup to the question about I I would agree that it probably makes sense to look at removing the drop off site for compost now that Ramsey County Environmental Center is open. Um, and then in in conjunction with that, my thought is in terms of even just limiting non desirable dumping of any kind is to move the fence as close to the curb as we can do that and put a lock gate there and that's it. you know, it's just for city use. >> If um yeah, if if certainly if this was passed, we would we would look to modify it. But certainly the walking gate would go away, but yeah, we would make it less attractive to pull over and and drop stuff cuz kind of that cove right there allows especially when the compost bin's empty, you can just tuck something away. So, >> and then finally, you mentioned that this was a filledin wetland. I I would be interested to understand some ability we might have to try to do some restoration in relation to that or or you know improve the the drivability or usability of the portion that we end up using for other purposes and maybe allow for some delineation of wetland from this because you know filledin wetlands aren't necessarily obviously they're not great to drive in because you get stuck but you're also kind of hampering the ability to process storm water and things like that. Is there some advantage that we might be able to achieve just in thinking about that in this site? >> Yeah, you know, we haven't looked into that, but um certainly we could help uh build buffers. We don't we don't need as the the full 2 and a half acres. If you lost a 15t 20 foot buffer on the outside, that wouldn't be a problem. Um certainly less traffic going through there in the fall when it's rainy. Um it's a little easier to manage when we have our heavy equipment. We're not going to get stuck with our front end loader. um or just bringing trucks in there. But, you know, when you got thousand people bringing their cars in over the weekend, it pumps the ground pretty good. So, I I think it's pretty manageable. I don't think we need we wouldn't need to do any major improvement just to use it as a a tree site. >> Appreciate that. Thank you. Other question, >> you were talking about the tree site. How much noise is that chipper going to make because they you >> So, if if we if we do it, it would be no more than we it would be a lot more sporadically. Um certainly if we rented a tub grinder that would be something but that would be like every 3 to four years or something. That would be that would be a yearly thing. Certainly we might do chipping with our normal chipper but we would do that during ours. Um if you're down there now the compost turner is not a quiet thing. It's it's backing up constantly. The there's basically two engines. You got the engine of the the front end loader and then the engine of the the turner itself. Um so it would be a lot more infrequent. Not saying it would go away completely, but it would be less infrequent. And then I would like to think um the odor goes away completely. >> Wood wood wood wood odor is maybe a little more >> Yeah, that doesn't bother me. >> A lot of cedar waste. >> Midland Hills, they do wood chip there and I know people on Fairways Lane complain about that quite a bit. >> Sure. Sure. Um, a follow-up question too in regard to next year and that the final batch of compost if we do shut down the operation would we still provide the opportunity to do delivery for a fee to residents get rid of that? I would actually in conjunction with the >> I would actually so the fees and the fee schedule um with the minimum numbers and you actually look so previous we saw it as a service and there was a way to get rid of compost. If our plan is to get rid of all the compost at the end of the following year, we can just end up getting rid of that excess with that. Um, we've typically sold it to other vendors. Um, we have used it a little bit on our construction projects, but not much because the quality as you stated is not great. Um, >> so we could continue the drop off program to the extent people use it anyway. >> Yeah. So, but or I mean I like said staff would defin it >> it it definitely costs us more to deliver it >> than it does. There's no return on investment. The main benefit is one more year, >> but we could but we could certainly do it for one more year. But um like I said, the plan would the proposal would be at the end of 26 though. >> The whatever we made this over the next 12 months, we would work with the vendor to sell it to to get rid of it for our site. So >> there some revenue associated with that to >> it's usually pretty marginal because they got they got a truck in. >> Yeah, exactly. >> So we would no longer accept it after this fall. >> Correct. No longer accept. So, this would be the last year people could bring their leaves. So, next spring if people are doing cleaning out their gardens, whatnot, they'd have to bring it to a Ramsey County site >> or or do a lot of uh waste haulers have um >> yard >> yard waste as a as an option, but you pay for that service. >> Exactly. >> I do want to provide an opportunity for public comment. If anybody from the public did wish to speak to this item, feel free to come on up and introduce yourself uh and address the issue. Uh, we appreciate the insight and thank you for your >> patience talking about this, but >> uh, you know, >> I love to use the compost, but I can go further to get it. That's fine. But I hope that introduce yourself. Oh, I'm sorry. I'm Marilyn Jacobson. >> I live at uh, 27 56 Greg Street North. >> Very close. And um but I think it it would really help me in our community to really be very uh better educated about what is available where it is and you know how to access it when it's you know all that because just makes it better. But uh but the compost you do have to clean it when you when you get it. So um can I do one other thing? It's very short. very short do this. Okay. Well, I live on uh the first street of Grig Street up that way, >> whatever way we are. Yeah. >> And uh so I