This transcript has been formatted with speaker names based on the provided context of the Bayport City Council and the dialogue within the meeting. [00:00:00] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Since you just sat down, right? Okay. All right. Got the thumbs up. I’d like to call to order the July 1st, 2024, meeting of the Bayport City Council. Let's all stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. [00:00:15] **All:** 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. [00:00:28] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Matt, would you please call the roll? [00:00:30] **Matt Kline (City Administrator):** Councilmember Bliss? [00:00:32] **Councilmember Carl Bliss:** Here. [00:00:33] **Matt Kline:** Councilmember Gilmore? [00:00:34] **Councilmember Ethan Gilmore:** Here. [00:00:35] **Matt Kline:** Councilmember Kipp? [00:00:36] **Councilmember Orin Kipp:** Here. [00:00:37] **Matt Kline:** Councilmember Hill? [00:00:38] **Councilmember Katie Hill:** Here. [00:00:39] **Matt Kline:** Mayor Hanson? [00:00:40] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Here. [00:00:41] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** All right, we have a motion to approve the agenda? [00:00:44] **Councilmember Ethan Gilmore:** I move to approve the agenda as presented. [00:00:47] **Councilmember Katie Hill:** Thank you, I'll second. [00:00:50] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Sorry, no, you got it, thanks Katie and Ethan. All those in favor? [00:00:54] **Councilmembers:** Aye. [00:00:55] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Anyone opposed? All right. Next is proclamations, accommodations, petitions, and announcements. The June recycling award recipients are Janessa and Scott Waseleski at 611 5th Avenue North. Sorry if I hacked up your name. They'll be awarded for recycling efforts with a grant from Washington County. And then we move on to the Open Forum. This is a portion of the meeting to address the City Council on subjects that are not part of the agenda. Um, we actually do have someone here that is part of the agenda, but I invited him, so I hope he's not confused. The City Council may take action to reply at the time of the statement or may give direction to staff regarding investigation of comments. Express a total of 15 minutes is allotted for public comment during the Open Forum. We already knew we were going to have Mike Huntley from Youth Service Bureau come, so do you want to step up first? All right, thanks. [00:01:54] **Michael Huntley (Youth Service Bureau):** Well, thank you. Good evening, Mayor, Councilmembers, and residents of Bayport. Thank you for inviting me to take a few moments this evening to speak about Youth Service Bureau. We appreciate the city's support of our organization; in fact, that support is very necessary for our success and continued operations. My name is Michael Huntley, I'm the Executive Director of Youth Service Bureau and I've been with the organization since 1989. I'm still here because I love what we do and the purpose that we fill in the community. Some of you might be familiar with our organization, Youth Service Bureau, and for others this might be some new information. We are a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization that's been operating since 1977. We have three offices—one in Stillwater, one in Woodbury, and one down in Cottage Grove. We provide a variety of early intervention and prevention services for kids and families in our area, and we're the only organization in our area that works exclusively with kids and families. Our services include diversion, family counseling, school-based chemical health supports, youth and family education, and a military family support program. We have strong partnerships with local schools and with law enforcement. The financial support we receive from the municipalities helps us keep our fees very affordable and allows us to have a generous sliding fee scale so that families can access services with fewer barriers. In 2023, we served 799 unduplicated youth. That's a fancy way of saying we only count the youth one time in a whole year instead of if they come in for multiple services. And we delivered just over 4,000 hours of direct service to those youth. That number does not include the public speaking that we do, and in 2023 we did presentations to over 2,200 attendees. In your city of Bayport, we know in 2023 we served at least 22 youth and delivered 129 hours of direct service to those youth and families. 2023 had some challenges for YSB. We're still impacted by the impact of the "great resignation," and at times we've been operating a little bit short-staffed. However, we continue to produce impressive results and the quality of our services remains solid. I'll go quick with these statistics; I'll try not to make it boring. In our diversion services, 90% of the kids who come through do not get re-involved with law enforcement for a year or more after they complete services. In our counseling programs, 80% of parents say that the situation that brought them in for counseling in the first place was either resolved or made manageable in follow-up contacts. And 87% of the students who participate in our school-based chemical health supports report an increased resilience towards not using chemicals. So we're proud of those results. We have other data, but I told you guys I'd keep it brief. We are asking in 2024 from the city of Bayport for $1,650 in support, and I understand there's a new process where a purchase of service contract is requested. I have that, I've submitted that, and then for planning for next year, we're asking for an additional $50. So in 2025, we would be requesting $1,700 in support, and that increase is due to rising operational costs. We appreciate your support and partnership. Our website has a lot of information if anyone's interested or looking: YSB.net. Are there any questions I can respond to? [00:05:46] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** No, thank you for your time and thank you for doing that service contract. I think that will help us remember to pay you. Matt, is there any other paperwork that we need? [00:05:54] **Matt Kline (City Administrator):** Nope, I don't think so. [00:05:56] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Okay, so it is—just for reference—it is number five in our consent agenda, so we have got that paperwork ready to approve. [00:06:05] **Michael Huntley:** Very good. If you do need anything else, just let me know. Matt knows how to get a hold of me. [00:06:09] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Yeah, I appreciate all that you do for our youth. I mean, just 22 just right here in Bayport, I was surprised that the number was that high. [00:06:17] **Michael Huntley:** Yeah, well thank you. It's interesting too—we ask the kids "where do you live?" We try and keep track of that, where families are coming from. If a parent's involved we'll ask, but sometimes people use a mailing address and they think that's the city that they reside in. So thinking you live in Oak Park Heights, you might be Stillwater, and West would be Stillwater exactly. So we think we have a pretty accurate count, but it's at least 22 from... [00:06:41] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** We have our own ZIP code, so we know the Bayport kids. [00:06:44] **Michael Huntley:** Okay, good, good. Then the kids who we work with in the school should give us the right information. [00:06:49] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** They should, yes. We hope. All right, well thank you very much. [00:06:53] **Michael Huntley:** Thank you. [00:06:54] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** All right. We also—I invited Matt Hanson. Is that how you pronounce your last name, Matt? I've not met you yet. Want to come on up and tell us why you're here? [00:07:04] **Matt Hanson (Washington County Historical Society):** Thank you, yeah. Matt Hanson, I'm a volunteer with the Washington County Historical Society. I wanted to speak with you about the Stillwater Area History Spots project. Those of you may be familiar with the Stillwater Area Community Foundation, which every year has a "Great Idea Competition." Last year I proposed the idea of what's called "History Spots," which are signs located among the communities that the foundation serves where you can scan a QR code and learn about the history of the place where you're actually standing. I think in your packet in the consent agenda, there are some examples and questions or frequently asked questions about the project. The Community Foundation generously gave a grant to the Washington County Historical Society to make this project possible. Working with the Historical Society, we went through a ton of locations from Bayport up to Marine trying to find locations that would have a lot of pedestrian visibility as well as historic interest. We came up with a variety of them, and the three that we'd like to propose as signs that be placed on city of Bayport property or right-of-way would be three of them along here. One of them is in the park, Bayport Waterfront, which people could scan and learn about the sawmills that used to be in the park. One of them would be the school—somewhere in the right-of-way near the school to learn the history of the school and the buildings that were there before. And then the last one, Anderson Windows, either by the boat launch or somewhere near the factory where people would be walking by and be able to learn about Anderson history. So with your approval and the support of staff, we'd love to leave these with you and hopefully have them installed for Bayport to be part of the project. [00:09:05] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Yeah, thank you. So again, this is number 12 on our consent agenda. Matt just happened to email today that the signs were ready and I said, "Oh, we're having our meeting, maybe you can just come and deliver them and talk a little bit about it," because there wasn't a lot of information. I don't know if it was clear in the packet what we were actually approving, but it's to post these three signs, and then there's also going to be, sound like window clings that