Stra client. I'll go ahead and call the meeting to order. Start with the roll call. McKe here. Lantern >> here. >> Friedrich >> here. >> Maramp >> here. >> Nicholls >> here. You'd like to stand and join me in the pledge. >> I pledge algiance 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. Thank you. All righty. On to agenda approval. Uh looks like there's a couple minor changes. I have the addition of 6 L and the removal of 10 10A close session. >> Is that correct? No. No other changes. >> Any changes from council? >> Um yeah. Could I just pull 6D? >> You can when we get to >> Yes. Yes. Yes. But I will make a note to remind me to go back to you. Um, okay. So, can I get a motion to approve the agenda as amended? >> So, moved. >> Second. >> All those in favor say I. >> I. Just move. >> Uh, so, mayor and councel, one of the things that I wanted to start out, it wasn't on the agenda, but today was the 18th annual truck safety seminar. Uh, I wanted to emphasize it for a couple reasons. One, uh, it keeps our roads safer. The whole goal of this is to keep everybody safe. It's a collaborative effort with the commercial vehicle enforcement uh department from from the state troopers office and uh our public safety police department and the public works. But I wanted to highlight this. We have uh 13 vendors or local businesses that support us that without their assistance we could not do this. And today we had 293 people participate. The reason I'm wearing this vest is because everybody who participates or shows up gets a vest. I was not one of those 293 and they still let me have one. So, if you'd like a vest, let me know. We have extra vests. We want everybody to be safe and that was the reason for the 18th annual truck safety center. That's why. >> Thank you. >> Uh next, uh mayor and councel, uh we're very happy to have here uh Joshua Hogland from the county assessor's office. He is the county assessor and uh the director of the department. We also have I want to point out Jason Vape who is our assessor. He's in the back. So Jason uh has has talked to some of you and talked to some of our residents. I I just wanted to call him out and say thank you to him uh from Josh's office. And Joshua, thank you for being here. I will do the quick change to get your slides up. >> There it is. Good evening, Mr. Mayor, Council. Uh, as Jay said, Jason's hiding in the back. Thought we couldn't see him. Um, Jay asked me to kind of just give a a kind of a high level presentation on what we do, how our process works, how our annual cycle works, and a little bit of how the levy and ultimately taxes fit in with the work that we do on an annual basis. So, uh, if you could jump to the next slide. This slide is our mission statement as a department. Our mission is to ensure an accurate and timely estimate of a property's market value, determine property use, and apply eligible benefits for property owners. That's a very clean way to describe exactly what we do and what we're here for. And most of this presentation is going to touch on how we try to deliver services related to this. Next slide. Um, this is a highle overview of our annual process. So, all of the dates here pertain to the January 2nd, 2025, I'm sorry, 2026 assessment date. Our assessment cycle really starts in on October 1st of 2024. The Department of Revenue conducts what's referred to as a sales ratio analysis. And basically what that means is we're collecting all of the sales data for any given jurisdiction and also countywide. And then we're analyzing that data. There are sales that may not make it into the sales study. For instance, a new home that may have been vacant land in the prior year because of that new construction. It's not apples to apples. The ratios are going to be a little misleading. So they'll be rejected as we refer to it. Other examples might be a relative sale. Maybe a a mom sells it to a child or something of that sort. It's not an armslength transaction. So it won't be included in the sales study. So that period extends from October 1st of every year until September 30th of the following year. And then our assessment date for this year is January 2nd, 2026. Uh our first round of value notices are going to be put in mailboxes tomorrow. So folks are going to end up seeing their value notices from us beginning probably early next week. And then people call us. We go through the process of of fielding phone calls really through the month month of March into April May and have conversations about a property's value, determine whether or not the characteristics are right. Jason's going to get calls and probably going to request a review of the parcel on a physical inspection basis and take a look. If there's anything in there that we discover is not correct in our data, we'll make the correction. um it may result in a value increase or decrease. Uh we'll share that with the property owner and and have that conversation after that. Uh and then we go through the county board of appeal and equalization that occurs statutoily that occurs after the second Friday in June. So this year it's going to be I believe June 15th. That's the first Monday after the second Friday in June. That's a statutory designation. So that county board of appeal uh is basically a body that's appointed by our county board of commissioners and they they hear from a taxpayer about their concerns regarding their value and then in most cases our staff are going to get up and also present because that's their expectation of us and then they make a decision whatever it may be if it could be a reduction could be a sustained sustained value. Uh once that board adjourns the assessor can no longer touch the assessment. It doesn't belong to us anymore. it it now belongs to the county auditor and that's when the levy process begins and then ultimately from that the truth and taxation statements and meetings start in November. Those are mailed in in November about the second or third week and then there's meetings really through the end of November into the balance of December. Those are primarily budget hearings where people are basically seeing what their proposed taxes are going to be for the subsequent year and then ultimately that tax statement is going to be mailed in March of 2027 as it relates to the current assessment for this year and then those taxes are going to be due in May of 27 and October of 27. So, a lot of times we get questions that we're behind the market and I suspect it has a lot to do with our our cycle being almost three year a three-year period from the beginning of that sales study period to the the second date that a tax bill might be due. And then basically overlying all of those dates that matter. We're also taking a look at a lot of data review. Uh we have a statutory requirement to review all parcels in a city every 5 years. So we break that up into what we refer to as a quintile. We try to look at about 20% of a city in any given year so that we can keep up with that time frame. We also are required to look at every bit of new construction throughout a year in a city. And Corkran, as you know, has has a lot of new construction. So, we've spent a lot of time on that over the past several years. And then when we get into the winter months, really, we're just tying up this portion of our cycle. We start to do a statistical analysis of all of those sales activity that occurred through that study period to determine what to do on the subsequent assessment. We have all kinds of statistical measures that we we look at to ensure that our ratios our ratios is assessed to sale or um I'm sorry assess assessed value to a sale price. So whatever our assessed value is as compared to that purchase price of a property that's the ratio that we're graded on by the department of revenue. We target 95% in Henipin County. The state's range is 90 to 105%. that covers the entire state. Where you might have a county that may only have six sales in an entire entire year. So they have a broad range for that, Henipin County generally has several more sales that allow us to target a much tighter range to be much more equitable across the county. And then there's a final review by the Department of Revenue that incurs primarily in May and it's referred to as the state board of equalization. What that means is if those any one of those statistical measures that we are are trying to achieve is outside of a a range allowed by the department of revenue, they'll come in and make the change for us, which we don't want to happen because we can really identify areas of of needing work in an assessment and make changes on a much more granular level. I like to say that we can do an assessment with a fine tooth comb. the the Department of Revenue is going to come in with a hammer and um move values in chunks to get it within a range of of their desire. So, um it's never happened in my career and we're we're not going to let that happen either. So, uh next slide. >> I have a couple questions on that if that's okay. >> Certainly. >> Could you elaborate a little bit on I think that's a good summary of what happens for residential. >> What do you do for commercial or industrial property? Uh it's an identical process, an identical measure. Um it's much more difficult in a city if we don't have industrial or commercial sales or even apartment sales, but we look at the county on a broad range. So let's say we don't have any industrial sales in the city of Corkran. We're going to look at basically the entire county. or if it's, you know, let's say it's a a substantial industrial building, you know, in some cases like million square feet industrial building, we're probably going to have to go outside the county to discover what the data is going to tell us for that market value. In those cases, we're looking primarily at an income approach, identifying market rents, vacancy, capitalization rates, and using that as well to try to identify what a value is in a given market. Okay. >> Whereas residential we use the sales approach looking at like properties and what they sold for to compare against the subject. >> Okay. Very good. And for mention granularity of the approach. So one of the things that we have going on in Corkran is there are different pockets of development with different types of housing. >> So if you've got a established neighborhood and then a new neighborhood comes in next door that's much more valuable homes. >> Yep. How do you prevent sales in that area from adversely affecting neighboring properties that haven't changed? >> What we do primarily in our assessments is discover what the market areas are. So like let's say that we have a a neighborhood that was built in the let's say 70s or 80s. It's more than likely going to have its own neighborhood and we're going to analyze within that neighborhood. And then if we have a brand new subdivision, a brand new development, we're probably going to look at a little bit of a cost approach to discover what the current value is of those properties. In some cases, the sales from a developer to a ultimate property owner are helpful, but we're going to look at ultimately a cost approach to see what the current value is. What what did it cost to build that property? If the land is the same size and identical, the land values might be the same, but in no way is the building value going to be the same just due to depreciation on an older property versus a newer property. So, we are separating those out and only looking that at them against each other and other like properties. So within your data, you can discern neighborhood pockets based on date of construction and things like that to separate. >> Absolutely. Yep. Yep. >> And then if there's differences even within a property, we're going to that's what ultimately why we'd like to do a physical inspection to make sure that we have that individual property data correct because even two neighboring properties could look the same from outside. One may have massive interior updates and the other one may be original build from 40 years ago for instance. So those are the some of the differences. If we don't get into a property, we're required by law to estimate what the interior might look like. We try not to overdo it in that regard, but ultimately just to try to get to the right number and be accurate. >> Just real quick to thank you number one for being here. One question that I have, I've lived here 19 years and I've had an assessor out one time. Is that about right? >> No. uh should have been out about five time or four times in that period. >> Yeah. >> Do I want him out four times? >> I'm >> You should be >> I'm I'm talking specifically for me. You guys, >> he's going to come back every year now. >> But y'all are out there saying the same damn thing. I haven't seen one. I'm the one that's sticking my neck out. So that >> what hap what what may happen is >> that's that's a concern if if you come you announce you're coming you send a note >> Yep. >> If you're not here we're going to walk around. I mean is that what happens? >> We send