did a little sketch of our neighborhood and uh I wrote on the back to the Roseville City Council members, "We are extremely pleased you've decided not to remove the Veterans Park uh and which contains a soccer softball park. that's what they're using it for now and to replace it with storage and maintenance for the city heavy equipment. Uh, thank you for your wise decision. We love our neighborhood. So, this is a picture of our neighborhood and then it's signed by the kids and the and the parents in the neighborhood. So, I'm just giving it to >> Mr. Mr. Trean is will be responsible for that. >> Yeah. >> Thank you. >> Well, thank you so much for bringing that. >> I did that. Yeah, I did that. >> Very nice. >> Very good. Is that your house? >> No, that's across the street. I >> Is it a watercolor or is it? >> It's a watercolor and ink. Watercolor and ink. >> I just uh did it from my front yard. The kids were playing and then I added kids that weren't there. >> Impressive. >> Those are the neighborhood kids that are there. Yes. >> I'm glad I allowed you to do that. >> Actually, I'm so strict on these. >> Okay, that's it. Thank you. >> Thank you for your patience staying to this point of the meeting. >> Okay. All right. >> Oh, isn't that nice? >> You could have come right away and been done at 6:05. >> Sorry about that. >> All right. >> Well, I think if it makes sense, you know, if the council is is interested in looking at the closure, perhaps it makes sense to have the official decision made as part of our 2026 storm water budget discussion and decision, unless we're prepared. My concern is maybe we want to provide a little more time for public input in case there is more Um, we obviously don't have much this evening, so that might be my suggestion. Mr. Treasure, >> I'm not I'm not disagreeing as far as more more notice, but we are opening the site October 6th, something like that. >> So, if it's part of the budget decision, that's not till later in the year. So, I think we want to be able to use this time. >> So, my question is, what's the impact to this year? >> Well, if we could you So, if we had a decision and we knew it was going to be closed, we could use our reader electronic reader board. We could have a lot more. We'd have flyers. We could we could use the people coming to the site as a lot more education. Um certainly we can use the newsletter, but >> I see. So the people that are actually coming to >> coming to the site, we can they can see that last year site will be open or we can come up with some language. So that was one of our thoughts to to get a little ahead of of that. Certainly, >> like I said, there's at least another council meeting or two if that needs to be part of it. But >> how to your point, how how do you envision being able to further message this if that's something that you wanted to do just given when the newsletters come out? >> I have a feeling that there could be an article in the Roseville Reader andor Roseville Reporter based on those folks watching this meeting following agendas. Not saying that that's city initiated obviously, but you know, I think if you know, it just really depends on what the council thinks. You know, I I hate to make decisions without people having an opportunity for input. Um, so I was but I understand the notion of trying to do the communication. So we could even put it off a little bit longer because you're saying it opens in October typically beginning. >> Yeah. So certainly the we have what two more meetings in September. >> Well, if we if we have it part What about having it as part of our budget discussion on September 22nd? >> Yep. >> Does that make sense? >> Yes. >> No objections. >> No objection. >> All right. >> Let's do that then. >> All right. Uh thank you again for bringing this forward and staff being thoughtful about it. Uh I think as as I was thinking about this I thought about it in terms of both you know making sure that resources are being used for services but also the whole the quality of life issue for residents. The discussion about that I think was different in 2006 because Rams County sites weren't necessarily as robust as they are now and and so I think it's it is good that we're having this conversation again. I just had a question as far as if we could look at this holistically for cost because you're saying we have to pay to store it somewhere. We have to pay to get it to the site and we would have to replace it. So I want want to make sure that we're looking at it holistically as far as all the costs that are associated with this. I mean, if you think they have to be offset with some other cost like renting the chipper or something like that, that's helpful. But I think you don't need to try to provide it right now, but just as we look at as a budget, want to make sure we take all of the ancillary costs into consideration as well. >> So, I'm not sure which cost you might be talking. >> Well, you talked about you have to pay to store it somewhere. >> Yeah. So we we normally it normally gets stored out there but if we have to do major maintenance on it like if we had to reskin it or have major engine itself then we bring then we we we we hire somebody to do it. So that >> it's not a yearly thing. It's it's kind of hit and miss when it happens just like >> if something breaks it's just part of our just comes out of storm water operating. So it's it's not perfect uh in terms of what cost >> it doesn't have to live somewhere in a indoors in the winter. There's a If you go out there, there's a little kind of pseudo shed. I don't want to call it a shed. That's >> Did you get it approved by Mr. England? >> That's a good question. I I wouldn't be surprised if it's not approved. >> Yeah, it's maybe it was put there before the 1959 code was >> Yeah. So, um but yeah, other otherwise I do think we we've kind of summarized all the costs, but certainly if you guys think there's something dramatically missing, we can look into it. But >> sorry, I think I just misunderstood that extra piece. >> Okay. No, that's worth