might be available? [00:09:31] **Matt Hanson:** Yeah, we'd also envision a window cling at the library, and we've been in touch with them directly about that as well. [00:09:36] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Yeah, so the library will have one, but instead of a sign, it's just going to be in their window. And possibly the Bayport Printing House? [00:09:44] **Matt Hanson:** Can you say that one more time, sorry? [00:09:45] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** The Bayport Printing House. [00:09:46] **Matt Hanson:** Are they... that's one that we've been envisioning. It's not there yet. We hope maybe to add some more; that could be a great one. [00:09:51] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Yeah, so a really cool thing and I think especially in conjunction with the fact that we're doing our historical markers right now for the Centennial Pavilion. That should be—we're getting close. We finally... we've been waiting on the Legion and they got their information to our sign company. So we're getting closer to having those. So kind of a nice thing. How long will the signs be posted? [00:10:14] **Matt Hanson:** As long as you want to keep them up. We hope that you would keep them up through say November or so. We envision this sort of a summer and fall project, but they should last for a while and the codes will keep working if the city would like to keep them up until they stop working... until people start complaining that they're not working, then we take them down. [00:10:35] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** All right. Well, thank you so much for spearheading that whole project. I think it's really great, great idea. [00:10:41] **Matt Hanson:** Yeah. [00:10:42] **Councilmember Ethan Gilmore:** Does anyone have any questions or anything for Matt? [00:10:44] **Councilmember Orin Kipp:** Is it part of a wider sort of project happening in the valley? It seems like it, right? [00:10:50] **Matt Hanson:** Yeah, he's got other spots too—Stillwater, Bayport, St. Croix Beach, Marine, Lake Elmo. Afton isn't part of the same grant, but they've expressed some interest in this as well. So we're really hoping to kind of have the whole valley be a part of it. [00:11:06] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Yeah, it's really cool. Great idea. Thank you. That's a good thing, that's what the grant's called: the "Great Idea." So that's very clever. All right, thank you so much. All right, so does anyone else want to come up to the podium? Are you here to talk about something that's not on the agenda? Big crowd here, so this is an Open Forum. I expected some interaction. You literally just came to watch because it's so exciting on the agenda? It is. And will we have a chance to take comment on whatever it is you are here about? For... we don't know what it is, so we don't know. Um, I guess we'll get there when we get there and we'll see, and I'll be open-minded to that. Well, I don't have page numbers in my agenda. I know how that works, but okay. So now we're on to the Consent Agenda then, if there's no one else that wants to speak. Consider a resolution adopting items 1 through 16: the June 3rd City Council Workshop minutes; the June 3rd regular meeting minutes; the June payables and receipts; June building, plumbing, mechanical, and zoning permits report; service contract with Youth Service Bureau; award the quote for the street light painting; temporary liquor license for Knights of Columbus for the Anderson Corporation picnic at Lakeside Park on August 10th; lease extension with St. Croix Preparatory Academy for the Nature Center; purchase of replacement equipment for the Police Department; sale of Fire Department tender apparatus; appointment of Jennifer Davis to the Library Board; placement of the featured History Spots by the Stillwater Area Community Foundation; revisions to the City Personnel Policy to comply with state law for election and earned sick and safe time leave; hiring of Dustin Perper as a full-time police officer; and a declaration of participation in Minnesota Council on Local Results and Innovation comprehensive performance measurement program; execution of a quitclaim deed for the Church of St. Charles conveying the property adjacent to St. Michael's Cemetery; and a fence encroachment agreement. Do we have a motion to approve all of that? [00:13:09] **Councilmember Orin Kipp:** I'll make a motion approving the consent agenda. [00:13:12] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Thanks Orin. Anyone want to second? [00:13:14] **Councilmember Carl Bliss:** Second. [00:13:15] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Thanks Carl. Roll call vote. Councilmember Bliss? [00:13:19] **Councilmember Carl Bliss:** Aye. [00:13:20] **Matt Kline (City Administrator):** Councilmember Gilmore? [00:13:21] **Councilmember Ethan Gilmore:** Aye. [00:13:22] **Matt Kline:** Councilmember Kipp? [00:13:23] **Councilmember Orin Kipp:** Aye. [00:13:24] **Matt Kline:** Councilmember Hill? [00:13:25] **Councilmember Katie Hill:** Aye. [00:13:26] **Matt Kline:** Mayor Hansen? [00:13:27] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Aye. [00:13:28] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Move on to Public Hearings; there aren't any. Unfinished Business is next. Consider amendments to the Fire Department Standard Operating Guidelines, and Matt's going to present the item. [00:13:40] **Matt Kline (City Administrator):** Thank you, Madam Mayor, members of the Council. Um, this has obviously been on the docket before over the last several months. Now the city staff and City Attorney have been reviewing and updating the Standard Operating Guidelines that outline the membership requirements of the Fire Department along with the hiring processes, benefits, and general terms of employment. The main objective of those proposed amendments is to make sure that the content was consistent with current legal requirements and the city's personnel policy, thereby reducing liability. Updates were provided; we've taken comments from the Fire Committee and also the City Council. And the Fire Committee was provided one last chance to review comments from a clean version; we did not receive any comments back from them. So the clean draft is located in your packet and staff is recommending that the City Council adopt a motion amending the Standard Operating Guidelines as provided. [00:14:40] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** All right, thanks Matt. Time for questions? Okay, well we've been over this quite a few times. I did go back and look at changes that I had, and they were made very well, so I don't have any more comments or feedback on it myself and I was part of that committee as well. So if anyone else has anything they have to say, otherwise we can take a motion. [00:15:02] **Councilmember Katie Hill:** I'm good. [00:15:03] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** You want to make a motion? [00:15:04] **Councilmember Katie Hill:** Sure, I'll move to adopt the Fire Department Standard Operating Guidelines as they've been presented to us. [00:15:10] **Councilmember Orin Kipp:** I'll second it. [00:15:11] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Thank you Orin and Katie. All those in favor? [00:15:14] **Councilmembers:** Aye. [00:15:15] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Anyone opposed? They pass. All right, finally done! Thank you. New Business: consider an amendment to Chapter 25: Prohibited Acts and Penalties, Article 3: Administrative Citations and Civil Penalties of the Bayport City Code of Ordinances related to abatement and recovery of cost, and summary ordinance for publication. Eric's going to present. [00:15:43] **Eric (City Attorney):** Mayor, City Councilmembers. The staff report itself, I'm not going to go through—I'll give you a summary—but I think I wanted to give a little background and context as to what initiated this recommendation from the City Attorney's office to this particular body. As you may recall, a couple of months ago, this Council authorized a code enforcement action against Mr. David Kringle for basically a decade of essentially non-compliance in keeping what is very clearly, historically, year-by-year, pretty much an unauthorized junkyard. Now, that's not a legal phrase, but I think that is a fairly accurate phrase as to what was out there on his property. In order for the city to essentially engage in code enforcement, the city has two means of doing so. It can go through the criminal prosecution process, which the city did in order to hopefully get Mr. Kringle to comply with city code and actually make sure that his property is clean and not an outdoor storage area for inoperable vehicles, as well as unlicensed vehicles and so forth for a long period of time. The difficulty that the city has had and this Council has had is that particular individual, however, was not dissuaded or actually compelled to clean up his property because of the threat of a criminal prosecution. He was prosecuted, and therefore even having that conviction was not a sufficient motivation for him, nor even a criminal fine. And the courts, frankly, are dealing with other criminals that are better put in jail rather than a resident. In those rarest of occasions, and unfortunately, we have the rarest of occasion, cities then have to look at the civil code enforcement action. Why civil? Because through the civil courts, that judge, when that particular action has a civil code compliance brought before them, has the ability to order and allow the city to go on private property and self-correct. And it was a couple of months ago that this particular Council did authorize a civil action. Our litigation team—and I'm a municipal civil attorney that deals with general civil matters, transactional matters, and real estate matters—therefore, you take the experts in this particular area within our firm, and that's our litigation team. Our litigation team has everything queued up as they looked at all the legal research and what the courts have done, found that certainly as a matter of law the city is in very good standing; he's already been found guilty, so we're really looking at now the court order to