a postcard at every pro to every property that we it's usually it usually says we're going to be out in the next few weeks. So we'll send out a postcard that says we're going to be in your area in the next few weeks. >> Uh Jason more than likely is going to be the one to knock on the door. Jason has a little bit of discretion. If uh nobody answers the door and he walks around and doesn't think he needs to get inside, he's probably not going to leave a tag. If Jason's looking at the data in his hands, says something doesn't feel right, he's going to leave a a d tag stuck to that front door to say, "Please, please give us a call." >> Okay? >> Sometimes people call, sometimes they don't. It's really your choice. Um, >> and and again, I'm I'm not normal, but I just, you know, my home is now 100 years old. Yep. >> And I I was telling the story that my property taxes have gone up 300% in 19 years since I've lived out here. >> If you take that, it's about a 5% increase year after year for 19 years. So, >> right, >> I don't think I have anything to complain about other than my barn is older than my house and my house is old. It's been remodeled. But >> sure, >> I I think the one time that the assessor came out was two years after I bought and moved in. So, just asking openly. I don't know how many people are listening online or anything like that, but just curious. >> Yep. >> So, >> so that'd be our practice in Corkran. We've been here for a few years now and uh we are out in the field looking at every property. But as I said, it could be Jason's discretion to decide do I do I think it's right. I don't need to bother these these folks. If not, then I'm going to leave a tag to request an inspection. >> And then the other question I had, and if I'm early, tell me. But why does it take so long? And then the reason I'm asking that is if a house sells today, a new house. >> A new house. It's going to take a year before they get an evaluation type deal and then another year before we actually start charging them taxes. Why is it take that long? >> And and I've been told that's just the way it is. I just in in our growing city and and such, I hate seeing taxes being burdened by all the residents that have been here a long time. While I understand the costs and the the valuations of their homes are going up and stuff, I'd really like to figure out a way to burden the new residents because the needs are the roads, the sewer, water, all of those things. I'm out in the middle of nowhere and >> I get my roads plowed. I got police. I got fire. But I don't have any of the amenities. So why that difference? >> I don't know that I >> Why does it take so long? >> I don't know that I can fully answer that question. It's I mean it's all in statute in in the way that it works. But for us, you're absolutely right. You know, if a property was a piece of vacant land on January 2nd, they started construction on January 3rd, and let's say it was done in April or May, we're not going to capture that full value until 2027, and those taxes aren't going to be due until 2028. >> 2022. >> Yep. >> But yet, we can do it quickly on a home that's been around, we can ping them, and they're paying taxes, right? >> Well, it the next year >> it's based on the same cycle. So, if let's say that the 100-year-old home um had very little updates on January 2nd of this year and it happened over the course of 26, we're not going to capture that value till 2027. And even with the market changes, the market changes that occur within 26, we're going to capture those in 27 as well. It's just I assume it's to basically help it build into the levy process, which also takes time. and then a lot of notification to property owners to make sure they have an opportunity to give us a call and speak to you during truth and taxation time and those sorts of things. >> Again, I'm just asking because I get so many questions about it and I I literally tell them call staff and get you in contact with the assessor's office and they never call. So, >> Yep. >> I understand. I'm just bringing it up. So >> certainly >> and and it's been funny since I've owned my property for 19 years. It's gone the values have it was crazy. The first two or three years I think my taxes went from 3600 almost to $7,000 in two years after I purchased my property. And I never questioned it. I never did anything about it. I just I was always told, you know, it's kind of a catchup deal. So And then the last question I promise is I forgot. I'll remember it later. Thank you for listening. >> No worries. No worries. Uh next slide is just a copy of our value notice. This is a 2025 because it's what I had available, but they look the same year year-over-year. The only difference among the different years of a value notice is the different color. So, we use basically a color coding system so that when you receive a value notice, it's got the exact same color as is going to be on the truth and taxation notice in the fall and on the tax statement in the spring. So that you can kind of see which ones connect to each other over the course of a cycle. I've got a quick question about the statement. So, the statements that go out in November and then a city that lowers its projected tax rate from what was set in September to something significantly lower at the truth and taxation meeting. Yep. How do property owners now understand how their statement bill is going to change? >> So the what Jay's referring to is the the the max levies that are approved in the fall. That's what shows up on the proposed tax statement for all the jurisdictions, the school, the city, the county, any of the special taxing jurisdictions. That's what shows up. So what people would have received in November is based on that. So if any one of those jurisdictions comes down in the final vote in December, the tax statement that they're going to receive over the next month, over the next four weeks, is going to now reflect that difference between what was approved in September as a max levy versus what was final finally approved as part of the budget for 2026. So to answer your question, there's not going to be anything that says here's what changed to cause this number to be different. It's just going to show that that it is different. >> Okay. Thank you. The reason that's important is we set a higher rate and then it came down considerably and I'm still answering questions because they're looking at that November statement and the answer is you'll get a new statement here in the next two weeks. >> Next couple of weeks. Yeah, >> I remember the other question if I may. >> Certainly. >> Um, how do you change your determination? What am I trying to say? where I have my property is classified as rural residential. How do you change that to rural egg? I I have 13 acres. I've got horses. I raise honey. I have bees. I do all of that stuff. >> Am I classified right? >> You'd have to call Jason and then we take a look at the activity. So agricultural purpose is thoroughly defined in statute. So that's what guides us and what we can do and what we can't do as it refers to egg. And there's there's all kinds of different ways to qualify. The simplest way is 10 acres in production which typically means tilled or pasture land. But then there's several other ways that can also qualify. >> I've got a pasture land. I pastures but I have horses. I'm not buying selling horses. I just right. >> It's like a hobby farm. Again, the last three years I've been the bees have been producing quite well and I sell them a lot. But I'll I'll give you >> Cool. >> Horses are a tricky one. They have to be uh commercially boarded to qualify under the statute, not just for >> Yeah. And I can't do that because they're my own. >> Sure. >> Gotcha. Cool. >> But I Yeah, I would recommend giving Jason a lot of business tonight. Uh recommend giving Jason a call to take a look at what the activity is and we can take a look at statute and work through. >> Understood. Thank you. >> So, quick question. So, the new property statements will be available online tomorrow, too. If you're they're being mailed out, >> I think the property statements are going online, don't quote me, Monday or Tuesday for the tax the tax statements. The value notices will be online on March 15th. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> Uh, next. So, this is just our continuing our assessment process. This is the definition of market value that guides us. Um, I'm not going to I'm going to spare you reading it, but it's it's a very typical market value definition. I included the definition from 1905 to show that it has hardly changed in 120 years. It's very very similar in the wording and the the guidance that we received from statute. And then there's two kind of two market values that we look at as assessors. There's an estimated market value. This is what we think it would sell for. And then there's a taxable market value that's actually it actually is taxed on. So probably one of the broadest programs that we have more than likely across the state is the homestead market value exclusion. It's uh statutory math. We come up with the estimated market value. Based on that math, it's going to come up with a new taxable market value that if your property is under 57 517,200 is going to reduce it to whatever number it ends up at based on the the math. And then net tax capacity is really just the the product of a combination of that value, that taxable market value, and the classifications that we're going to talk about next. >> What are the exclusions in general? What you say those are? What's that >> from the estimated market value minus the exclusions and deferrals to get the taxable market value? What are those? >> So, we're going to talk about that on a later slide, but the homestead market value exclusion is a example where the statute guides us to say if a property is homesteaded and it's at a certain value um below 517,200, then it's I'm I'm going to spare you a little bit. There's there's math within the statute that says here's how much you're going to reduce that estimated market value that now becomes the new basis for taxes. And then an example of a deferral program might be green acres where somebody qualifies for the the green acres law which allows them to basically defer their taxes as long as they continue farming it and then if at any point it sells then there's some sort of a payback that has to occur. So in that case, we value the property at its market value, which in many cases in Henipin County is a development value. And then the Department of Revenue determines what would the true egg value be if it were an egg market. And then we apply that as the taxable. So this year the true egg value is about 10 grand uh per acre. The estimated market value is substantially higher than that, but the 10 grand is what they're going to pay taxes on. >> Thank you. Uh in the in the the system there's uh five major classifications residential, agricultural, commercial, industrial and utilities, apartments which means four or more units and unmin ore and then the catch all others. Um there's a I believe a slide later on where it shows how many classifications there actually are with some of the subsets. There's about 65 that we have to manage. So even within it's referred to as class 4, there's a dozen different things that were within that class 4 that are totally different from each other that we have to manage as far as making sure we get it right. Uh next slide, Jay. And then programs. Here's where we we talk about the exclusions and deferrals. Uh exclusions, as I described, is the Green Acres program is probably one of the most prevalent here. Um there's others, but that's probably the one that we administer the most. Exemptions. That means within the statute or even within the constitution, a property's use qualifies it for an exemption such as a church or school or city hall. Uh deferrals, I'm sorry, exclusions is the homestead. Deferrals is a Greenacres program. And then there's special classifications, which means if they're doing a very specific thing at a property that it can qualify for a special classification or if there's, you know, there's a special homestead classifications, for instance, for individuals who are blind or disabled. And then appeals, uh, local board of appeal and equalization. That's typically a city council serving as the the body, the third party to make a decision. If somebody doesn't like their value or, um, has a concern, they can come to the local board and and voice that concern and then the the local board will make a decision. Uh, Corkrin has an open book process, which is an alternative within statute. It's uh, referred to just as that alternative uh, option at the local level. And uh really all that means is we're uh we're now responsible for conducting the the process as the the county. And then the county board of appeal and equalization is the next step which I described earlier. And then ultimately mutually exclusive from all of the other local options is Minnesota tax court. It's