the clarification then. Thank you. And and I do think that that you know one of the benefits is it's not like we're saving costs necessarily, but we're able to use our resources perhaps in a more appropriate or effective way for the benefit of the community. So >> yeah. >> Thank you again. >> Thank you. >> All right. That brings us out of our business items. We have a couple of sets of council minutes to take a look at. We have our August 20th special meeting for interviewing candidates. Uh and then also our August 25th council meeting minutes. Were there any uh changes or corrections to those as presented or a motion to approve? >> Move to approve both. >> Second. Moved by council member Sher. Second by council member Grath to approve both sets of minutes. Uh any discussion on that motion. Right. Hearing none. All those in favor signify by saying I. I opposed. That passes unanimously. Those minutes are approved. Uh that then brings us to our consent agenda and I'll turn over to Mr. Trean to introduce those items for consideration. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Very short consent agenda tonight. Item 10 A approves payments in the amount of $1,429,38946. Agenda item 10B approves an ordinance extending the cable franchise agreement with Comcast until 2032. Agenda item 10 C approves a short-term rental license for 1901 Shady Beach Avenue. And item 10D approves a short-term rental license for 1277 Garden Avenue. And that is the consent agenda. >> Thank you, Mr. Trojan. Is there a motion on the consent agenda? Second. It's been moved by Council Member McGrath, seconded by Council Member Bower. Uh any discussion on that motion? No. Hearing none. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I opposed. That passes unanimously. Those items are approved. Uh that then brings us to our future agenda review, Mr. Trean. Yes. Uh just real quickly here, we have a series of meetings here in September. September 15th. We'll start off um the ED EDA meeting. We'll have the executive director of the Rice Larper Alliance. We want to review and discuss the EDA fund balance. uh and then also look at various professional services contract legal C legal shovel the regular meeting we'll have a couple commission uh commissions there we'll have a joint meeting with the parks and recck uh recreation commission I also received the finance commission's 2026 budget and levy information as I mentioned I previously attended their meeting uh in uh late August here and they're meeting again tomorrow night to make those final recommendations we'll also look to award the contract for architectural services for the civic campus project on the 22nd. Uh the main event is looking to approve the prelim preliminary tax levy and budget. We also may have an approval of a minor plant for 2035 Twin Lakes Parkway. Uh that's a commercial lot out by the Walmart area there that wants to split in two. Then we have several meetings in October and November as listed. >> All right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Are there any questions on the upcoming agenda? Any council member initiated items for future meetings? Um, we did have someone contact us this week about um, >> did everyone get the same email >> about >> dot dot dot asked >> me to bring it up in the meeting? >> But you don't remember what >> he's the only one who brought it up. So if I think of it all. >> Okay. >> Well, I know it's on Hamlin Avenue in the post that have been installed. >> Best for the bike lanes. Uh, the this is a pilot project that we're working with the county. So, it's between B and B2. >> Oh, with the posts. >> Yeah. >> I I would like to comment that that person is my neighbor and um he called me to tell me that everyone hates them and I told him that I like them and he told me everyone except for me hates them. So, I think he's not a biker, he's a walker. He's making some observations and he's collectively interviewing all the neighbors and deciding that they all are on his side. Um, I I just encouraged him to ask other people who maybe ride bikes, but as a biker, I absolutely love having them. It feels so protected and it's unfortunate that you go up a little farther on Hamlin and you're pretty much left on your own. So, uh, it'd be nice if it extended and you actually cuz there's >> some more discussion. Uh, >> there's not even a shoulder. So, >> it's not on our agenda. >> Yeah. And we can follow up with some some email about >> I just want to know about the police whether that was a >> Yeah, the police. There is a center uh there's a center shared >> what the police issue is but um >> perhaps we could have some followup directly that individual >> staff and I I remember seeing that email from you >> yeah I didn't get the email he made a phone call but I also question there is a center aisle there is a center link >> so we're not discussing this item this evening so just in case that wasn't clear >> but I appreciate the thoughts um are there any announcements or communications side reports. Council Bower, >> uh, you may have received this, but it's worth noting on October 8th, there's we are invited to the Roseville area schools local government meeting. I believe it's a I have it here 7:30 to 9:00 a.m. So, those here that are able to attend. >> Is that the same as the fire department? >> Uh, this is in the morning 7. >> Yes, you can do. >> And these are these are actually been going on for several years now and are I think something like quarterly. So far, >> I've attended them in the past and they've been beneficial. >> Very good. >> Then tap on court is coming up. That's right. On the 19th, >> 6:00 to 10 p.m. >> So get your tickets at the oval. >> Very good. And with that then, is there a motion? Seeing no further business before the council, is there a motion to >> adjourn? Second by council, second by council. No discussion on a motion to adjourn. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. Opposed. >> That passes unanimously. We are returned at 8:11 p.m. Thank you everyone and skull Vikings.