enter onto the property and get into code of compliance. But our litigation team recommended to myself and then the city that we revisit our code to make it very clear that the city has the ability, now when it incurs these costs, to assess those costs against Mr. Kringle and in those rare circumstances in the future. Hopefully, it never happens again, but if it does, then we have the ability to essentially get those costs also recouped by assessing against the property. And it suggested that the code make it very, very clear that in those instances where the city is having to go to district court and get a court order to enter onto the property and get it cleaned up, that our code also makes it clear that the city is expecting to get its costs returned back to it, and that that be very clearly authorized and expressed to the courts as guidance that that is one of the reliefs that the city is expecting as well. That way, the public dollars for a single individual who has been repeatedly through many years non-compliant and so forth is not having to bear the burdens of that, but indeed that property owner who could have self-corrected himself or herself or themselves and so forth for many years—they're the ones that are bearing those costs and those burdens. I also wanted to make it clear that if the city needs to essentially go to district court and initiate that action and the court therefore provides other matters and avenues of relief, the city, having to gone through such extraordinary actions to bring a civil action, still should be able to at least ask the court to recover whatever expenses it has incurred at that time. That's the premise, that's the goal. What you have here is now that goal, that objective, distilled down into code language. And that is the basis for the recommendation here—that when the city undertakes those rarest of actions to go against a resident and actually go into the property to self-correct, it's telling the court, "Please provide us, the city of Bayport, all the relief possible and also let the public get its money back for having to go through such extraordinary efforts." All it's doing is providing a basis to make those requests, and at the end of the day, as with all things, the judge will grant, deny, or somewhere in between. Thank you. [00:20:41] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Thank you, Eric. So, thanks for that very thorough background. We've all heard it, we all know what was going on, but I'm sure a lot of these people didn't. And is that why we're here? [00:20:53] **Eric (City Attorney):** Mayor and Councilmembers, if I could just add one point. I want to make clear that that background wasn't in the report because this is now something that will apply from here on after, regardless of whatever happens to Mr. Kringle. So I... that was purposeful. It wasn't meant to mislead, and I also did not want to make it personal to that individual, so that... that was the tension that I was engaged in. [00:21:18] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Right. It wouldn't make sense to give that background in the packet itself because this is... it's an ordinance that’s going to go on for the future, not just because of all of that, though that was what spurred it. Does anyone have any comments on the Council that they'd like to share? Staff, anything you want to say? Okay. I'm open to hearing what people are worried about if I can do that. I guess it's my meeting; I can ask them to come up if I want. [00:21:44] **Eric (City Attorney):** Mayor, you have that privilege. [00:21:46] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Okay. If you would like to come up, though, you need to state your name and your address, and we'll give you each just—you know, please keep it short because there's a lot of you here, and if you're repeating what someone else has said, just make it quick and just say "I agree with them" or whatever. Let's not be here all night; that would be great. So yeah, all right. Who wants to come up first? Sarah? Hi, I saw the cute graduation signs on my walk yesterday. Our little graduated. [00:22:18] **Sarah Jerson (Resident):** I'm Sarah Jerson, 317 Lake Street South. In my lifelong quest to volunteer, I volunteered to speak for... well, that'll make it easy... a few dozen community members that have concerns about the language that was used to draft this and how it doesn't just impact one, but many of us. So I have the letter that I can give you guys and I'll read it. Bear with me; I'm going to try to make it like speedy but also less shaky than I feel right now. [00:22:51] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Oh, don't be shaky. It's just us. [00:22:54] **Sarah Jerson:** Okay, thank you, thank you, thank you very much. [00:22:57] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Did they just get emailed today or what? I don't think I got emailed... I never saw anything. [00:23:01] **Sarah Jerson:** It's a three-pager. Buckle up. All right. "Dear Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers: We write to you in connection with an ordinance which has been proposed for adoption by you tonight. But it's important to note that our concerns are not limited simply to that ordinance. Instead, it raises questions and confirms a growing belief that there is a disconnect between our city, some of its citizens, and small business owners in connection with communication and handling of such issues. First, please observe the text of the ordinance. Specifically, what it purports to do, among other things, is to make taxpayer, property owner, or residents personally liable to the city for all fees—administrative fees, legal fees, court costs—incurred in connection with the city's code enforcement, remediation, and or restoration of the affected property. Second, it provides that the city is authorized to enter upon the affected property and hire a contractor to abate the violations and that it may conduct an abatement by whatever means and cost determined. Setting aside for a moment the Draconian terms of this ordinance, we know that it apparently first emerged with the city around June 20th. A few days later, on Thursday, June 27th, it was included in the agenda packet and thus first made public, and thereafter the city's offices are closed on Friday. This confirms some serious concerns we have about a 'promulgate on Thursday, vacate on Friday, and act on Monday' approach to regulatory government regardless of the impact it has on us residents. These should otherwise be discussed comprehensively with business owners and residents in our city, not rammed through. But turning to the substance of this Draconian punitive regulation, we offer the following observations: The adoption of this ordinance cannot be justified on any claimed grounds that there is a plague of homeowner or business property violations in the city. Perhaps you will agree with us: by and large, people in Bayport take good care of their buildings and property and are responsible and reasonable to the city requests. At the same time, the number of violations that are claimed to exist are probably reduced yet further in cases where a property owner has a legitimate and good-faith question, a quarrel, or disagreement with the city whether a violation exists. The property owner—and any property owner—should not face the punitive and enormously costly burden of paying the city's attorney fees and whatever cost it claims to incur simply because a violation is claimed or a violation is confirmed, or because they have good faith disagreement with the city about it. This ordinance in large part is intended to be or will be a deterrent to any potential challenge or disagreement and to provide a quick pipeline to fees reimbursement. This is not a relationship that the city should foster or endorse between its regulatory team and its residents and business owners. This threatens blon... Similarly, this ordinance cannot be justified on general claims that other cities have them. Some do, some don't. But Bayport’s relationship with its property owners and business owners firstly is not defined by what is vaguely claimed about other cities. I might have just lost myself... about other cities. Second, not all cities adopt such an approach, and instead many of them favor community engagement, discussion, education, and requests at informal cooperation and leave enforcement methods to general city ordinance and state statutes. In that regard, all of those provide a host of available remedies to a city confronted with a true violation. Indeed, though a property owner in the city may have a dispute in good faith over whether a violation exists, many people recognize that those formal enforcement tools only occur after confirmation of violation and repeated refusal to correct in accordance with, say for example, a court order. In other words, the city has been and is amply protected by existing regulations, statutes, and remedies to eradicate violations. Instead, this approach is apparently, in our view, reflective of an intent to not only create financial burdens for those who do not violate it and also risk of massive financial cost for those who may or may not violate but are just accused of doing so. It will squelch and jeopardize open, free, and ongoing communication. Again, there is no shortage of statutes and regulatory tools that allow you to make corrections, usually with court sanction in the first place. Repeated violations after court order is one thing, but what is written now is something different. It is telling that the 11-day-old memorandum which prefers the Draconian regulation to the City Council does not contain any showing that our city is indeed plagued with numerous continual violators, that is occurred out of pocket or out of the pocket ordinary fees in securing correction of those cases. Finally, a question: Would you have it for yourself? In other words, would you want the city to be in peril of paying attorney fees in a case that a dispute over a regulation's scope and application is resolved against the city? For these and other reasons, we invite the City Council to take a pause on this suggested ordinance and to give consideration to our concerns and the means and methods