[0:03] Mayor Mary Fasbender: I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Welcome, and let the roll reflect that a majority of the members of the Council are present and a quorum has been established. Council members, are there any corrections to the April 17th meeting? Okay. Comments from the audience: At this time, we'll have live comments, may they be either through our Zoom link or in person. We ask that attendees either raise their [0:51] hand in person or use the raised hand feature in Zoom, and they will be invited to speak one at a time. I want to also remind everyone that the public comments period is not intended for extended dialogues. When you come to the podium, please state your name and your address. Is there anyone on Zoom? Okay. Anyone in the audience wish to speak to the Council at this time? [1:27] Mayor Mary Fasbender: Step up to the podium, please, and state your name and address. [1:36] Jeff Duvlay: Jeff Duvlay, 10695 180th Street East, Hastings. I actually live in Marshan Township, but I didn’t hear about the gambling. I’m just—I want to ask a question: How many different gambling organizations do you have? I represent the VFW that have gambling in the city. [2:06] Mayor Mary Fasbender: Refer to our Clerk. [2:08] Kelly Murtaugh: Eight. [2:10] Jeff Duvlay: Eight. And do—just a couple more—do they all turn this in every month? [2:13] Kelly Murtaugh: Most. [2:14] Jeff Duvlay: And did they turn this one in from the Gambling Control Board? [2:18] Kelly Murtaugh: Inconsistently, because we haven't required that then. [2:21] Jeff Duvlay: Well, I'm just—I'm just saying that that's something that the city should be checking on every month if these gambling outfits are supposed to turn these in every month. And it’s gotta—and this has it on here: 50%. So then you should know if they are putting 50% of their proceeds—or their gambling proceeds—to this city. I mean, I know you want to change the amounts, but do you know how much these other outfits are contributing to the city by these papers they're supposed to be submitting every month? [3:09] Mayor Mary Fasbender: If you could just keep it to comments, staff can look into it and have questions answered. [3:14] Jeff Duvlay: Well, that's all I wanted to know. That's all I have to ask. Thank you. [3:19] Mayor Mary Fasbender: Well, it's not for a dialogue; it's just comments, so we can take it to staff and answer those questions and get back to you. Anyone else? Sure. [3:49] Dan Constantine: Hi, my name is Dan Constantine. I live at 3536 Douglas Drive in Hastings here, right off 316. I’m also the gambling manager for CLIMB Theatre. I don't know if—how many people here are familiar with CLIMB Theatre? We do a lot of children's programming in Hastings schools. If you don't have children, maybe ask a teacher about CLIMB or other children. Usually, if you ask them about CLIMB, they don't know what CLIMB is, but if you say, "Oh, the theater group that comes and does the plays," then, "Oh yeah, we know who CLIMB is." Anyway, we do a lot of—thirty thousand dollars in programming for the Hastings schools last year. Just that—that's just in Hastings. We have two sites in Hastings: Pub 55 and The Bar Draft House. The Bar Draft House being one of our oldest sites for 10-plus years. We also make donations to all—to any of the sports associations that ask us for donations in town here. Just this year, we had Hastings Youth Hockey—we made a donation to them; Hastings Softball—we have an event coming up not this weekend but next weekend at Pub 55 that we're working with them to raise money for them. We've also given money to people who've had tragic losses in their families in Hastings and the surrounding areas. So we do a lot to serve Hastings and the community; mainly where we serve the kids. I'm here to speak about the $250 investigative fee yearly. We don't have that from any city that we are in. We're in 10 cities at least. We don't have a yearly review process with anybody. No, never. None of the cities have a process like that. We have no problem with trade area percentages—50%—we don't feel that's too high. But when you get up to 75%, it becomes hard to do business. We do serve the community outside of Hastings also. But I'm just here to ask you to reject the gambling amendments because it would affect my charity. I'm a member of this community, and it would just be really horrible, I think personally. And there's a lot of other charities in this community that do great things also, and I would hate to see them lose money too, not just us. And that's all—that's all I have to say. [6:28] Mayor Mary Fasbender: Okay, thank you. Thank you. Anyone else wish to speak to the Council at this time? This is your time to speak. [6:47] Tom (Legion Gambling Manager): Good evening Council and Mayor. Last-minute Tom here on arrival, but—so I'm very new to the Legion. I just became a member, and I'm also the new gambling manager. So I'm learning a lot of new things right now and getting used to it all. As I get more familiar with