easily the most formal option for appeal. It's um it's a formal case with the with the tax court which is an administrative arm of the executive branch. Uh a little bit more on open book. Um, this is just a notice that each resident will receive letting them know what the process looks like. In every case, we urge individuals to call us first. Give us a call. Oftent times, we can get that that uh problem resolved in the next couple of days, whether it means over the phone or going out and looking at a property or or whatever it may be. Um, but if not, we have uh now seven open book meetings across the county that anybody can attend. Any city, anybody uh whatever works for them. We have several that may work in Richfield but live in Rogers and they they attended the Richfield meeting and that's just fine. Um but open book um that's what Corkran does. It's a greater accessibility meaning it it basically goes on until the county board goes in a local board setting once that local board adjourns. Let's say nobody shows up and it adjourns that night. There's nothing I can do. But for open book, we can still make a change to that party property up until county board adjourns in June, which gives us three more months. But we can move on. So this is the this is the classification rates that are put out by the department of revenue. So this is each one of those five major categories and then each one of the subcategories under them that we have to manage. So some of the big ones again, residential, apartments, commercial, industrial apartment, agricultural. There's basically subsets with within each one of that. That adds up to about 65. And then as it pertains to the tax. So we talked a lot about what the assessment looks like and what valuation classification looks like. Before we actually get to that actual tax bill that people are going to receive over the next month, there's all kinds of other factors that contribute to it. Um the first and foremost is policy decisions at the state level. I've mentioned many times that the state law guides almost everything that we do. And as policy changes change at the happen at the state level, then our guides may change and it could result in a difference. And a good example is a couple years ago, the math on the homestead market value exclusion changed, which meant more people now qualified for the homestead market value exclusion, which meant we had a greater reduction from estimated market value to taxable across the county. Resulted in about a billion dollars now taken off the taxable market value, which means whoever didn't qualify for that received the burden and that shift. So, that's an example of a state policy change that affects taxes, market forces. Um, you know, as properties sell and things change. A few years ago, we had massive uh increases in value primarily related to the market and what was going on with interest rates. We just have to follow it. Fiscal disparity, which I'm going to stay out of, it's primarily a kind of a reallocation of of taxes across the metro. Tax increment financing decisions at the local level. And then ultimately uh last but not least levy decisions by all the different jurisdictions. >> Is there someone that could talk to us about fiscal disparity? One of the questions we've had is most of our tax base is residential. I would say we aspire to change that at some point, >> but we don't fully grasp the impact of adding commercial, adding industrial relative to adding more residential and how much we would actually capture as incremental revenue over and above what we would get if something stayed guided as say residential. >> Yep. Absolutely. I can connect Jay with somebody from our auditor's office. I try to skim over that because they're much smarter than I am as far as that calculation's concerned. But you're absolutely right. That's one of the decisions a lot of cities have to make. More rooftops or smoke stacks. I've heard it referred to as um so then these are just some examples. This is a very simplified example of how different things working together could result in very different tax changes. Um this example is just let's say 2025 we had a $4,000 levy and it was flat for 2026 and all of the values across all the properties increased at the exact same rate. So you can see these are it's a fourhouse town. All the houses went up 25% but the levy didn't change so nobody's taxes changed. Ultimately it was a zero impact as far as the final tax bill. Jay if you could go to the next one. The next one it's a slightly different scenario. The the levy is still flat but now all the values are changing at a different rate. And I just highlight the top two. The the top property is changing at a 50% clip but because the levy didn't change the taxes only went up 16%. the second property um it was flat but the taxes went down 20% because of the shift to the other properties that increased. So it's just a kind of a example to show that it's not a perfect correlation between what's happening on a market value versus what happens on a a tax bill. And then keeping in mind all of the other factors that might contribute to that final tax bill on the previous slides it this is just a simplified example that shows just two variables can have major differences. And then the last uh example, same four houses. Uh the only difference between this and the last slide is now we've got a 25% increase in the levy. And you can see the now the differences that value or that property was that was flat. The second one is no longer receiving a 20% reduction in their tax bill. It's just flat. And the top property is seeing a 45% increase in their tax based on that change. And then the last slide I have is uh this is just looking at our our cycle a different way. Uh looking at it more horizontally just to see kind of how how it spans out. Same dates I talked about in one of our first slides, but the sales ratio study period starts in October 1st of 2024 and spans the course of that three-year period until you get your final tax bill in 2027. October 15th or I'm sorry, due date October 15th. That's uh that's what I have. Any any questions? >> Any other questions? >> Thanks for coming in. >> Thank you for having us. >> Very helpful. Thank you so much. >> Call us anytime. We happy to help. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Okay. And now we'll move on to open forum uh for items not on tonight's agenda. Jay, do we have anything? >> I received no cards and no letters. Does anyone want to come up for open form? If not, we will move on to consent agenda which consists of items 6 A through 6 L. Michelle, you wanted to pull 6 D. Perfect. >> Okay. Anyone else want to pull anything? >> If I could pull 6G >> G, please. >> Okay. Anything else? All right. Uh then can I get a motion to approve consent agenda items A, B, C, E, F, and H through L? >> I'll make the motion. >> Second. >> All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Okay. We'll start with uh D. Michelle. >> Sure. So, I think it's important for us to pull this just so there can be some clarification on what this actually is. Okay. I think it's important to just for anybody listening to understand what that means. >> So, >> thank you. >> Uh so, mayor and councel, uh this particular resolution for CIP reimbursement is related to future potential bonding. And the reason that we have this resolution and speaking with our bond council, there's two different ways that we can recoup costs that are resulting from whatever we're going to be bonding for. One is we can do a look back uh and that's usually anywhere from 60 to 90 days. The challenge from a look back is there's a greater number of restrictions on what you can do for a look back. So when I spoke with bond counsel they recommended that instead we do this resolution which allows us as of this date any expenses that would be related to our future bond we then could recoup ourselves in the future when we do that bond. So an example would be you know the bond that we're projecting is uh for the future civic campus and we need to do some surveying uh and surveying was not in the budget for this year. So we could pay for it right now and then recoup that expense when we do the bond at a future date and then if we were to choose not to go forward with a bond then there's no impact of the resolution. we would just have to figure out how to pay for that out of our expenses. We wouldn't be able to. But but for this resolution, it's more difficult for us to reimburse ourselves. Like I said, there's there's a look back way to do it and I' I've used that in past bonds, but knowing both of the ways when I spoke with bond council, this was the most flexible way that they recommended us to approach it. That's the reason. >> Thank you. >> I'll make a motion to approve item 60. Can I get a second? >> Second. >> All those in favor say I. >> I. >> I. >> Okay. And then G Dean. >> Yeah. Thank you um for letting me do this. Um I just have questions. I was at the planning commission and things seemed to settle out and the recommendation from the planning commission was to um recommend approval for the variance and stuff. I'm in favor of the variance. I am very confused about buildings, how we're going to monitor um the property owners to make sure they're not allowing visitors into I'm going to call it the red barn, all of those things. There just seems to be an awful lot of stuff that's put in and I I want everybody's input on this and what they feel. I hope everybody has read this. I know I have spent a number of hours talking with uh Margaret and John Fernandez and such. I've spent plenty of time at the property looking at these things and it just seems confusing and I I wish it would could get cleared up. I was fully expecting um shovels in the ground and stuff and and buildings going up a couple of months ago, but it just seems to keep extending out and such. So I the matter of fact variance is related to and and Natalie you can clear me up for it. I know Dwight you sent a great email um was it yesterday or this morning about some of this stuff because let me let me let me start this way. If they would have moved in and not done anything with with wine tasting, growing vines or anything like that, that building would have been still identified as in the wetlands. And I'm talking the red barn. That's correct or not? >> It's in the shorland overland. >> Yeah. It's in a flood plane. So if they if they had done nothing um and weren't we weren't having to go to the process which requires the site to be in compliance with all performance standards of the zoning. >> Gotcha. >> Um we likely would not have moved forward with any kind of requirement to either deal with the after the fact variance or relocate the building or remove the building unless we had received some kind of code complaint. Um they for example since it's a flood plane if it all of a sudden someone was complaining about drainage patterns or something like that tied to the building then it's possible we could have been called out to the property at that point. >> Um but there was no This is not a proactive uh result. >> And I'm I'm going to go down a little different road and stuff. This was in front of the council and such. It was originally going to be a wine tasting in that red barn if I remember right. And I if I remember and I don't remember who was on here, but they were talking about an eight car parking lot and such and a lot of what the council and planning commission and a lot of our our folks wanted was to help do more help with aggra businesses and stuff. >> Okay. And then it just seems like it just kind of blew up from originally being in that red barn to all of a sudden a center with 40 parking spots. It's just changed and blown up and such. If if it would have just stopped at that red barn being remodeled to a taste venue, would they have been able to do this back then? when it first when it first came to us >> likely not in this location. It's in a flood plane. So that getting building code is a different matter within a flood plane would be very challenging for having customers, employees. >> But we wouldn't have we wouldn't have known that when it was first we hadn't gone down the road of examining the building, seeing the location, all of those things. Right. When it first came to us, there was a just a tasting and now it's turned into kind of an event center combination and such. >> So there's an there's a the wine tasting room aggra business and there might be occasional events. Correct. Uh but that was the intention of the concept plan >> even the original. >> Yes, that was something that they identified in their narrative. And just to be clear, the IUP has already been approved. This is just the variance of the building to remain. >> I know all that. I just my my problem is that building should have been on the east side of the home. >> Should have been uh south I'm sorry, north >> north of the home. >> North and east or straight north. That picture is accurate in here. It was >> I believe it was >> almost