by which the city works with, communicates with, and ultimately coordinates with residents and business owners on their property uses and needs. Not all of us are large commercial industrial property owners in the city of Bayport. We'd ask that you'd recognize that and it should no longer serve as a quiet basis for disregarding our concerns on this and other matters. We are happy to work with the Council to bring about change here based on open communication, mutual goal setting, and cooperation. We view the future handling of this measure of whether responsiveness exists. Please decline or table this matter indefinitely and let us work together for something different." And this has some signatures that I'll give to you guys. Thank you for listening to me drone on. [00:29:41] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** No, thanks for reading it, Sarah, so we didn't all have to read it in silence and everyone wonder what we're reading. Thank you. Okay, um, I guess I I'm a little stunned that this is being made into such a big deal, but maybe I'm missing something. What am I missing, Eric, that is of concern that we're not... that we didn't pick up on? So, um, are people... okay, I guess she wasn't speaking for everybody. I I don't want to be stepping away of any resident. [00:30:17] **Jeff Oswald (Resident):** Yeah, I'm sorry, I thought she was. She was just speaking for some people, so there are more people. Listen, but I'm just kind of feeding off your... so Jeff Oswald, 466 Pero Creek Drive. Okay, so actually this was just brought to my attention tonight and I'll be "brass tax" with you. I own a construction company, I own a lot of personal property, trailers come and go. I mean, I've been asked by the city to move certain things and do certain things, and I've tried my best to try to make everybody happy. I know my situation is a little different, but that's why I bought empty land behind me is to have somewhere to put the things. Some of us in life have campers, boats, you name it, we do outside activities. Let's be honest, we don't live on top of the hill, no offense to those people, but I can't fit my 45-foot camper in my driveway. So I guess one of the questions I got is: if this new proposal passes, is that for people that are breaking every ordinance on potentially a trailer laying in the property or a boat parked down the street? [00:31:14] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Yeah, I don't—you must not have been following the other case. It had gone on for years and it is literally a junkyard. It's very extreme, and we were very patient, and I think our city always has been very patient with people with ordinance violations. [00:31:33] **Jeff Oswald:** So I guess my question is, when Matt comes knocking on my door or the Chief of Police asks me to move a camper that's in the front yard because I'm doing service work on it and I'm not going to comply—I'll be a "brass tax" then—is there going to be a fee associated with not complying? [00:31:49] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** And no, the fees would be if we... my understanding is that... so we took, as you heard, we took that other resident to court. Um, he lost, didn't do anything as a result of it. We had to take him to a different kind of court to make that happen instead. So a lot of we, as taxpayers, are all paying for him not complying. And so this is to help cover so that we aren't all paying for someone like that where we're racking up thousands of dollars in legal fees. It's not... we're not going to come because you are having one violation and you're saying, "But wait, I need to finish fixing my camper." We're pretty open, I feel we're an accommodating city. This... this is for those extreme cases. [00:32:32] **Councilmember Orin Kipp:** If you went out there, he doesn't just have a boat or trailer; he's got... it's literally a junkyard. It's a junkyard. It's got... we had a picture, and I didn't realize it was as bad. I've gone by it a few times, and then when they got a shot of actually there's semi-trailers, there's broken down tractors, there's broken down snowmobiles. I mean, these aren't things that he's repairing. When we talk to him, his reasoning for not helping cleaning it up 10 years ago or whatever or at least starting was... well, the one thing was, well, it came in handy for last year's flood. Well, there was nothing in that property that he would have used to help with a flood. [00:33:10] **Jeff Oswald:** I mean, I'm with you. I mean, I have cars and my sons have things. I don't want people knocking on the door and saying "you have to move this." [00:33:18] **Councilmember Orin Kipp:** This was literally for his neighbors. I felt bad that they had to drive by it every day, and I think he thought a lot of it was hidden because he had some shrubbery, but pretty soon it was coming out of the shrubbery and no longer hidden. [00:33:30] **Paula Hahnbah (Resident):** Can we stay to the original thing? [00:33:32] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Well, yeah, but you have... they should have a background and understand that this isn't... Excuse me, excuse me, excuse me. You can come to the podium but I... I was trying to explain that it has not been just "we are going to go pick on" because a neighbor has a camper or an extra boat or two things out in their yard. This is compiled of years and years, and he's been approached many, many, many years. I appreciate your frustration with it, okay. However, and I've been pretty... [00:34:04] **Paula Hahnbah:** My name is Paula Hahnbah, 443 Main Street. [00:34:08] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** What's your last name again? I'm sorry. [00:34:10] **Paula Hahnbah:** Hahnbah. H-A-H-N-B-A-H. I used to be Brown before I got married. I must have been out to lunch that's... or in love. Maybe both. But anyway, look, this is what I have a challenge about: this is an ordinance for all. It's not just for this case. I understand your concern, you need to make that clear and you need to say something. I believe this—my feeling is that you need to say: step one, when you do this, this is what we're going to do; step two, when you do this, if you don't comply, this is what we're going to do. [00:34:44] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** We have all of that already. [00:34:45] **Paula Hahnbah:** But then, but I also... I have a question. I have to pay liability fees if someone sues me, and does not the city have liability insurance to deal with court? Am I wrong? Is that... isn't that a valid question? [00:34:59] **Eric (City Attorney):** That's two things. Your liability insurance protects you if you're sued. Your liability insurance is not going to fund you suing someone. [00:35:08] **Paula Hahnbah:** Well, no, not necessarily. Right. [00:35:10] **Eric (City Attorney):** So, in some cases it's not. And the other thing I have to say is, this is one question I have: I feel pretty confident in my answer, but okay. But some people, it goes either way, and I know you all know that, but that's fine. One of the things that I... what I'm wondering about is it is, again, the process. I hear that a lot when I was talking to neighbors and stuff—it's the process of doing something like this. If this is such a major change, everybody should have gotten one of these in their box, not just posted on a back page of a meeting, because this is a big deal and some people do feel like, "Okay, I realize that..." I mean, it makes people paranoid. It makes them feel like the city is out to get them. [00:35:54] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** It's not, okay. We don't want to have a city like that. We don't want to live like that. [00:35:58] **Paula Hahnbah:** Yeah, we don't want to... we're not a city like that. [00:36:01] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** So, and just remember, in order to have these judge... we like... somebody called and complained. So we're not driving around—Matt's not driving around looking for someone with his camper. Neighbor. [00:36:13] **Eric (City Attorney):** And Mayor, Councilmembers, if I may suggest, change the language a little bit. Because I've been hearing the residents, I tried to, as your City Attorney, listen, and I can see as both of the residents have indicated that when they read that language in the context that brought it, that all of a sudden it can be this overall overly broad general catch-all. And I feel very confident that that is not at all the intent. I feel very confident that it is as the residents have indicated—really the context of the extraordinary, the rarest of circumstances where all other avenues have been exhausted. And yet, under the extraordinary, rarest of circumstance, a civil district court actually needs to be taken. And yet, I agree with all of you, there's not any language in here that talks about a civil district court action. [00:37:11] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Just... [00:37:12] **Eric (City Attorney):** And in retrospect, I wish I put that language in. We could have avoided a lot. Eric. Yeah. Well, it's made for... so, with that, 25-15 that is entitled "Abatement and Recovery of Costs" has four subdivisions. One (A) is really just talking about the fact that a person has violated and, despite many requests and so forth, has failed. (C) is where we're talking about the city and its fees and administrative fees and legal fees and trying to get that back. And then (D) is if the court order should grant fees and the city's ability to then assess. I wanted to kind of give you that kind of summary. It's (B). (B) is—and I'll read to you the existing language, then I'll read to you what I propose as that very necessary District Court action provision. Currently, and it's just that first sentence, the first sentence of 25-15 (B) states currently: "If an abatement of a violation or restoration of affected property is required, in addition to abatement, the city may seek and order specific performance, injunctive relief, and any other equitable relief to the fullest extent permitted by law to ensure compliance with Bayport City Code." Now, it looks like when you read that the city has that legal authority. Well, the city