these proposed amendments, I just want to come up and say a couple things. One— [7:14] Mayor Mary Fasbender: Tom, could you state your address please? [7:16] Tom: Oh, I'm sorry. Yes. 550 7th Street West. [7:19] Mayor Mary Fasbender: Thank you. [7:20] Tom: Thank you. I'm also a Hastings resident. Thank you. So, for one, on the 75% increase that's been mentioned several times: how that would hurt our operations and who we affect. I do get it from your standpoint if we are just a local mom-and-pop, that we don't have—we're not sort of a franchisee in per se—that we have a larger group that we represent, that we support, and we all together support our mission in several directions that were mentioned. So I feel 50% is a pretty—50% of the pie is a pretty good slice of the pie, and I think the city should be happy with that. Another thing on the 10% charitable contribution fund: that one to me—I have an issue against as both a member of the Legion and as a resident because I feel it's weird to me that the city becomes a charity itself. And in a sense, kind of—I don't know, I could be understanding this wrong—but I feel like the city is taking from—wanting to become a Robin Hood. So it's taking from another Robin Hood in town that's giving and helping out others in the community, and so they're kind of, in a sense, becoming a charity. And I don't know if that's the right direction for the city to go in. And that may be what other cities are doing, but you know, many of us have kids; we've told our kids, "Just because other people are doing it doesn't mean it's the right thing," right? So I want you to consider that as well. And so those are my thoughts. Thank you for listening, thank you for consideration, and I'm sure it's a tough decision for you all, but I just wanted to express my thoughts. Thank you. [9:24] Mayor Mary Fasbender: Tom, I think you have a question. Tom? Tom, if you wouldn't mind. [9:27] Councilmember Dave Pemble: Thank your honor. I'd like to ask a question. When we were here two weeks ago—so the numbers for me are—I mean 15, 75—I don't know what we're dealing with here. And you mentioned not being part of a—like you're a smaller group, but you're part of this larger group, correct? [9:45] Tom: Right. [9:46] Councilmember Dave Pemble: So explain to us how your charitable gambling here—and I assume you're only at the Legion here in Hastings? [9:51] Tom: In Hastings, right. Yeah, we don't have—all of our gambling operation is in and within our building. [9:55] Councilmember Dave Pemble: Is that the same thing for all of the other Legions around the state? Do they— [10:00] Tom: No, no. Okay, some—yeah, others have branched out. They'll have pull tab boxes at other establishments that are under their name, their operation, their license. [10:10] Councilmember Dave Pemble: So of the money that you make—and we're talking after price payout and allowable expenses, so your net profit amount, whatever that dollar amount is—so far you've been spending 50% of that in Hastings. What are you doing with the other 50%? [10:28] Tom: Yeah, with our—you know, I'm again, I'm new, so I'm not fully—there's definitely people here could answer that question better than I could. [10:38] Ray Kane: Ray Kane. I'm a member of the Hastings Post and Beyond the Yellow Ribbon president here in the area. So when cities have a requirement in their areas like the 50%, then we do support the community. But there's also American Legion programs we run under four pillars. So a lot of the American Legions—like we talked about last two weeks—I am Department staff, and so I run Fund 85. Fund 85 is the Minnesota Veterans Assistance Fund. So we talked about—I looked it up before I came here—we spent about fifteen thousand dollars assisting veterans in this area. And so the Minnesota Veterans Assistance Fund is if a veteran's in crisis. First—you know, we had one lady went to the VA and found out her husband was going to be in hospice at that time, so we paid her rent. So we assist like that—car payments, some tires, and that kind of stuff. In this area, you had a Hastings member that was a veteran, was pretty sick going through cancer, so we fixed his fence and made a payment and fixed his car so he can go back and forth to his chemo appointments. He's since passed away, but Fund 85 does that. There's Legionville; Legionville is a camp up in the Brainerd area that helps school patrols and teaches kids safety—bus safety. There's Boys and Girls State. We donate quite a bit of money to the VA—the Minneapolis VA Home. But we also donate—and then in the letter that you got from Sarah Sterner, the Commander-Elect, she states some pretty good hard numbers of what our district—which she is leading a district at—has actually contributed to this Hastings area. Even though, once again, the check is written out to the state or Minnesota Veterans Assistance Fund, it still goes here. Beyond the Yellow Ribbon—they've supported me, and so that check is written out to Cottage Grove, but we do a lot in here. When the city of