straight north of the house in the garage and stuff. >> Correct. But so yeah, basically when we went through the file and some of it speculation based on this is happened in about 2018. When we went through the file again with um our construction services manager, it looks like what we received back in 2018 was an exempt uh building permit site plan. So, we have this little code. Yeah. >> Where we allow people to forgo a survey if they submit a site plan that shows that the building meets twice at least twice all the required stepbacks. >> So, because they did that, we did not require a survey which would have identified the shorland. It would have identified flood plane and wetlands. It would have identified a lot more >> and that hasn't changed. That flood plane or wetlands or anything hasn't changed from when that building was put in until now. >> Likely minor changes. Wetlands and flood planes can adjust over time. It's just the nature of land. But it I don't believe it's changed drastically since 2018. No, there's nothing that indicates that from what we have gone through and evaluated the property. But what we believe happened is the building inspector at the time um did a field relocation without discussing it with planning staff. >> That's the way the email went. >> Yeah. So um so then it wasn't caught at that time that they basically approved what would have required a variance which someone cannot staff cannot approve in the field or administratively. So something was wrong on the administrative side of the city business, so to speak. >> Well, the person changed it. So >> yeah, the property owner >> the property owner didn't build it where they said they were going to come in when they came in for the permit. So that's part of the problem. >> Prior land owner, correct? >> Prior land owner. >> So we're asking the current land owner because of what the process is and what's going on, they got to bring everything into compliance. >> Yes, we did this with all CU and to bring the site to compliance, clean this up. So, the opportunity options were remove it. They uh they were already building another building. They could have looked at options to incorporate more space into that building. They could relocate it or they needed to go through the after the fact variance process so that we have this clean and um approved and on file with the city >> because staff cannot unilaterally approve a variance. >> No, I understand that. I just I'm still trying to get my arms around it. I want to help Edgar businesses ideas. I think this is a great idea. I think the what staff has done has been great. It's in a good place. All of these things. The thing that I'm not crazy about is if the business is sold or the property is sold, that red barn needs to be taken down or relocated to the right place. So if the if the vineyard were to go away or there were the other option is if I believe the way it's written if the vineyard if the vines or another crop is not because basically the reason why we said that the variance can be approved that there's a practical difficulty is because the presence of the vines on the property do not allow for another location for this to be relocated. >> Right? >> So if that's the practical difficulty then the condition for the variance is that either be vines or some other crop that remains to justify keeping this within a flood plan. Otherwise, >> keeping that building where it is right now. >> Yes. Exactly. So, they can sell it to another property owner and if they want to use it for a vineyard or agriculture use, >> everything stays the same. >> Correct. >> Okay. But if all of a sudden that crop goes away, those kind of things, what happens to the new building? Well, so if the new building if they were to sell the building, I'm sorry, they were to sell the property, the that property owner is going to have to come in anyways as part of the IEP because the IEP is not transferable. So this actually all ties back to the IEP even this condition because basically when this property changes hands, when this property changes uses, we're going to have to reevaluate all the buildings on the property. >> All right. And then so all the buildings stay the same with this matterof fact variance or does the garage have to go away or the chicken coupe or this there's there's three buildings two other buildings next to the red barn. There's a garage and then a very old I'm going to say chicken coupe. I think it when I was touring when I stepped in it smelled like a smokehouse kind of deal and stuff. Do all of those buildings stay the same until or what's going on? >> Sure. Yeah. So, when we went through the interim use permit process, part of the approvals for the site plan was um a few of the a few of the structures in the northwest corner of the site didn't meet the setback requirements. >> That one chicken coupe is going to leave the machine shed staves in that northwest corner. I'm not sure which one the machine shed is, but I think it was it was two structures in the northwest corner and this pole barn were the ones that were non-compliant with our setback requirements. Okay. And at the time, I think the applicants uh boys that they were open to moving the chicken coop to a different location on the property to bring that. >> That one is going to Yep. That one's going to go away. So then the one next to it, I call it a machine shed. >> Yeah. And then you got the red barn. And then in front of the red barn is a standalone garage. And next to that is an old chicken coupe, smokehouse, whatever. A very old building. So there's do all of those buildings stay with this new new building going in. The only buildings that would be removed if this variance were approved would be the I I believe it's the machine shed that you're referring to in the northwest corner of the property and then the chicken coop would be relocated. Um >> so just the two buildings in the northwest corner are impacted by this otherwise the rest stay. >> Correct. >> Correct. And that was handled as IP. So the variance is just for this building. And then who's going to that was a conversation from the planning commission about the red pole shed stays but visitors can't visit it those kind of things. Who's going to monitor that on the city side? >> We are >> or we're asking them to just >> yes that is a requirement. we are that it's in good faith that they will follow that requirement. If we were to receive a complaint as we do with any other >> code enforcement complaints, then that's when we would follow up. >> Could they turn that into an observation? If they punched some holes in, added some windows, could somebody walk over and view some of the processes of the wine manufacturing, the storage, those kind of things? I'm assuming what's happening there. I haven't talked to them the whole process or anything, but >> yeah, I I don't see if there's windows and they're having people look in the windows. I don't see how that would violate the approach. >> Okay. Just trying to give options and stuff. So, okay. And then we're going to have enough room for the driveway to keep that secondary garage there then. And the two trees, do they go away? Has all of that been done? The driveway drives back to this new parking lot where the new building's going. There was two very large trees that were I'm going to say 16 feet apart, but we wanted a 20 foot driveway. What's the status on that? Or I shouldn't even ask because the IUP is done. That's all tied to the IUP, isn't it? >> Correct. >> So, all of those are resolved. The issue at hand is the variance. >> Well, we might be working through conditions of approval, but we that we gave them options to be able the trees if they found a workable way. So there was a pathway for it the last time. >> But otherwise, right now, this variance would say the house in the garage is the same place where it is. The ancillary garage stays. That little building next to it stays. And the red pole shed stays, but the chicken coupe and the old machine shed in the back corner has to be removed or taken care of. >> Correct. >> Okay. >> Can I make a motion? >> I move to approve the variance. >> Second. >> Any discussion on that? >> Okay. All those in favor say I. >> I. I. >> Do we not to speak or or because some of this conversation was actually inaccurate. >> We wanted to we wanted to touch on some of the the details on that. >> Okay. Um so it has been approved typically not on consent. Um there's not an opportunity. Um >> Okay. >> I'd like to make a motion to hear what they have to say. >> Yeah. I mean, I'm I'm okay with them. I'm okay with you guys coming up to >> the variance is to speak, but the variance is approved. >> Appreciate that. >> Um, should I read this? >> Um, say your name and address for the >> My name is Margaret Fernandez. Um, 230220 Corkran. Um, we just wanted to John. My name's John Fernandez. Same address 302. >> Um, we just wanted to say we're very excited. Thank you for moving through this process with us. I know it's a big a big deal and I know um that this is something new and for the city and and we're very excited. I get emails and texts about this all the time. Um, we were very excited after the CL planning commission approved the variance two weeks ago. However, we we did receive in an email from the city planner city planners on February 18th and I submitted that yesterday that they were adding the condition um to to the plan the vines and agricultural has to stay there. Um the planning committee actually approved just that we didn't bring people through the barn that it was only for storage. And so this addition I guess I I'm surprised that it's just approved that way a condition can just be added without our input into that. Um, in fact, in in the email when when uh it was sent to me, I communicated that the planning committee actually did was questioning whether um whether we were upset about the fact that it could only be used for storage. And we had agreed that um we had agreed that we would use it for storage, but then again the the po the posts uh got moved forward again. and the goal post got moved forward again and then this condition um came in. I mean I guess that's where we are today. But I they approved something different and then a condition was snuck in kind of like you know when we originally did the concept plan um we were told okay well if you guys didn't apply for the IUP that barn would have been just fine and we've got signatures and approvals that I didn't resend to you guys um on all of that. Uh, so I thank you for the variance and and we appreciate it and we'll move forward with this, but um the barn was actually built in 2015. There's questions of when that um the wershed was fully enforced at that point in time. Um and uh uh the buildings that are removed are not what we talked about, but uh that's fine. It's in the IUP already. So, um there's just some things that aren't accurate and and uh we're just kind of wish we would have had the ability to talk to you about the fact that the planning committee didn't like this additional wouldn't have didn't approve this additional condition and they were fine with the without it and had approved it. So, thank you. >> Any later enforcement would be complaint based. >> Correct. >> Correct. >> Y the there with um that part there are um infections like every year technically with the IEP but as far as anything with the building I anticipate that that would the building that is being granted a varian anticipate that being something that would be complaint based I don't really we're not going to be out there monitoring to see um >> but it could be something that someone could complain about at a later point >> just add to that technically the engineering memo requires basically pro no impact as part of the variance. So that proof would exist if we got a complaint related to the variance in terms of drainage. >> Does that make sense? >> No. >> So the engineering condition here in the engineering memo basically requires them to go through a modeling exercise that evaluates if there was an impact basically vets out that impact as a condition for this variance. So a came in later saying I think there's an impact because of the building. We would point to this evaluation this no ride evaluation and say this proves that there's no impact. >> So he's talking more about the drain adjustment where certain people >> Mr. Mr. Mayor, can I also make a quick correction? Earlier, when councelor Baron Camp asked me about the structures that would be removed, >> I had the structures, one of the structures was incorrect. So, it's the I pulled up uh resolution 202587, which conditioned that the southeasterly most shed either be relocated or removed uh to meet the setback requirements, and the northernmost shed shall either be removed from the property or relocated. So, it wasn't the two in the northwest corner. It's one in the northwest corner and one in the southeast corner >> are the two that would be impacted. >> Which one? Which one in the southeast corner? >> Uh >> there's