doesn't; only a judge can allow the city to enter onto private property. I know that, but it should very clearly communicate to the residents. And so, even the best scrier—and I think I'm a pretty good scrier—sometimes messes up a little bit. Let's hopefully change that up. So I will now state the language that I believe should be there: "If an abatement of a violation or restoration of affected property is required, in addition to abatement, the City Council may authorize a civil district court action seeking specific performance, injunctive relief..." So you see what it's doing is it's making it clear City Council has to authorize this. Once that's done, then what? Now the code is saying to the court, as I stated, you know, the context for this and so forth: "Your Honor, we've had to go through these extraordinary efforts pursuant to our code, we also want not only the ability to get this property cleaned up but also the city's costs." And then the judge can decide whether that's correct or not in full, in part, or somewhere in between. Yeah, so again, what I'm striking is "may seek and order" and I'm replacing it with "Council authorizes a civil district court action seeking specific performance." [00:40:02] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** I like that. Would be my proposed amendment and hopefully if I've heard correctly, it meets everyone's concerns. If not, I guess we can continue to listen. Okay, I like the attempt. Let's see what the feedback is. Hi. [00:40:20] **Nathan Jerson (Resident):** Hi, Nathan Jerson. Long time no see. 317 Lake Street. I've been up here, we've talked about boathouses and whatnot. I'm going to come back to what you said, and I appreciate you making the changes. We'd love to see those changes before you guys enacted it, hopefully. Just to, you know, have a chance to look that over. Perhaps that could be an opportunity to bump this to the next one. One of my concerns is going to be the legal fees that go with taking someone to district court. At what point does the person end up paying for that? And I want to just... I'm going to just read here so I don't get too off topic, which I can do sometimes. My interactions with the city staff... let me hold on, start up here... have been very tough. I would say tumultuous. Very knowledgeable about the law, the staff often come across for me cold, slow to respond, and overly complicated. I trust the Council; you guys have been logical in your decisions, and so I appreciate that. But the staff and I feel like the legal team seem to create a lot of unnecessary complexities when we're trying to get things done, and this is hindering our... the property owners. And I just want to use an example here because what we're talking about these fees and last year when I requested the variance on our house, I was told I had to give up my boathouse—a 70-year-old fixture predating all the current laws. These are... we're not talking about RVs, right? We're talking about a 70-year-old structure. And I personally spent $10,000 on legal fees to fight to keep that boathouse, and the city spent over $12,000 trying to take it away from me. And the city lawyer later—Eric here—admitted that the entire argument was pretty much moot, right? Thin soup. And it was a waste of legal dollars and time, I think for both of us. Despite all of this, I was charged those $12,000 in fees and I paid those. And this was without any prior mention of exceeding the $1,500 limit. And I stood before you guys and asked to... I'm sorry, I was so frustrated by this that makes me a little shaky... I was just frustrated because you guys put that on my back, and I've been... since I've since learned that I'm one of the first community people to have to incur that expense. No one that I've talked to has heard of that before. And I've paid that. City staff should support and care for their people they serve and help us navigate regulations through common sense and empathy. And I'm not getting that from... You guys are great, I feel like the City staff... I feel like you guys are having a hard time with the city because you're not... you're not showing empathy in your conversations. I'm sorry that I'm getting all shaky. I'm just going to power through. Trust between the city and its residents is essential. Proposed ordinances like the one we're discussing tonight seem like a move towards more control and less cooperation, and that's what I've seen here. We need a city that trusts its people and a staff that works with us, not against us. And I urge the Council—you guys—to consider the impact of this ordinance and to work towards fostering open communication, mutual goals, and cooperation. And I'd like to build a city that... I love the city and these are my neighbors and I find them to be charming. And I've grown very fond of this community. But I want to build a city where residents feel supported and not burdened. And I feel like that's what we're getting here. So I appreciate the language change, I really do. I just want to make sure that we're not adding extra insult to injury here with those fees. So thank you. [00:44:31] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Thank you, Nathan. I just want to say, I think that... I mean there's obviously a lot of history here. There's a lot of history with the Jersons, there's a lot of history with Mr. Kringle. We all have stories, we're all coming at this from our own personal experiences, right? And the way we're interpreting this is reflective of that. And so you guys are coming here as though we're the enemy which... oh my gosh, that hurts. I mean Jeff, really bad actually. Nathan's getting choked up. I mean, that is... we all are, we all are. But I'm just saying someone coming here to say that like we're the enemy—is that... that's just hurtful. But again, we all have different stories. It may not be you, it comes across. Exactly. And I'm so glad you mentioned... I'm so glad you came and talked about that. That's important. But saying that we're the enemy is... is like us showing up here and saying, "How can we screw the citizens over?" None of us want to do that. We're welcome, we're glad you came with your concerns. I wouldn't have wanted to pass this if you guys had concerns about it. I mean, I knew where it was coming from, so to me I didn't see any of that in it, and you guys saw it because I came at it from a totally different just like... I mean everyone probably up here read it and didn't see it as a bad thing because we knew what we had dealt with with that other property. So none of us are here to make anyone feel afraid of government or mad at government. We... I mean, that's not what we're about. [00:46:17] **Jeff Oswald:** I know you guys. I think most of us get on or up here because we wanted to make a difference. [00:46:22] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Yeah, we want to solve problems, we want to help people. Problem. Exactly. And so the fact that you view us that way—it's a problem. Yeah, very, very discerning. Do we know where we're at? Just... just we talked about the situation with Mr. Kringle in terms of legal fees and where we would be at for remediation. At one time, I thought I read in something that we're into the tune, or we could be into the tune, of like $30,000. And I'm not interested as a resident of Bayport in putting that on me, us, and you guys as taxpayers. [00:47:04] **Eric (City Attorney):** Mayor, Councilmembers. We have the pleadings all set, but we did not want to initiate action until this code was enacted so that we would be able to incorporate the code by reference in support of the civil action. What the fees would be as... if... could be a wide range, and 30,000 is really probably a worst-case scenario. And that might even been the phrase that I put in there just to make it clear. But I also did not want to have a situation where the worst-case scenario occurred and this body was surprised. Right? So, you know, hopefully the petition and the fact that Mr. Kringle has been found guilty, has failed to clean up even though he has been found guilty, would expedite a court order fairly quickly. And as a result, the primary fees—the bigger fees—would not hopefully be legal but would actually be hiring a contractor to go out there and dispose of that property and initially assess whether there are any hazardous substances and other things as well. We won't be able to get onto that property to do even that type of assessment till we get a court order. Again, I want to emphasize that even the City Attorney, I probably even should have put they... even I and my firm are here to try to serve you and this Council and do so not with cold-hearted legal analysis but also with a warm, embracing heart. Reasonable minds can disagree. Reasonable minds can disagree about what is common sense. But hopefully it's done with civility and with warmth. [00:48:45] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Thanks Eric. So it sounds like we do have to make some edits to this to make it not as scary for... we've had 10 years, I think we can... not to step on your toes, Eric, but a motion to table this for a month for further review and consideration I can see as very appropriate. The only downside—maybe it's not for you and so forth, but I will be in Chicago. So... [00:49:15] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Someone else will be here in my stead. Okay. [00:49:18] **Sarah Jerson:** Can I say one thing? I do appreciate where you're all coming from. It's a big job; it's mostly volunteer. You're doing the very best you can. I think when something becomes an umbrella policy from one person's issues—us being assessed 12,000 in fees for trying to improve something that was hard, and we're like, "Wait, we're trying to make something better, we've been here two years and we haven't been a problem, we're trying to make something better"—those are the things when you do an umbrella on one person that affect many. So I appreciate your willingness; I know you work hard. I know that you guys... you're not the enemy. I don't want you to feel that way. But we're trying to better understand and create better communication policies and procedures so that people don't misunderstand and it gives us the opportunity