Hastings—most of you guys know some of the stuff that we're contributing right now. So I mean I could go on and on about veterans' programs, but the money that is not spent here in Hastings goes to veterans' programming in the area. And that's something that your current residents use; they go to the VA, there's the Hastings Home, they spend a lot of their volunteer time. So even some of the money that's not donated to Hastings, they're still using that money to do volunteer work at the Hastings Home. So there's quite a few programs that the American Legion has. [12:56] Councilmember Dave Pemble: Okay, just clarifying because the things that we talked I think briefly about—what's happening out at the Vet's Home—that that would be within our, you know, the fee area or the trade area. Thank you. [13:14] Ray Kane: So, thank you. [13:16] Councilmember Dave Pemble: You've answered my question. [13:20] Ray Kane: Okay, thank you. [13:24] Mayor Mary Fasbender: Thank you, Mr. Kane. Anyone else wish to speak to the Council at this time? Sure, step forward and please state your name and address. [13:43] Resident (E.R.): [First Name E.R.] and 517 Ramsey Street. I'm here for—is this—we're still in public comment, right? [13:54] Mayor Mary Fasbender: Correct. [13:55] Resident (E.R.): Okay, I just want to make sure I accelerate time. I'm here about the resolution to amend the special use permit for Rise Up Recovery. I remember the meeting a little over a year ago when that was approved and that it was good for one year. So they have been void for almost two months now. And I understand that like there's not really hard and fast rules about whether or not things continue or if they actually stay void, but I just wanted to say that I still don't support that being in my neighborhood. I think there are probably better places in town for it, but I don't feel my neighborhood is a good fit. And I know they've worked hard on it, but I don't think they should get reapproved. I think if they wanted to amend it, they should have amended it before it was void instead of waiting almost two months to ask for it to be continued. I think that would have shown a lot on their part to do that versus waiting the two months. So that is just what I wanted to say. Thank you. [15:10] Mayor Mary Fasbender: Thank you. [15:14] Jesse Ritter: Hi, I'm Jesse Ritter. My address is 1151 Southview Drive, and I'm here for the gambling part of this conversation also. I'm kind of a different perspective than everyone else here because I own the bar. I'm not managing the pull tabs or anything like that. But I feel like—I'm not going to talk about the 50% to 75% because I don't know their bottom lines; I don't know all those things. But my biggest thing is the 10% that the city wants to take from us. To me, it's just disappointing. If you want to put that 75% in—make us do that in our trade—I think that's great. But I also think that we should get a say in where that money is going and what parts of the community we should be putting in. I have a list of everything that Doogie's donated to in 2022: We put money into the all-night grad party, Pinecrest PTA, Hastings Band Boosters, the Vet Home, the United Heroes League, Hastings Family Services, HFC Raiders Swim and Dive, Basketball Boosters, Black Dirt Theater, Hope Lutheran Church. We donated four thousand dollars to the busing for field trips for the middle school. We do a lot of good with the money that we're being given and we support all sorts of ways in the community, and we want to keep doing it. I mean, I'm always telling people, "Come and ask, come and talk to us, we can talk to our gambling people, they're probably willing to support you." I don't feel like that's something that we need to go to the city for. Like, we can do that stuff. We, as business owners, can support our community too, and I feel like that's getting lost a little bit in this message. Thanks. [16:55] Mayor Mary Fasbender: Thank you, Jess. Anyone else? Public comments at this time? Okay. Council members, are there any Council items to be considered? Okay. Council, I would accept a motion to approve the consent agenda. [17:21] Councilmember DawnMarie Vihrachoff: [Moves for approval]. [17:22] Mayor Mary Fasbender: And a second by Councilmember Haus. All those in favor of the motion, state by saying aye. [17:28] Council (Collective): Aye. [17:29] Mayor Mary Fasbender: Opposed to that motion, state by saying nay. That motion prevails. Tonight, under Administration, we have the second reading for the City Code Amendment, Chapter 110.17 and 34.303: Lawful Gambling Fees. And for this item, we have Assistant City Administrator Kelly Murtaugh. Welcome, Kelly. [17:53] Kelly Murtaugh: Thanks, Mayor. I'm not ready for that role yet—good right where I'm at, thank you. I'll just take a couple of moments just to kind of recapture or capture where we're at, review where we're at with the second reading of the proposed amendments to the lawful gambling ordinance. So I'll just give you a brief overview, hopefully clarify