a It's not in the photo, but to the east of the house there's a you're talking that one, >> correct? Yeah, it's a it's a small shed to the east of the house. >> And then the building to the northwest is actually a movable I call it a lean too. It's a It's a nice uh It's a nice piece, but the main machine sheds unaffected, but those other two are part of this. Okay. >> Part Those are part of the um IUP approvals, not part of this variance. >> Got it. >> How many Kevin, if I can ask one more question, I'm sorry we said everything was good and stuff. >> Who went out and surveyed this property? because I I I'm we keep saying that the the building is identified as in the flood plane, those kind of things. It's almost the same elevation as what the new building is. So when the previous owner built this, they had to have lifted, hauled in a tremendous amount of dirt and changed that elevation of that building. Would that show on any of these documents that we've got and such? Has anybody been out to the site to do this or has it all been done cubically? I'm going to say >> um I wasn't involved with any of the original building. So I'm not sure you might be able to look at aerials. So in terms of who surveyed the site that we've looked at who they've hired their engineering consultant would have surveyed the building existing conditions that we're speaking about today. Um the wetlands were delineated more recently with this process. Okay, >> that's one that needs to get redone every five years just to validate them per the wetland conservation act. And really the flood plan and floodway uh related to Rush Creek, those are really defined and have existed probably well beyond even when this building was. So it just I don't know if that answers your question, but >> I it does. And then my last I promise is what are we doing in the future to make sure we don't drop houses, buildings in the wrong place. I know we've got the thing where you can put it anywhere as long as it doesn't impact any setbacks and everything. That seems not okay. >> Staff would like to get rid of that, but that would not be a part of the discussion tonight. But I think this is a perfect example of why that doesn't work very well. But I I am confident that uh Mike is very involved with conversations inspectors and I don't think that they would do a relocation without requiring submitted plan plans to be revised. >> So >> it just it seems wrong to me and I mean no disrespect to anybody why a new property owner is paying the full price for a matterof fact variance when it wasn't theirs and it was a mistake made by previous city employees, whatever. If if that makes sense. It just doesn't seem right to me. So >> So, so in defense that it wasn't it was contracted employees. Yes. You didn't have the appropriate oversight. And now we have staffing. It looks dramatically different than what we had in 2015. >> I'm I'm grossly aware of that. I'm just saying it still doesn't sit right with me. >> The re the reason it's because we're trying to do something different and it has to be in compliance. the the alternative is that all the other taxpayers pay for the time of the staff uh for that. So we have corrected it so it won't happen again and that's what's important. I regret that it has occurred >> and we don't I I hope we don't have another business that turns into the same kind of situation that the Fernzes are going through right now. just I I thought agger business's stuff was going to be a little bit easier than what this one is. And uh I hope we've been able to shore up a lot of things. I thank the Fernandezes for being patient and being I'm going to call you guys a guinea pig on this process and helping us rewrite an ordinance or write an ordinance that is fair and and right to everybody else. But this has been a long type deal. Are there any other conversations we're going to have about this or are they going to be able to stick a shovel in the ground sometime soon? >> There's no more. There's nothing that goes back to council as far as the approval. So, >> all right. Their wine is wonderful, by the way. I traded some honey for it. It was pretty darn good. So, >> good day. >> More to come, guys. Thank you guys very much. >> Thank you. >> All right. Then on to planning. Uh we'll start with 7A which is site plan for St. uh Theresa Cork uh St. Theres of Corkran phase two. And um maybe I can summarize some of it off the top and then staff feel free to fill in whatever I miss the big picture of just for the time sake. Uh I believe it's addition of 31 units of um indivi of independent living uh with two additional kind of community room spaces. Uh under uh expanded underground parking and then the discussion of the linear park improvements versus the park dedication in cash which is about $125,000 cash value. um which is for council to kind of discuss. Other than that, those are the big picture things. >> Yeah, I would add that um uh in addition to the issue about park dedication fees or construction of the lineal park, there's also potentially in working with the applicant on this potential to use uh the lineal park for construction staging and we would need to incorporate that into a development contract. Council's comfortable with that. I would remind you they did use our park when they built their initial one. And then um there the condition in the code they cannot provide all of the landscaping on site. And so the code allows um them to either plant the 25 missing trees on city property or for the city to take cash and plant the trees elsewhere. If you choose to do the allow them to design and construct the lineal park, the parks commission felt like that would be a terrific place to put those trees. And so tonight, we would like your direction on those three out items, pretty much all related to the park, but three items. And then we would work with the applicant um to um develop a plan for improvement, bring it back to the parks commission, and then bring it back to you with a development contract. >> I had a chair, I had a comment on that. So I support the idea of doing the offsite trees and trying to develop at least a portion of this park ahead of time. 25 doesn't seem like enough. Is it worth looking at using some park dedication and maybe doing a joint project to do the full landscaping of that area so it can start to grow? Uh since we will be doing it anyway, I'm guessing tree prices will continue to go up just like everything else does. There could be some savings in making that investment now after the construction is complete and take advantage of that growth cycle. I mean that we could do right >> well or could that be included in like the the second bullet from the bottom park dedication piece or construction of the lineal park? Could you could include that within the scope for the construction of the lineal park in terms of greater landscaping like what what does the lineal park >> entail? Yeah, >> which I'd imagine that would go through maybe commissions or at least parks and trails. >> So, one of the discussions that we've had is we have a joint meeting on March 12th to discuss our our park planning. That would be a good opportunity to discuss the future of this as well and provide some guidance as the parks and trails commission will be there. Uh, >> and that's something I know the applicant is working with their design team to put something together. I've talked with them about that. I don't know if we'll have a by then, but the idea of um if they they do owe approximately $125,000 in park dedication fees. And so uh what we talked about is design and build the trail, the meandering trail. Um, and with any money that's left, let's think about, this is from the parks commission, potentially installing concrete areas for some benches for some, um, places to stop and sit under the trees and see how many trees we can get in there. So, parks uh, gave them sort of some wide direction. We're looking forward to seeing a plan from them. When I spoke with Josh from the St. Terres team, he felt like they were going to be able to add a few extra things. So, hearing Additional trees is something at least some of the council might want. That would be something that they can take back to their design team, I think. But nothing would be approved without parks and trails commission and then council on plan. >> I second Jeremy's comments about start growing it now. Anything we can put in that would be a great idea. So, and it'll be an amenity for everybody in that community. being able to walk, sit down, do this stuff. It would be it would be a neat joint deal and such. So, >> and maybe some bigger trees, not since it's going to be a park more more quickly than some of the other parks, maybe have the trees be a little bit bigger since we could put some benches by them versus little baby trees. >> As long as they live. >> Yeah. I'm also interested in what we can do to isolate it from 116 because a trail adjacent to a county road with lots of big truck traffic isn't necessarily intrinsically appealing. So, can the landscaping plan address that in some way, but shrubbery? I don't know what else could be included, but I'm sure there's creative people who can solve that problem. >> I just heard Monty Python. You said shrubbery. There's some uh uh rain garden uh basins there that are pretty good natural buffer at least for the southern half. >> The side won't the sidewalk won't go right against 116. >> No, it'll be it'll be inside of the ponds that you see out there, the little mini ice rings when I drove by this. There's some natural separation with that storm water management design. >> Yes, I see those fill up with water instead of being dry. So, it's cool. >> Plant some nice big native willows. >> Native willows. >> I had one question, Mr. Mayor. >> It says signage. We We don't allow freestanding, those kind of things, but I remember a conversation a while back that St. Theres came up to came in front of us and asked for some signage changed on the building and such. Will they be able to put They wanted more signage. they wanted something bigger. Those kind of things. Is that still part of a conversation at all or not? >> I think it's a conversation we could have maybe at a later point. Not necessarily part of this application, but >> Okay. If staff has anything to add or >> right, I don't think they're interested in more building signage. Uh but they were they are interested in uh somehow we had this conversation previously about having that gateway talked about having at both 79th and city center drive to being part of that and so I know they would welcome the opportunity to be part of that. We do not allow offsite signs as a general rule but that is something in our city center >> but if if that's appeased them of signage on those gateway signs and stuff. Good. I'm good. Thanks. I just I remember they were asking Any other questions? Can't wait to see more. >> What you guys do is awesome. Thank you so much for taking care of many many of our residents in our town and and welcoming new. So, >> sure. >> And for hosting us for an open house, too. >> Yeah. Thank you for for doing that, >> being part of the community. >> I'll be there. >> Um, so let's see here. lang the motion. And I guess a lot of the discussion was more direction for for future meeting >> 12 and stuff regarding think we're generally aligned with um how we'd want to see some we want to see the process of the designing of that but >> open to that uh linear park aspect being done and the rental uh for staping. Um I'm assuming if amount of that fee would be figured out by >> we will work closely with the applicant. We've asked them to provide construction cost estimates. We're very familiar with how much things cost. >> So we'll take a look at that, work with them, have a little back and forth and bring it back to you. >> Perfect. >> Hopefully soon. >> Perfect. And then anything else that uh you need feedback on from council? >> I don't think any feedback, Mr. Mayor. We would be looking for Um, a motion to approve the site plan. >> I will go ahead and make a motion to approve resolution 2617, >> approving the site plan as recommended. >> Um, and discussed a second. Perfect. Second. >> Any discussion? All those in favor say I. >> I. >> All right. Thank you. And then that we have a quick 7B J. I'll toss that to you. >> No, I'll toss it. >> I don't I don't have a presentation of this. >> Dwight Dwight, >> you messing with stuff. There she blows. >> So, uh, the last time the land use application process was discussed with council was back in January of 2024. At that time, the diagram was created by myself as very lovely. Um, but it's also very complicated. But this has been added to our land use application uh form and it requires a signature um of the just so that they're aware that it is an intensive process, but basically all land use in the city is subject to this process. um whether it's a subdivision for homes or a conditional use permit interuse permit, they're subject to some uh for most of these boxes there. It's