to be here and to talk through and to get better. So I know that was really hard on you, and I could see that. I don't think that's everyone's intent; it is just to get more clarity. [00:50:18] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Thank you, Sarah. And it is unfortunate that you guys went through what you did with the fees and the... it was obvious miscommunication and confusion. And a lot of... we've had a long... like you said, it's been a while since we've seen you, but we were seeing you quite a bit for a while. So yeah, and I'm sorry that that all came out the way it did, but hopefully we are all coming out of this better and we do better in the future. So, anyone else like to speak about this? Or are we good with... all right, come on up. Brad, I'd like... oh, Brad was first if that's okay. [00:50:56] **Andrea Wold (Resident):** Okay, ladies first. I have to move this. Andrea Wold. I live at 333 Lake Street South. Just... 74 years ago, my grandpa and my great-grandpa bought the point that I live on. He was a wonderful steward of the river, the park, served on the City Council, and I... he taught me that. I want to continue that, and I feel like I'm fighting against, and I don't like it. [00:51:30] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** What's it? Thank you. Oh, now I know what I was... and was a bar? My grandma was the lunch lady. Yep. [00:51:41] **Brad Smith (Resident):** Brad Smith, 220 1st Avenue South. I again just want to reiterate: it seems like you're creating a very big umbrella to open it up to do something on anyone's property if there's an issue versus you... you're trying to correct one problem you've had for 10 years. I sure would think you'd have enough tools in the ordinance you have to take them to civil court or sue. [00:52:05] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** We've done that already. Two different... we've done the court process; that's just he's lost both times. So... [00:52:13] **Brad Smith:** But when they lose, you can do something about them. [00:52:15] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Well, yeah, that's what we're hoping, right? I mean, at some point the judge tells us what we can do. You can do something against it. [00:52:21] **Eric (City Attorney):** Mayor, Councilmember. I want to make clear that what the city did was bring a criminal misdemeanor charge and repeatedly brought Mr. Kringle before the judge. Mr. Kringle was found guilty, you know, has a criminal record. Yeah. But the court was not going to put him into jail, and even if it put him into jail, that's not going to correct the problem on his property. It's the rarest of circumstances, but Bayport is not alone that when you have an outlier like that, you've exhausted what you can do criminally, that is very, very rare. But it does happen, and happened here. So then the only thing that a district court—that a Council can do, the city can do—is to authorize a civil action. However, you already have a set amount that you're paying for a prosecutor. Prosecution is actually fairly, you know, cut and dry and so forth. Civil action is more involved, takes a little more time or may take a little more time, and that's what this body authorized. When you talked about "does our code, does the Bayport city code, already have sufficient basis to go forward?" Yes. Does the code have some weakness as far as the ability to collect its costs if it's successful? No. That's what we're trying to essentially patch up. [00:53:40] **Brad Smith:** So if you took them to civil court and won, we're not going to get our attorney fees and costs, and we may not get our costs whatsoever. Not at all. [00:53:47] **Eric (City Attorney):** Correct. That's what we're trying to fix. Period. [00:53:50] **Brad Smith:** You can't sue him for the civil attorney fees? [00:53:53] **Eric (City Attorney):** You can always ask, but you're not going to get it based upon our litigation team's review. Because right now, what you have in your Bayport city code makes it clear that assessment is based upon 429. So what's 429? 429 is Minnesota Statute Chapter 429, assessment for your public works, your road upgrades, and so forth. So we needed to make sure that that assessment power was broader when we're dealing with these extraordinary circumstances. [00:54:23] **Brad Smith:** It still seems like everybody's getting lumped into this because of one thing, and it really gives you the opportunity to go after... [00:54:32] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Brad, if you did what he did and we took you to court and you refused to make any changes and you never cleaned up your yard or whatever, we would be going through the same process with you. But most people are not going to do that. Most people are not him. And he was really a problem, and I'm sorry we had to write something to solve this problem, but I don't know... I mean if you guys—if you all want to pitch in and pay for it, to us to go remediate his his junk, I mean it's like... I feel like that's what we're trying to avoid. [00:55:04] **Eric (City Attorney):** I think what I'm hearing is basically, let's make sure that the wording is narrow and specific enough. I think I've done that, but we'll certainly revisit it because I'm hearing from the Council—I know for myself—I don't want these concerns to be founded. I want these concerns in the language of the code to be unfounded. But I also want to make sure that I am protecting the public monies—your monies—which I'm sure sometime you'll probably come after me for something. I have 11 properties. [00:55:36] **Brad Smith:** Well, we hope not. [00:55:37] **Eric (City Attorney):** I'm going to be a target. [00:55:39] **Brad Smith:** We hope not. You would... you would respond. I would think. [00:55:42] **Councilmember Orin Kipp:** Only if you're found guilty and for a 10-year period of time. You say "don't do anything, take me to criminal court, I won't have to do anything anyway." So... well thanks. I suppose that's a lesson learned. Maybe it's not the best lesson, but I don't think it's the lesson most people would want to follow through that process. We had a similar group of people in here that were neighbors of Mr. Kringle that were basically begging us to please do something. They've put up with this for 10 years, and it's... they were at their wit's end. And I'm pretty comfortable moving forward with this and making tightening things up. And you know, we have to table this to make some tweaks with the language, great. But I I'm interested in protecting my money and my neighbor's money and not have to be on the hook for an inordinate amount of time spent by our staff. And another thing I do want to say, I just want to stick up for our staff, and I think they do a hell of a good job. I've remodeled a house in town, I've had three different houses now going on four in Bayport, and I've had nothing but great communication and experiences prior to me being on Council. And so I just want to add that. [00:57:04] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Thanks, Orin. That's a good point. They... they know their jobs very well, and I know sometimes it does come across as cold, or maybe... I mean because they are rule-following—following the rules—and that is their job to do that. We have a small staff and they pump out a lot of work. They do a lot. Yes. Sorry if it isn't always what you're expecting from them, but they are doing their jobs very well. So, we have one more comment, like a question? [00:57:37] **Unidentified Resident (Female):** What makes you think that he's going to pay this? [00:57:40] **Eric (City Attorney):** Well, because we can assess, right? We can... yeah, I... it would be pure speculation as to whether he would or not. But let's presume he doesn't. Then we had the ability to assess against the property. That mean... what that means is now it would be part of real estate taxes and there'd be an assessment line. And of course the county is the one that collects, you know, the property taxes. So all cities then are really at the sufferance of the county taking collection actions. And generally, counties usually wait a couple years until someone's really into default and so forth. But that's that's all you can do is wait until the person pays their property taxes. [00:58:24] **Unidentified Resident (Female):** Yeah, and there's no saying he's not going to fill it up with junk again either. That's what I'm worried about. [00:58:29] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Yeah, that's what I'm saying. I mean, if we're making a law just for him and yet it's an umbrella has umbrella consequences. [00:58:38] **Paula Hahnbah:** I don't even know why we're doing that. It's not just for him. The ordinance is already there; it's for us to collect the money back. And what I think... he, when he rewrites it, it would still going to have to come before a council, and I can't guarantee what future councilors are going to do. I can't guarantee how any of these people are going to vote. But for me, it would take an extreme 10, 12 year like this person is. It's not just, "Oh, you left a boat for years." [00:59:08] **Paula Hahnbah:** No, I understand that. But I'm just saying that if this guy has a history of not following the rules anyway, I can't see a $30,000 fine that's going to make him pay that either. I'm just... you know, it kind of reminds me of slumlords in Minneapolis when they have these things against them, but eventually the city says, "We're taking your property." Do you have any anything like that? [00:59:33] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Well, you want it to get even worse now? You want us to add "and we're going to take your property"? That's not going to go over very well. [00:59:39] **Paula Hahnbah:** No, but for him, I'm saying. I mean, if if he doesn't pay us 30,000, you still don't have anything. Excuse me, but it sounds like you're speaking out like... like saying, "But for him we can do that." But we're writing something now that you're saying is for him, but it's not. It's for these really bad cases that are going to come up. [00:59:58] **Councilmember Ethan Gilmore:** And I'm sorry... Ethan, go ahead. I mean, I haven't been on the Council