some things. A lot of questions came up in the discussion last time that we needed to go back and research and dig into it just a little bit more, so that was valuable feedback and valuable comments. So we appreciate those. The first reading was at the last meeting on April 17th. So I'm going to review right now, as I think you know based on the comments that have come through, the key pieces of the proposed amendments to the ordinance that's in front of you: Increasing the trade area expenditure from 50% to 75%; instituting a charitable contribution fund (10% contribution of net profits to a city-administered fund that would meet the same rules as the lawful expenditure requirements on all charitable organizations); increase the initial investigation fee from $150 to $250. That's just the first time, so I would make sure that that's very clear: the initial investigation fee is for a new organization coming in, a new organization setting up a premise permit in the city. The annual renewal investigation fee would be $150. And then the final piece would be amending the language that some of it is in conflict or doesn't appear the same way in state statutes, so we did some cleanup since we were in the ordinance anyway. So that's a brief summary of the proposed second reading that's in front of you. Just another piece to clarify, so I thought I'd throw a picture in—the trade area. There were some questions in the past on what the trade area was. The trade area is the city of Hastings plus the contiguous townships. So it extends—it's a little bit bigger than the picture you see here, but we struggled at finding a picture that would just show you our trade area because nobody else cares about that but us. So that's the trade area that we're talking about. The next piece that we wrestled with a bit last time was math. Math—that's hard. And so we wrestled with that a little bit. I will preface the math by telling you that we do get documentation from the charitable organizations, but we don't necessarily get all of this documentation. So what I put together for numbers here is a "what if": Someone had $100,000 in gross receipts, and what if they expended in prize payout and allowable expenses $85,000. Now that may be grossly inaccurate for some of you who know what that is, but we don't have that level of detail given to us. So what we wanted to show is what the charitable contributions would look like because that comes from net profits. And so a net profit in this scenario would be $15,000. And so that charitable contribution (10%) would be $1,500. There are two stars next to that; I'll come back to that, but essentially that would mean it applies to the trade area expenditure if it were 50% or increased to 75%. So again, using the same scenario, accurate or inaccurate as it might be: we have gross receipts of $100,000, we take away the prize payout and allowable expenses, we say we have $85,000 there. So we have a net profit again of $15,000. If we are expending $10,000 of that, or $12,000 or $15,000—but again, I threw out a random $10,000—then our trade area requirement currently would be five thousand dollars. And in the proposed, it would be the $7,500, but we would take $1,500 of that charitable contribution toward that. So actually, the trade area requirement would be $6,000. It's simple math because that's the math that I could do without real hard numbers with everybody. And so I hope that that clarifies that piece. And we also had this in the memo, so this should be identical to what's in your materials. The other thing that came up last time that I want—this maybe, I apologize, this may be hard to see, I tried to make it as big as I could—a number of cities we did have information on in terms of: Did they have a charitable fund requirement? Do they have a trade area requirement? And what might that be? So we pulled together the ones that came up in conversation last time. As well as, generally, this list would represent a list of cities that we typically compare ourselves to based on population. You're going to see a couple of outliers there. Newport—we don't typically compare ourselves to, but it came up in conversation so I wanted to include it here. And Saint Paul—typically we don't compare ourselves to, but it came up in conversation in some of the feedback that we got from folks, so I wanted to include it here just for comparison purposes. So you'll see here currently: trade area requirements and then charitable fund contributions. The one with the double star—Saint Paul—does not have a trade area requirement. They do have a charitable fund contribution, and as I understand it, they have a youth fund that they put the bulk of those funds in. I think they can do some other work by resolution to identify organizations, but the youth fund seems to be the big one that they get the funds toward for that. So they've designated that for certain programming. The other thing with Saint Paul is they have a 3% gambling tax. And when you have a 3% gambling tax, then you are not allowed