because development is very sight specific and and desire specific of the property owner. It's difficult to say um that it applies that this exact format will apply to every single application. I don't think that's exactly true, but this is the general idea of the steps that individuals will take in the report provides more details on each step as well. So, feel free to let me know any questions that you have. Um, there's anything you want me to work um walk through further, but this is just meant to be the a visual of what we are doing as staff and we're working with property owners um to work to work uh to get to a yes as to what their goals are for their property. >> Can you scroll up to the top just a second? So, so mayor and council, this this was discussions as I when I first began with the city, there was some some significant concerns about the process and so we had some work sessions and got some some clear guidance and direction in terms of council's desire to not only try and simplify what is a very complicated process, but more important clarify. And if if you recall, there was one particular development that was the catalyst for this discussion. And it was a property owner who came in that had had a application in process for a couple years. and they had come and they'd sat down with staff and and they were upset about staff's understanding of a particular uh um code is or know particular uh zoning ordinance as it related to a property. And so they they insisted that that property didn't fall didn't it didn't apply in this case. And and so my my point of bringing this up is these processes uh staff continues to work with property owners and at the direction of staff and and we are adjusting the process. In that case uh you recall we did a moratorum at the request of the property owners. We did a lot of research we got it back and we got clarification and then we came back to the process. So, so the reason I'm trying to say that is but for that that particular property owner wanted just to come to council and make their case. If they had done that, council would not have gotten all the information they need from staff because it cost staff time and energy to invest in these properties. And Corkran uh philosophy is that development pays for itself. And so if somebody wants to do something with their property and it incurs expenses, the person who wants to do those things should pay for the expenses associated with that. Uh so if somebody just comes with an idea, I I can think of one piece of property on the corner of 10 and 116th. I think I've been involved in at least five different conversations in which they've come in, it costs them no money to sit down with staff and say, "I want to do this idea." And then as they sat down with that idea, staff gives them feedback on here's some of the concerns that would be related to your proposal. If they get past that so that then we can do the deeper dive rather than the initial look. That deeper dive costs money >> and then we can come forward with the concept plan to council. If we did not do that staff work, it would be incomplete and actually a disservice to a property owner who came in here. Council gave them, I like this idea, but staff hasn't done the due diligence to find out, for example, that particular property has significant issues ahead of it. And now the property owner is angry with staff because council said we could do it, but council couldn't say you could do it because you didn't have all the information that you needed in order to provide that direction. staff's responsibility is to provide the information. We can't provide the information if we haven't been asked the question. If we're asked the question, then we have to do work that costs money and that's on the part of the person who wants to develop. But the first one is always free. >> The first hour of the pre so the pre-application meeting basically the first hour it's not really free. It is we believe it's recouped with the eventual application fee. So basically our application fees have built into the assumption that most pre-application meetings are one hour long and most of them will result in a land use application. Um there are there are pre-application meetings that don't move forward for for whatever reason. Um so sometime that balances out. Um but for pre-lication meetings that extend past that hour, we do take a small $500 ask either a concept plan or other formal applications. >> So that that's the reasoning behind this. It was at the direction of council to in order to fulfill that if people want to do things that cost money which is staff time then then there's a fee associated that that they have to pay. But also at the direction we we meet with them for an hour to try and identify any potential issues so that we can resolve them before they spend a dime. >> If they came to council first before it got to staff and council said we don't like that idea, it wouldn't even have to go to staff. So staff would waste no time on it then. >> So I can use an example. Uh Continental came here three years ago. and council said we don't like that idea and then they came back and they talked to staff what is it that you don't like about it and then they modified it and then they came back with another idea now in each of those cases because this was a potential development that that pro that party paid for expenses associated with it and then now they finally come forward with an idea that several of you are happy with and that would serve that but for that process they might not come back. >> I think part of the concern too is just identifying all the issues and the different things that were weighing a land owner might not fully understand the what all different aspects of the zoning code are coming into play that they were even asking what flexibility that they would need. That's really why we um that concept plan really is a first chance to okay uh let's do a overview of this property. What what do they want to do? What other complications come into play? Like is there a non-conforming use? I don't know that all that information comes out. We have had a couple times where people have come to the council um where there was no concept plan and staff did not do any type of beforehand analysis. Um and feedback provided did not line up with what actually had to move forward for that process because there wasn't any due diligence beforehand to have it clear to have the issues clearly outlined to council that we needed to work through. So I think It's It's not I There might be situations where it's a no, but staff can't assume it's a no. Staff really actually assumes it's going to be a yes. We're just going to have to have work through mitigation. Um, and the reality is is we can't really work through what the yeses need to be without doing a concept plan review. >> I I would also say that uh we've had several people having spent uh significant time with all of you. I I have a pretty good pulse oftentimes on things that you wouldn't support. And so, uh, there have been many Continental Continental would be an example after they got a rejection, they called me and they said, "Is there any way for us to potentially get TS?" And I said, "These are my understanding of the things that council's concerned about. You would have to address these issues." And then they they started to modify their plans. Uh so so my my point being uh there there are helpful conversations, but we also had a property owner that was trying to talk with different council members and was not telling the whole story, >> right? >> They they were trying to get to yes without addressing some of the things that staff had told those property owners that were issues. They were downplaying the issues and then upplaying some of the other concerns >> a a a one-on-one call with what they would think that that council member would like. >> Yeah, they they totally did that until that's why we finally got them here into the council chambers and said, "Okay, we're at a place now we need to have a conversation with council to get clear guidance and that's when we did that moratorum." >> Well, for that one too, I just wanted to clarify. I think part of the reason why this conversation happened before we even were talking about the moratorum is because they wanted to skip the concept plan process, the feasibility process. They wanted to skip all of these pre-application processes >> um that are simply needed in order for a preliminary plat to move forward and there was a lot of argument about what we needed. So in that case they weren't going to do a concept plan. They just wanted to move forward with the preliminary plat but we weren't able to get the feasibility study um to move forward which is needed to identify infrastructure needs. >> So help Oh go ahead. But there are cases where you don't need a concept plan if something is clearly within the code, right? That only occurs as an escalation. If something doesn't >> So um how would I generally recommend to I would say our code allows anyone to do a concept plan. They really want that assurance they can do that. I generally recommend it as a the time and cost that as far as the time and cost, it's like the least cost um as far as our applications and the least time. We do try to streamline that process. Um, but I generally recommend it when there's more than one variance or I really don't think there's going to be support for the variances requested. Um, or we need to understand what that would look like. Um, and that it is required for PUDS. So there but yes, like if it's if it's a straight site plan, everything they really don't have any variances they're requesting, everything complies with code, then I do not necessarily recommend the site plan unless that's something they So, help me understand or walk me through this. Let's let's say that I came to you and I said, "Natalie, I'm super excited. I love Dalia so much and I want to start selling them because I want everyone to be able to appreciate the Dalia as much as I do. So, I want to make a oneacre plot in my backyard and it's going to be solid Dalia and I'm going to build a little for sale hut. I'm gonna put on the end of my driveway so they can buy Dalia at the end of my driveway for $10 a bunch. What process would I have to go through with this in order for that to happen? >> So, as far as there I don't know about Dalia specifically, but there are some egg there is some egg ability to have a stand. So, we would have to evaluate whether it falls under that exemption where there is not a process because is treated a little differently. If it was something that was having customers come to the site, um it may be something that's a simple as a home occupation um registration. Either we have three levels of >> I think what she's getting at is what the process is for the >> correct. So, so if you're just calling to see what your property zoning is, if this is something that's an allowed use, that would probably fall under the general information gathering and we've, you know, offered to set up a pre-application meeting when you have more of a concept of what you're thinking. Um, so then staff would meet with you uh likely uh not likely planning and engineering that would meet with you to kind of work through what you're thinking, how you think the site would function. Um, and then that's where we first try to start addressing what type of application this falls under. I think in this instance probably be a home occupation license um which could be done administratively technically. So you might skip quite a bit of this process if you fall under administrative review. Um, if there were some if there was something that was completely outside of the scope of our current ordinances, then we would likely move to that concept plan to see where it falls to see um how it best falls with our current ordinances, what would need to change with our current ordinances in order to get to yes. And then we bring that to council for feedback at during the concept plan. if there is any infrastructure that needs to be evaluated. That's typically when we identify whether a feasibility study is needed and then we would move forward with the submit formal land use application. So it really depends on how whether or not it's something that fits within our current structure or not whether you're going to do that concept plan step. >> So to just do like a garden like a oneacre garden which really isn't huge that's a huge process to go through. Well, so again, the the one acre garden you wouldn't need anything for. If you're talking about customers coming to the site, that would probably be an administrative permit. So, you're not going through this whole process, as I said. >> Okay. >> If it's something that doesn't fall under our code as it is, then yes, you would have to go to a concept plan. But I don't what you're discussing is I I think we're trying to compare apples to apples and not quite there. >> That would probably be hashed out in that like threehour