long enough, but I'm... and I don't know how long you've been the attorney, but has there ever been a case that you would ever pursue this far except for this one thing? And if we're just trying to get the money back so we don't all have to pay it, we all live in Bayport and it's going to get paid by somebody, and if it's not him, then it's going to be all of us. And again, you're going to write it in a way that it's going to come to us first before it ever even gets to that point where we're going to civil court and criminal court and all that stuff. So I don't know. [01:00:36] **Eric (City Attorney):** Mayor, Councilmembers. Eckberg Lammers has been representing municipalities for 75 years. Um, I've been a public lawyer for 23, but I joined the firm—the Eckberg Lammers firm—a year and a half ago. But I do have the pleasure of having other attorneys to consult with as well as, you know, almost 75 years of record there. Is Bayport in this one instance a one-off? No. This is an issue that has arisen in various iterations in many of the cities. But when I've used the adjective "extraordinary, rarest"—not just rare, not just rarer, but the superlative rarest—that is an opinion that is based on our firm's experience. And you're right, it's the Council that would have to authorize the district court action as this Council did in this instance based upon its history. Thank you. [01:01:31] **Nathan Jerson:** Did you assess legal without vote or... I mean you're just assessed without notice. [01:01:37] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** I'm... I'm not going to get into your situation here. We can do that later at the direction of the Council. [01:01:45] **Chris Henning (Resident):** Chris Henning, 473 7th. I like what you guys are saying. I think you're trying and you guys are frustrated about what you're perceiving. You have to realize everybody here—there is a trust issue, and that is why something has happened that has created that. So it's a two-way street. Yes, you guys are helping and you guys are listening, but there is something that happened that caused why we're questioning where is this going to go. Because this is one incident that happened, and you want to change rules. Well, how do we know it's going to be just that? Because everybody has had something happen that is questioning why. Thanks, Chris. [01:02:35] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Okay, last chance for anyone to speak. Colleen wants to, I can tell. [01:02:41] **Colleen (Resident/Planning Commission):** I am... I'm not here for or against either side. I feel like it's sides. I feel like that's what it is: us being residents versus you guys. But I mean, that's probably what you sense. I agree, I am a big believer in communication and I feel like it's a problem. I feel like stuff comes out, "Oh, and we're changing the meeting or we're moving it to this, to a 5:00 time versus a 7:00 time." I feel like there's just a lot of that, and it seems shady sometimes. Which, I mean, I call Sarah and say "what's going on," but not everybody does that or even knows to do that or say if they hear something going on that they've never been aware of, they don't even know I guess what to do. So I think communication needs to change. And not that everybody here can ever say in ordinances, because if people really want to make a difference they should be on the City Council which, I mean, a lot of times it's not full or you're looking... you know, somebody leaves and you're looking for good people. I mean, that's a way people can get involved. I... I do appreciate that there are rules that we can't just build everything everybody says "this is what I want to do." I mean, from just a construction person, I feel like sometimes you should say, "This is kind of what we have in mind. Does this fit? Is this going to be approved?" and get the reasons why before we say "this is like our great big plan," and then it's not and everybody's mad. Which, when we built our house we had issues and I was calling Sarah again and whatever, and we weren't able to do what we wanted to do and we didn't, and we're fine. But with rules, I do appreciate them because I don't want maybe something that someone thinks is great next to my house. Or I don't want people's stuff all outside their house next to my house—cars and junk and whatever. So I do appreciate that and there should be rules, even I know people say it's their property, but you want your city to look good too. And it's... I mean, that's every resident's thing, but some people may not take what you think is okay as okay. So I know it's a hard job. I wouldn't want to do it. So in any case, then to the ordinance: I I feel like changing it with your wording is good. The whole thing is we keep on talking about this guy, but we're putting this blanket thing out there. I mean, why is there... is there notes in there to say like a time frame, like very specific? You're saying, "Well, it's we're not just going to go to your house." Well, how do we know that you're not... you're saying extraordinary circumstances—what does that mean? Does that mean it's been a year? Does that mean it's been... we've told you three times and that's it? Do you know what I mean? Because then it's up in the air and you guys can do whatever you want and say, "Well, we told you once and we're getting tons of complaints from the neighbors and we're sick of getting it and we're going to... we're going to fine you, we're going to do this, you're going to get charged." No, I'm just... I'm just saying that is, for instance, versus... it's seeming like a blanket thing. Like is there... what does extraordinary circumstances mean? Thank you. [01:05:43] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Thank you, Colleen. Okay. Yeah. Okay. And thank you for serving on the Planning Commission. You said you don't want this job, but you're... [01:05:51] **Colleen:** Want that job? No, I'll take this job because it's a precursor. You guys have... I'll have my input. I would like to have... I don't know if someone can explain the process that you go through before you get to taking someone to court. Is that something from the Chief wants to talk about, or... I don't know, do you want to talk about it, Chief? I'm sorry, would you mind? Just to answer that last question. We're just having a big conversation here, aren't we? [01:06:21] **Jay Jackson (Police Chief):** Yeah, it seems... so how it generally works is that we will receive a complaint, in this case several over the years. And we always try and work with the homeowners—that's number one—because how it happens is if I, say, get a complaint and we issue a citation because the homeowner doesn't try and fix the problem, well then it's now tied up in court. And during COVID things pushed way down, everything got really slow in the court process, so we almost don't get to make any progress for a year. While it makes its way through court, oftentimes it gets to court and then the prosecutor will tell the person, "Hey, you cleaned it up, we're good, we'll dismiss the charges," and we all move on. But it's a slowing down of that process, and the last thing we want to do is issue a citation. We will go to the homeowner, we will have the conversations with them, oftentimes multiple conversations. We send them letters, but most of the time we will go out and meet with the person and tell them "here's the issue" and 99% of the time people will work with us. Sometimes we'll give extensions or we'll take into account hardships. You know, I had a gentleman in town that had a roof that was falling down and siding that was decaying, and I worked with that guy because obviously that's a huge project, a huge expense. And I worked with him for a long period of time, and we finally got it all replaced and it worked out great, and I still have a good relationship with that person. So this is one of those extreme circumstances. We try and avoid getting to the citation part of it, but sometimes we got to go to that extreme example. And oftentimes it's just somebody just not willing to work with us. Citation gets issued, then it gets on the court calendar, the prosecutors will work with that person, and sometimes it doesn't, or sometimes they just pay a fine. Well, if they pay the fine, sometimes it's just done, and now we technically we have to go back and issue another citation. Now, that almost never happens, but that can be the process. But in this case, it's gone on. It's such an extreme circumstance that we've exhausted that period. You know, part of the original guilty plea that was entered came with an adjudication, which was an agreement with the prosecutor and the judge with Mr. Kringle, that he had an additional year with specific set deadlines within that year that he was supposed to meet these things. So one of the things was making sure all vehicles were registered and operable, and it set out like four different time periods where he was supposed to meet that. Well, when those things were not met, we brought Mr. Kringle back into court after doing an inspection of his property that he agreed to as part of this. And every time he had to go back to court on it, and then we finally reached the end of it because this was built into his probation for that adjudication. So when his probation ended, it ended any potential violation we could push on him. And then we have no choice but in this case to go a civil route to rectify the situation. [01:09:27] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** But before any of that, the court proceedings happened; there were many, many, many conversations with him? [01:09:34] **Jay Jackson (Police Chief):** Correct. And that I don't even know that we could count. And I will tell you that... when... how many times you guys... I took over a lot of the ordinance stuff when I got promoted to Sergeant in 2015, but even prior to that, I'm not aware of at any point in my 24 years here that we've ever come close to anything like this. I could be wrong, obviously, to the scope of this, but I don't remember anything like this. [01:10:05] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** So, I mean, and maybe we as a Council need to just rethink it. Do we want to put this burden on the