by statute to require an investigation fee for renewals of the premise permits—the gambling permits with the city. So that's why I put the double stars there, because there's just a little different setup than what we've got here in the city. And so I wanted to note that. So those are the primary pieces that I wanted to clarify and bring to all of you with just a little bit more information than we were able to present last week. I will take any questions and do my very level best. [24:33] Mayor Mary Fasbender: Okay, thank you Kelly. Any questions? Councilmember Leifeld. [24:34] Councilmember Lisa Leifeld: Thank your honor. In consideration of all the emails, public opinion that we've received prior to coming in tonight, and public opinion that we've received tonight—with new also new information that we've received that the state legislature is looking at laws that may affect our decision here within Hastings—I'd like to make a motion that we table, excuse me, the City Code Amendment regarding lawful gambling fees, and as the chair of the Administration Committee, I would request that we send it back to the Administration Committee for further discussion. [25:12] Mayor Mary Fasbender: Thank you, Councilmember. [25:15] Councilmember Angie Haus: Second. [25:16] Mayor Mary Fasbender: Second by Councilmember Haus. [25:21] Councilmember Tim Lawrence: Thank your honor. It's fine to table it, but everybody's here so let's talk about it now too. 10% or whatever percent it is—I said this last time—I struggle with going up to... not that I participate in gambling very often, but if I were to and I saw a sign that said whatever local organization it is, I would assume that the money would go to that, not some of the money that would go to that, right? So 10% goes to something that I have no control over when I'm choosing to spend my money. So to me, although there is precedent, I don't—I don't really—that doesn't make sense to me. And likewise, not that I'm advocating for a higher trade area requirement, because I do understand there are some unique situations where you're across borders, right? I think the intent is good, though. I mean, we want the money to be spent with our children or our charities, you know, people that need things in our community. So I think you have to respect the intent of the language rather than maybe the reality of it in some cases, right? So we could allow someone to open up shop in a bar and have a really successful charitable gambling outfit and zero of it ever touches the town, and I think that's disingenuous as well. So those two things, I think, fight each other. Though, like I said, you go to a charity and you see that it's going to X, Y, or Z, 10% shouldn't go to A, B, C. But also, if it's in Hastings, you would think that, you know, a healthy chunk is going there. So I hate to, you know, put organizations in a tough spot where, you know, like the Legion and whatnot, where you—like I said, it's a bigger organization and you have different challenges with that. And likewise, I think we probably are the beneficiary sometimes of outside money, I'd imagine. I think the issue is really around ensuring that all the organizations that enjoy the ability to operate in town are following the rules and making it easier for us to be lenient and work together, right? So I would advocate for finding a better—for the administrative committee to find a better way to, you know, audit or whatever, find a better process. Maybe the current process isn't great. I see a printed-out piece of paper—is that the best way to do it? I don't know. Maybe we just need to relook at what that all looks like altogether and then later on revisit the trade area requirement. But you know, 50% is a healthy amount. I'd say 51% just to drive home the point, but I don't think 75% is necessary either. Everybody's trying to do the right thing. So that's all. Thank you. [29:11] Mayor Mary Fasbender: Thank you, Councilmember Lawrence. Councilmember Vihrachoff. [29:13] Councilmember DawnMarie Vihrachoff: Thank you, your honor. I want to thank Attorney Land for placing in our packet... there were actually three versions of the ordinance change, and so thank you for listening to our requests. I was going to make a motion to move forward with the third version of it, which actually removed the 10% contribution and then kept it at the 50% as it is. I've been involved with—I was on the football boosters in organizing and helping to do fundraising there—and although they don't do the charitable gambling, I know how our local restaurants are great partners. There's lots of businesses that are great partners, and they personally make those decisions, you know, to help our local sports associations and other charitable groups and such. And furthermore, I'm not sure where—you know, what was so completely broken with what we had had, why it was that we needed to go up to the 10% or from the 50% to the 75%. So I'm not judging that, but I'm just—having been involved with those types of groups in the past, it, you