meeting, right? Yes. If it's something beyond that, that's when you determine, okay, there might need to be more meetings to figure out what the ask would be in terms of >> variances or ordinance changes or if it's possible at all or not. Um, and then that would go to staff some more that to council further. >> And and sometimes these conversations start out that it's it seems as simple as what you're saying and then now when they come back and they go and I'm also going to sell honey and bottles of wine >> or or I also want to have weddings on this and now we're talking about a different classification >> and and then and then folks are frustrated. Well, wait a second. And I was just Yeah. But now you also said you wanted to have a bunch of people to your site and you're adding this and and that has happened in the process numerous times which people have pivoted from what they initially asked for, right? >> And they've expanded the scope of the request and then they've blamed staff for the fact that the requirements have changed. >> Right. >> The one that we just had in here is an example. >> Yep. that that's an example that the the concept when they originally started to where we landed today, it has morphed so much over the course of this. And and I also want to emphasize that staff at your direction, but also our desire is to help people. >> So that's another example. The last city that I worked in, that community development director would have said, "Tear that damn shed down. Don't care." >> That's exactly what he would have said, and it would have been torn down and they wouldn't have been able to do anything. uh staff has been working very hard in order to try and help property owners with the variance uh in order to try and but as people keep pivoting what they want. >> Yeah. >> It's watching a bouncing ball. >> Is there is there a way that you could give us a little bit more of that information or should we just say to our applicants you really need to work through staff? They have it. They're giving you direction. They're doing this. It is going to be your least expensive way to get to the end. >> Council member Varap, that's exactly why I brought this up today is because this process was developed at the direction of council. The reason this exists and so we're just wanting to get direction. If there's a desire to deviate, that's council's prerogative. But if you're happy with our process and procedures, then we need to affirm it and and not deviate from it because it's our deviations that put us Mr. Ames isn't here. But that's what >> that's when decisions are arbitrary. >> And he just affirmed to me so so he's not able to be here tonight, but when I talked to him on the phone this afternoon, one of the things he said, please remind them that part of the reason we found favor uh in some of our litigation is because of our consistency of process. It's it's when we deviate from process that we're liable for further litigation and we're really vulnerable then. >> So I keep hearing I'm telling you exactly what I hear. Why do I want to develop in the city of Corkran when I got to spend $200,000 in extra to get a no answer? Has anybody ever spent that kind of money? >> Uh I don't believe a no answer. >> Yeah. I So I don't believe anything that since I've been here got $200,000 to a no answer. >> I think Eagleber Eagle Brook Church must have been pretty close. >> Eagle Brook Church I believe did have a significant escro, but that that predated me. So I'm not too sure. That's why I said since I've been here I'm not aware of that. Um but I don't believe it was 200,000 like I believe the last 36. >> Silly stuff by here. But that wouldn't have changed by what process change would have changed the outcome of that. >> Right? But I'm I'm I'm not going to specific. If I if I go specific international, it's already built. It's done. >> They followed this process, right? >> This process wasn't as clear when came in now. >> It was but it was a similar process. Yes, it's been a similar process for >> but if they follow this process, this will be the least expensive way or the least >> the cost would be least if they just follow this process. >> So, so if I could say one thing in terms of the cost, some other cities have a different philosophy in terms of how to deal with development and so staff costs will not be paid for by escrow. The city bears the cost of that as part of developing the city. So one of the challenges and the reality of developing in corporate is there's a philosophy that development will pay for itself. That costs money. >> So if people don't like that then they vote with their feet and they don't develop in corporate, >> right? >> They'll go to a city that will subsidize their development. >> Yeah. >> Just just to our east >> and uh and and it they'll they'll have a different process and a different >> Well, they they can they can afford to subsidize. we we have no resources to help subsidize and that's that's a conversation I have >> but that's an important clarification when people start to talk about the cost of developing in corporate the foundational reason is our philosophy so if development's going to pay for itself that's part of the reason why we don't do tip districts too so if we did tip districts it would the cost of development would look different >> and and again 30 years ago in the community to the east development had to pay for itself right it was not subsidized by the cities. >> The previous city I worked for, they also did not subsidize. So it's not unusual. Our model isn't unusual. >> Um it's it's >> and it hasn't stopped people from developing, >> right? So my question I guess is is should we have a different model because develop like when developers come in this is a great model to follow but like if a smaller person comes in that looks at this and says there's no way I'm going to be able to do my oneacre garden and sell flowers at the end of my driveway because this is this is too much. again that that that example something like that where it's a small home business where it's just customers coming to the site with no employees then that's this isn't the process. >> Okay. >> So I I think it really is very specific. I mean someone is talking about something that would require a zoning ordinance amendment. >> Um I don't see I don't see a way that we can require some people to go through the zoning ordinance but then decide to wave it for others. And that is when we're can be subject to all the sense of choosing favorites >> um treating people differently under the same code, which is very problematic. It can lead to laws until we are liable. So that I >> But for your example, it would I think it would literally be meeting up our free time with Natalie or Dwight or whoever. And then probably it'd be yep, you can do this or there's here's the one variance you might need. >> Like this seems like this wouldn't be like for homebased businesses. Like I feel like we'd have, >> right? We have a different conditional use that >> how many have we done of those? Do we do we have like an estimate? >> I don't have an estimate. No, the last couple years um >> I I I could follow up with that data. I don't want to speculate. I don't have a number on the top of my head at all. Uh but we do have a conditional home occupation process. There's also permitted homes which is just a registration and there's also administrative if it's really minimal for what you're talking about that I envision with the information you're providing that that would be the process. Now also they want to be able to have weddings in the garden >> then we're talking about yes they're going to have to go through this process >> but parking's required in a different way. >> Yeah. Uh, one one last thing that I I want to say and and uh if it's a clean slate and there's no like you haven't done anything else on your property, that's a different process too than if you've already built your stand, you've already >> done all of the things and then you're coming back and you're trying to ask the city to bless all the work that you've already done without authorization. >> That complicates things now. >> But it's still the same process. It's just now I think that it's they feel like it's unfair because they've already done it, but they never went through the process to begin with. So that so there wasn't this kind of tension to begin with. The other thing I will add is staff and not we we this process has been fine-tuned and adjusted over trial and error for a couple of decades. Um and there there are definitely areas in our code where we could further streamline things to make things easier for property owners. We have conditional use permits that are required for sidewall heights. accessory structures. I haven't ever seen one be denied. Should we be looking at making that an administrative approval? I believe so. I think planning commission would very much like that. They feel like it's a rubber stamp and they feel like their position is very ceremonial when that's all they're getting. I think they also think that we could talk about is site plans. If it truly complies with the code as it's written, is it meaning is it worthwhile for the cost and time to get it in front of you um just to rubber stamp it? >> Planning to bring this up on the 12th >> approval. I don't want to be the 12th. That's not planning. >> We can certainly bring this up as discuss there's we have ideas >> whenever we do a joint. I think it'd be great to hear all this. >> So we can certainly do that but I would say I think the issue that's brought this up there's not a way to streamline that process because we're talking about changing the code. >> Yeah. But some of those code changes like you said probably should >> there are definitely ways we can make things a little easier for people who are just trying to operate within our code. >> I agree. I don't think I've ever seen the sidewall height denied. >> Yes, >> it's always just been >> on consent done. >> Yeah, we could correct it. >> Yep. >> That might be an easy one. Okay. Anything else on this? >> I have a quick question on the concept plan portion. So, the concept plan review is the easy off ramp if something is not going to be acceptable to council where they can find it out before they invest a lot. Do we ever get complaints that they don't get clear enough feedback from council where they don't know whether they should proceed or not? Like is there something we should look at in the output of that discussion >> that would create greater value? >> Yeah. Every once in a while I think well I would say that a couple times it's like staff feels it was pretty clear that maybe the applicant didn't feel it was clear. We're like no there's not support. Um so I I think but I think generally staff tries to summarize all the issues that we are looking for guidance in those concept plan reports. Um it would be very helpful if each point was touched on so that there is a little bit more uh clarity for the applicant and staff to move forward. Sometimes it can be exhausting. Believe me I'm the one writing the staff reports. So this is Kendra it can be exhausting to write the staff reports. I'm sure it's exhausting to discuss everything, but at the same time, um, when those items aren't touched on, uh, or it's a it's really positive feedback, but we don't really get to the crux of the details, uh, that can be a little difficult as we navigate with the applicant forward. So, >> can I suggest something there? >> Um, >> when I'm reading through those longer ones, it can be challenging to keep track of everything. I know you've got like a bullet section you've been adding over the last like six months or so. >> Do you want that in the front? >> Can I suggest that you create almost like a worksheet for me that at the end of the document or maybe at the beginning these this is a bullet of the issue, all the issues that we need opinions on and then a section where I can put in my level of concern from 1 to 10 about that issue and my comments. That'll make it easier for me when I'm giving feedback to not something. >> Maybe you guys want to connect offline and see if you can figure that out. >> That that actually might be really helpful. Uh what what one of the things that I was thinking about is actually to go with each concept plan and say, "I would be in favor of this if A, B, C, and D were true." That would be very clear feedback. Or there's, you know, no snowballs in Ela would ever put me in favor of this. I think when you guys are all on the same page that you don't like a project, a previous example was uh the the landscaping, composting, a whole bunch of stuff happening on that property right by the creek off of 19 and 10. Um you guys were all very clear that there this was not the right site. I think there was maybe some more discussion on potentially allowing the use somewhere else, but that was not going to be the site. And so that application was very that applicant was um took that message and has not moved forward with that site. Um and part of that too is staff tried to tell them from the beginning that we didn't think it was the right site. They wanted to kind of get have a chance to have a different answer and make the case for their application. And so the concept plan allowed them to do that because um our direction was I think at first this isn't going to be this was very confusing in terms of the many different uses and we were very concerned about the the proximity to the creek. >> To to that point I want to build on that for a second. So the ones when I've been in with the with the staff meeting the pre-application meeting it's not uncommon for staff to provide that kind of candid feedback like with what's going on or what you're asking to do. The barriers are this that we see. Uh and one of those barriers might be past examples where this has come forward and not seen favorably by council. That kind of candid feedback happens. Uh and and still some applicants choose, nope, you just don't know my special pet rock. >> Yeah. Well, with regard to what you said though with Continental, they came back several times. And so, I mean, I guess you don't really know because it could be I've changed this. I've done something here or talked with Natalie and I made this change to my zoning plan and I want to present this again. >> So, also to speak to that, they liked working with staff. Like they've had some cities in which they've said like, uh, wow, this this would be way too hard. they they felt like, okay, I can see a way forward here. And so that was part of that collaborative sphere, too. They saw the potential here for this site. Uh they thought that there was a way forward and they thought that collaborating together eventually could get there. >> And Jeremy, maybe I I'd recommend you and Natalie and Jay want to touch on kind of your idea there and see if maybe there's something you can come up with that would be helpful in general um or not, >> worth looking into. Um, also I've had pretty good success. It took a while to kind of get there, but with chat GPT with feeding it a specific agenda item, some prompts about um, you know, from my first read through of specific areas of concern I wanted to look into more, making a bulletoint list of the issues of discussion topics of areas where flexibility is requested, etc. And in especially the last like six months, it's been pretty good. Um, so some trying. >> All right. And with that, any staff reports? >> Uh, just one. Um, Mr. Mayor, uh, you're aware, but for the rest of the council, uh, the mayor and, uh, Chief God and I met today with Senator Liur, uh, to get his feedback on the potential for state bonding, uh, portion specifically training site uh capabilities uh as part of the civic campus. Um he provided some really helpful feedback. Uh previously we met with uh representative Robbins. She also pres presented some helpful feedback. Where we're at in the process is the res revisor's office should be receiving here a draft of the bill or it's being put into the bill form here within the next week. that will be extremely helpful for the next stages. Uh our um our lobbyists uh are communicating with me multiple times a day about who they're talking to and what they're what they're talking about. And we've had some really great conversation with some of our neighbors and potential partners. Uh so um there's definitely some challenges ahead, but there's a lot of optimism in terms of the potential of of us receiving some funds. Uh so that's and then uh earlier this afternoon uh from Kelly Morrison's office got short notice notification uh potential for community project funds uh and uh I have to turn them in by next Friday and there's a lot going on. >> I will say we have done it two times in less than a week. So, it's technically possible. Not >> the last one I submitted, we did uh JCB and I did it in half a day and we got $500,000 >> and now we have no LM. >> And the first one with water, I think we had a day about and I called Bisy and I said, I've got good news and bad news. So, so, so with this one right now, so that we we don't muddy the waters with the the police department portion with state bonding because we don't know what will happen with that. Right now, my recommendation and and I want to get any clarification, direction is uh that we focus on two potential targets for community project funding. one is the other nuances of our civic center that I that I have to go through the guidance on CPF to see what will qualify. But if you would trust me to do that, some of the things that would be uh related to community spaces and some of the other stuff as much as I can get uh within there that will meet their requirements. That would be my suggestion of of an alternative target that will help bring down the civic campus expense uh and and potentially bring in some funding from federal. Uh so on that one, is there any other thoughts? Is there >> support themed items? We talked about that as a a park >> idea coming. >> I I can explore that too. Um that's that's a great suggestion. Uh and then and the other one is we during our space need study we identified uh 40,000 square foot need out at public works and that might be a really good target that we have currently no no current plans uh to do. So, in terms of us being able to address some immediate needs, uh, that we don't currently have a plan for how we meet them, that might be a helpful target. >> If we ended up doing the water tower on parcel to the north, would it make sense to have some public works storage at that location as well? So, certain number of snow plows, whatever other equipment, so not everything is located in one spot. Could that be another federal So, so the plan right now, if you call it that, we've got four projects that we're looking at for that $10 million in water funding. >> First, first first priority is the water tower. Uh second priority is the well. Uh the third priority is the booster station. If we're able to get those within pricing, remaining funding, uh would go towards what what's been identified in the bond for utility uh maintenance. uh the the best location of that would we also be able to use as a parks maintenance facility if we were to do it adjacent to Heritage Park. That that would then eliminate the need for a parks maintenance building for the future and and allow us to address that utility maintenance need today. We can also and we need to uh that's for uh some of our utility um TAC funds. uh those need to go towards a building and so we can match that in order to get right now we're projecting a need of like 10,000 square feet there. Uh this is out at the we we already had a significant shortage out at public works. So we've got a plan for utility. We got a plan on this side of town. We don't have any plan right now to address that. My question was, if we're going to be doing construction here for the water tower, is there any way to get some leverage by using federal funds to do some of that 40,000 square feet in a different location potentially doing the project? >> So, the timing we can't do that till 2027 and we have to spend the water funds in 2026. >> So, it's it's a timing issue. Uh, and then also the site there might be some site problems uh that I have to talk with Kevin about. So I I don't know if that could work. Uh, but it's definitely a timing issue for when we have to get the water tower built. Um, and and we haven't the the advantage to the public works building is we currently have the data that drives the demand because we did a facility condition assessment, we did the space needs assessment. we can demonstrate the need with some data that drives some of those decisions uh and and and talk about the impact of it. Um the other one's conceptual and I don't have the data that would help with that. >> It's hard to get it in a week, right? I have just a thought um this since you've been talking about the campus um once we get to the point where we have like an estimated cost after we've gone through all this like have we considered like for the size of it and what's going to be in it for one thing how are we going to pay for it like long-term maintenance and then do we have to hire a building maintenance person >> to take care of the building >> so the building maintenance we've we've restructured in in the last year. So that actually parks maintenance does facilities maintenance too now. So they've already taken over this building for facilities maintenance which wasn't previously true. Uh our our building official used to take care of this building. Uh thankfully he did a fantastic job. >> Uh but trying to align towards what you're talking about for your concern. it's going to require uh some staffing and so we've already started to make some of those some of those organizational changes to be prepared not only to address current needs but be prepared for future needs >> right >> so to clarify public works was a possibility civic campus is a possibility uh the I don't know that I have the time uh to to generate because we haven't done the work to explain what we do like we don't even have a concept for a veteran park right now >> and that might be coming up in a conversation at another meeting. >> Right. But I have to do this by Friday. >> No, I'm saying with a different funding course. >> Correct. Yeah, there might be some veterans funding we might get and some other alternatives. So, um I I was planning on trying to submit two. Is that acceptable or is there different guidance? >> I think that's good. >> I think that's good. >> What do we get? Three. I mean, >> so so I'll see what I have for time. I mean, I'm I'm happy I would imagine we'll get one additional lucky at Heritage Park. >> I'm I'm I'm meeting we're meeting with hopefully meeting with Representative Morrison on Wednesday. So, I'm going to do a draft and then we might actually only have one. We'll get get feedback on what has the greatest likelihood. >> Yeah. >> Uh >> that was it. Any other >> one last thing? I don't know if anyone's had an opportunity to look into the tree grant through the state. I don't know if it's a federal or state grant, but like with all of the or the county with all of the trees that I'm seeing in Corkran that are going to be needing to be taken down because of emerald ashbor. >> So, um we can definitely look into that. My previous experience with tree grants is there's some second and third order effects. So we we don't currently have an arborist on staff. >> Uh that was one of the challenges that I had in Chakapi is that an arborist >> had to be involved in the process for like checking on them and stuff. >> Uh so you're either paying to hire someone or in our case we sent somebody through our school >> or like a consultant, someone that would come in and help us and we could help fund it. >> We'll check to see what grants are available. >> Um here we go. Uh Karen G a l P H P H P H P H P H P H P H P H P H P Henipin County. She was a speaker at one of our >> A l >> um and she spoke to the group about some new uh and seemingly pretty available funding for tree removal and replacement. Um, and then some, uh, I guess Met Council also has some similar funding available that might be able to work in conjunction and I can send you Jay here a uh, the slides show she brought, but I would reach out to her. >> Did they speak to whether that was private trees or public trees? Uh so there was there's a program for private that that individuals can apply for and then the p the bigger program she was talking about was for public land. >> That's great. I will send that to you here shortly. Jay, >> thank you. Nothing else for sale. >> Thanks, Mayor. I had a follow-up question on the pavilion we talked about that Lenar was going to provide in lie of having to install irrigation lines. Do we know when that is going to actually be available to install now that spring is kind of around the corner? >> Yeah, we met on Friday that made the purchase but there's a fairly long lead time on it. I think it's we'll know more when they actually get the equipment, but it might be a bit summer time. >> They didn't order it when we approved it. >> Okay, >> that'll be nice when it's in. >> It will be nice. Looking forward to it. >> Anything from council? >> All right. Uh, city council schedule. Just wanted to note um our next meeting on the 12th at 5:00 for the work session will change from 5:30. So 5:00 start um we'll have three rivers correct >> for part of it and then the joint meeting with parks and trails for the >> HKGI >> and HKGI. Yep. And then a meeting at 7 and um yeah other than that. >> Are we going to do food that night? >> Yeah. >> Could I request a salad? Uh, send a note to Nic dietary request. >> Can I Steak and potatoes? >> Write it down. >> Please send a request to Nicia. >> Potatoes sounds good. >> You have any special dietary requirements? >> All right. And with that, I will entertain a motion to adjourn. >> I'll make that motion. Do I have a second? >> Second. >> Second. >> All those in favor? >> All those in favor say I. >> I.