know—I mean, it's really hard to do fundraising. And so I know that the groups that actually do have the licensing to do that—I had a friend who was on the Hockey Association and he was telling me how they were going through all the training that he had to go through to be able to get that ability to do it, and it sounded like it was a huge hurdle. It was a big step. And so I think that we should be respectful of the groups that are within our community and how hard they do work to do good. Anyhow, if you weren't going to table it, that's the motion I was going to put forward—was that we move on that third version. And they weren't labeled like "A", "B", or "C", and so I'm just going to say the third one that began on page 14—or it was Alternative 2. It was like Alternative 3, actually. There's three versions in there; if you read the packet, there's three versions, and it was the third one. [31:18] Kelly Murtaugh: Yeah, I can clarify that. There are three alternatives: There's the Proposed, and then we have two Alternatives: Alternative 1 and Alternative 2. In Alternative 1, it increased the trade area but eliminated the charitable contribution of 10%. Then Alternative 2, as Councilmember Vihrachoff indicated, took out both of those pieces, left it at the 50%, and really just focused on the initial investigation fee and the annual renewal fee, as well as some of the cleanup language. [31:35] Councilmember DawnMarie Vihrachoff: Thank you, Kelly, for that. I was just going to go on to say that I am supportive of there being an annual renewal fee. You know, I mean, it takes time for staff to touch all this paperwork and make sure that things are in order. And so I think that it is completely—you know, it's realistic that if you want the city to do something special for your organization, that a renewal fee would be in order. And so $150 really isn't a lot of money when you think about how much it costs for a staff person. That's maybe just like two hours of a staff person's time and benefits, you know? And so I just don't think that that's really that far out of alignment. And so I would be supportive of at least having some kind of an annual renewal fee associated with that. Thank you. [34:49] Mayor Mary Fasbender: Thank you, Councilmember Vihrachoff. Councilmember Pemble. [34:52] Councilmember Dave Pemble: After the meeting two weeks ago and some discussion and some review and thinking about the process—and I was the one who mentioned that this ordinance hadn't been reviewed in 15 years—and how many of you sitting in the audience tonight would say, "Yep, I'm happy with things"? I say: I've got a home insurance policy and I didn't look at it for 15 years and make changes, and you just paid the annual fee. And so that was part of the reasoning behind what I was thinking—was that, you know, we need to get an understanding of this. I think as we look closer—at least as I look closer at it—it's the things, it's the language, it's the state statute, it's how the community—how the city receives the information. That it gets it on the time frame that it's supposed to be delivered. It's correct; we have all the appropriate information that's supposed to be compiled and given to the city so the city understands where we're at. I also realize, just looking this afternoon at the Senate agendas and about gambling and what's happening at the state level, that I think that there's going to be some very big changes by May 20th—if they can stop talking and do something. But I don't think that some of those changes are going to be good for any communities, let alone any organizations. But the long and the short of it right now: I look at this and say I will support Alternative 2, and that would be to increase the initial investigation fees, have an annual renewal, and then straighten up the language, including some of those things to bring us up to, you know, current standard. I know it was mentioned before about "do we use a piece of paper" or do we say, "Okay, here's a form, you go online and get it done, and it's automatic to the city"—something along those lines. Something—some of this stuff has to be straightened up to make business and the city's operation and the charitable gambling successful. But you're looking at things and we're kind of struggling with how we're going about it. But that all brings me back to the idea that 15 years have gone by, and you know, this is where we're at. And I think with some annual reviewing, or every other year or whatever it takes to keep everything up to snuff and people aware on both the city's and the state's and the gambling operations that are in this area, so that we can make everything work. And I think that's really what we're trying to strive to do. And in my point, I would support Alternative 2. Thank you. [38:05] Mayor Mary Fasbender: Thank you, Councilmember Pemble. Councilmember Lawrence. [38:08] Councilmember Tim Lawrence: Thank your honor. Again, I'll say I'm not sure what value going back to the committee will bring. I support Alternative 2 as well. As I read it, it addresses the majority of the concerns that have been discussed. Yeah, the fee probably wasn't—isn't something that people want per se, however, the reality is we are asked to do a heck of a lot with the same budget or just keeping up with inflation, you guys. And it's the same people that are working that have to do more, and at certain points, there's too much to do and we need to be able to afford that. And it's not necessarily fair to pass all of that burden onto a taxpayer either. You know, there's benefit to fees. I hate fees—everybody hates fees. I don't like taxes either, to be honest, but it's a mechanism. And to Councilmember Vihrachoff's point: If this opportunity is of value to an organization, then that fee is part of that. And I don't think it is an outlandish amount of money, but I think it does adequately represent opportunity cost—that that individual or individuals could be doing something else for other citizens as well. So I think Alternative 2 is a very reasonable adjustment to what we have, which is a 15-year-old ordinance. So I would love to be able to vote on that today. [40:21] Mayor Mary Fasbender: Thank you, Councilmember Lawrence. Councilmember Haus. [40:24] Councilmember Angie Haus: Yeah, I—knowing what we know now and that the state legislature is also passing new laws that adversely impact the operations of these nonprofits, I also have a change of thought on it as well. And I think that either tabling it or... I am in support of Alternative 2 as well. I think that it's reasonable for the investigation fee and for the renewal fee. And I think a lot of our charities and nonprofits in town do a really, a lot of good work for us, and so I thank you guys for it. [41:01] Mayor Mary Fasbender: Thank you, Councilmember Haus. Councilmember Fox. [41:04] Councilmember Angie Haus (as addressed): In honor of the motion that's sitting on the table, I'll be brief. I support tabling it with the idea that we're still waiting to find out what is going to happen with e-tabs, and we want to be fully aware of the whole situation as we move forward because that's going to be significant. So how do we actually react and respond to that in a healthy way? So there's a motion on the table. [41:17] Mayor Mary Fasbender: Thank you. There is a motion and a second. We've had discussion. All those in favor of the motion on the table, state by saying aye. [41:25] Council (Collective): Aye. [41:26] Mayor Mary Fasbender: Opposed to that motion, state by saying nay. [A few nays]. I think I heard a four-to-three. Motion prevails. Thank you, Kelly. So it is tabled for further discussion with the Administration Committee, which is Councilmember Leifeld as Chair, Councilmember Pemble, and Councilmember Haus. Council members, any announcements? Okay, I have a few—Councilmember Vihrachoff. [42:04] Councilmember DawnMarie Vihrachoff: Thank your honor. I just wanted to thank staff for responding to the concerns of residents that live on the far eastern section of 4th Street. They had made requests for staff to bring gravel into the DNR land that they had been using to be able to get to their neighborhood, and so I'd just like to show some appreciation for going that extra effort in helping them so that they could get back and forth out of their neighborhood during the flood. Thank you. [42:45] Mayor Mary Fasbender: All right. May is National Building Safety Month and National Historic Preservation Month. Next week is Municipal Clerk Appreciation Week; please join me in a great and heartfelt thank you to the employees in these departments and their services in our community. On Saturday, May 6th—which is this Saturday already—the Birds and Bison Bike Tour showcases three unique bike trails that offer stunning river views, two historic downtowns, bird watching, bison, and more. Plan a DIY parks and trails cleanup to keep Hastings clean, safe, and beautiful. Contact Paige at Parks and Rec to volunteer and pick up cleanup supplies. On Saturday, May 13th, Hastings residents can bring personal and confidential documents to the Hastings Public Works facility for free paper shredding; please no documents from businesses. Tuesday, May 16th, we have our Police Week open house—all invited to this free event. Meetings coming forward: Thursday, May 4th, 6:00 PM, HEDRA; Monday, May 8th, 7:00 PM, there's a Planning Commission meeting; 7:00 PM, there's a Utility Committee meeting; Wednesday, May 10th, 6:00 PM, Arts and Culture Commission; Monday, May 15th, 5:30 PM, we have a City Council workshop and that'll be the fire study; and at 7:00 PM, we have a City Council regular meeting. Council, I would accept a motion to adjourn. [44:37] Councilmember Lisa Leifeld: [Moves to adjourn]. [44:38] Councilmember Angie Haus: [Seconds]. [44:39] Mayor Mary Fasbender: Motion by Councilmember Leifeld and Councilmember Haus. No discussion. All those in favor of the motion, state by saying aye. [44:45] Council (Collective): Aye. [44:46] Mayor Mary Fasbender: And we are adjourned. Thank you.