taxpayers instead of Mr. Kringle? I don't feel like we should. I feel like we want to have this reassurance that we will get reimbursed when we go pay to take all of the stuff away. But I don't know how you guys are feeling about that. Maybe we need to rethink this whole thing. [01:10:29] **Councilmember Ethan Gilmore:** Well, I don't think it's necessarily the issue of Kringle. I think the people are more concerned about this blanket. [01:10:35] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** That's what I mean: rethinking this thing because we're doing it to ensure that we can get reimbursement from that one case and any potential future case that could be Kringle again. Just bear that in mind: we don't know that he's going to actually not just keep filling that place up and we're going to keep going through this, right? So how much do we want to put that burden on the taxpayers versus him? I feel like we're doing this because we... I personally didn't think the taxpayers should be paying for that, but they're now saying "we don't like this because you're doing it just for him." So I... I don't... unless there's a way we can write it that makes everybody happy. And it sounds like maybe... I mean Eric's kind of on his way there, but it still seems like there were some concerns. So I mean, we do you know what we can to try and keep costs and taxes and things, fees and things like that down even in a tough situation as we are right now. And I... I'm firmly in the camp that the person with the problem needs to be held accountable for their problem and ignoring their problem and not passing it on to me, you, and everybody in this room. And if this helps that, I'm in favor. [01:11:47] **Councilmember Carl Bliss:** So we're still feeling like we want to move forward with it with some new text? I guess I'm feeling maybe we need to table it. [01:11:54] **Councilmember Ethan Gilmore:** Yep, definitely tabling it. I don't have any problem with that. [01:11:58] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Okay. Lars can do that, do his thing or whatever, back us, but I don't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater. [01:12:05] **Councilmember Katie Hill:** Okay, good. Are you feel the same way? [01:12:07] **Councilmember Ethan Gilmore:** Okay, just want to make sure that we weren't going to spend a lot more time on this if everyone was going to just say "let's..." Yeah, because I don't think it should be a taxpayers' thing, but I think we... I think we have to hear them, and what I'm hearing is they need a little bit more security—secure feeling. [01:12:26] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Yeah, but I will say in my 20 years on the Council, I've never, ever, ever gone into any court thing like this or pushed it that far or had any property be to this... this point. So I guess it usually doesn't come to the Council when people have some violations that he handles it and... Okay. Um, I'd like to move on if that's okay. We can... we do... we have to... oh, I'm so sorry! I'm so sorry! What's your name? I mean, it's not actually a public forum; I'm just allowing people... we're not off the topic. [01:13:06] **Jody Dayfield (Resident):** Okay. So my name is Jody Dayfield, I live at 307 Lake Street South. So I think clarification is going to be huge. There's so much vagueness in the codes in the city, and it seems like—and it does seem like—us against the City Council because I think there's a lot of things you maybe you're not aware of that happens between the city and all of us residents, and it's constant. And I'm just going to give one example because as much as I'm sick of talking about Chris Kringle, it's... that's not why we're here. I mean, I feel like his situation, yeah, unfortunately it might fall—there's fees and stuff and you know, whatever. But you know, we could have a natural disaster and there's going to be fees and stuff and whatever. But that's one person. Where we're concerned about is the ordinances. And it goes back to a year ago when you pushed how many ordinances through in one vote? Was ridiculous. And then now we're looking at it and people are getting the repercussions of "this is code, this is ordinance, this is code, this is ordinance." Going back to that, and I don't want to get into that, that's not the purpose. Clarification like: when can you come on our properties? Whose idea is what is acceptable and what isn't? Um, is the pink house in Hudson acceptable? The... the flaming pink one, the Barbie house? Well, some people will drive 30 miles to see it; their neighbors probably hate it. So I mean, who gets to decide what is appropriate to have on your property? And then when that decision is made, who... whose authority is it to send drones looking into windows and looking on properties? That has happened. So I'm sorry if you're not aware of everything that happens, but a lot happens. So we collectively... everybody has a story here, an awareness story. So that goes back to the umbrella, and if the umbrella isn't clear, it does affect all of us because they're so vague. Do you know that riprap is suggested but is it the best to hold back the shoreline? These are the things that get like hammered down on things when you pick and choose who you're going to decide when you're going to use it. [01:15:28] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** All right. So I hear you guys, and I'm hearing like there's... like there's some sort of conspiracy or behind-the-scenes stuff going on. I I haven't gotten an email—you guys clearly have our emails—from any resident for weeks, literally. So the the first thing I would do if I was a resident, and I am, and I had trouble with the city, I'm going to either call Matt, Sarah, or one of my Councilmembers. [01:15:58] **Jody Dayfield:** Okay, here's... and I'm not... and I'm okay... I'm just going to speak primarily for myself and our situation and I'm not even going to get into the situation because that's not what the point is. We're afraid to talk. We are afraid because then it's like another thing denied, another thing denied. Do you know, a year ago I sat in this Council room and the whole people here passed their boathouse and passed when they were going to have it restored? One year. I was here then. They get a setback. Why are we supposed to trust the city? Now they're 12,000 on top of your city fees because of the boathouse that we all, in the same room and heart, you unanimously passed. [01:16:47] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** I'm going to clarify. I'm going to clarify what what I understand happened that we passed. And I'm sure it wasn't as clear to everybody, but what we passed that night was to take it out of the very... the other part of the... I don't even want to talk... it was it was confusing and complicated. [01:17:07] **Jody Dayfield:** My point is... I was here, I was here. I... yeah, but the point is... so yes, there's a collective... not... we... a distrust of your ordinances and your codes and everything you pass. And it and it comes up on Thursday for um that... you know, City... this... that is not acceptable. Like you said, getting it... we all should have this information. I think it was... these are big things. So all I'm asking for, all we're asking for—and I hope this isn't going to set our problem back now because I'm speaking, because we had a a setback right after the meeting when I spoke the last time—you can think, "Oh, would that happen?" but it happens. So yes, we don't want to talk. [01:17:54] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** This is true. This is not made up. Wow. This is very, very concerning and surprising. Yeah, I have no idea people are afraid to speak to their Councilmembers. Do you guys know that we're Bayport residents and that we have kids that go to the school? [01:18:13] **Councilmember Katie Hill:** That doesn't... that is irrelevant, Katie. We follow the rules too. That is irrelevant. If I have a question about... right. And we try to fix it. [01:18:23] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** And we—since I've gone on here—we've gotten rid of some of the ordinance, changed them so that they're easier to read because, yeah, they're 100 years old, some of them. [01:18:32] **Jeff Oswald:** And I don't disagree with what you're saying. Once again, Jeff Oswald, Pero Creek. But I do believe a lot of your ordinances are set for maybe newer developments and not the older part of town. I've gone round and round with Matt about different ordinances, and even Adam before Matt was even in place. Actually, Matt would come into meetings and sit down with me and Adam and go over things tip-for-tat on what is acceptable. "Can your trash can out front?" Well, I live on the old part of town; my trash can has to sit out front. I can't put it anywhere else. I didn't have a garage at that time. Some of your ordinances and the way that all these people feel is based off of experience, whether it's with Sarah, Matt, the Chief of Police. I've been here 18 years; I've been... I feel like I've been mistreated as a citizen time in and time out. Pulling teeth to get permits passed. I'm a licensed contractor; I run all over the state of Minnesota. I go to Woodbury—"here you go, you have your plans in order, you get your plumbing, electrical, and building all at the same time." Here, I get pulled in by Matt on a separate occasion to say, "Well, you don't have this," and I spin the plans around and say, "What does this say?" There's a lot of issues that you guys need to be aware of. You guys need to let us know. [01:19:43] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Yeah, thank you. Contact the city. Okay, we're going to... I I do appreciate you all coming here and all of the information. A lot of it is surprising, a lot of... I have heard some of it before. The the fear of talking to your Councilmembers is a little surprising to me. But um, unless someone has something else to add, I'm ready... I'm very much ready to to move on. I think we've listened to them. You want to have a motion to table to the City Council... that would be our next... [01:20:17] **Councilmember Carl Bliss:** I'll make a motion to table... I don't even know what I'm table... the amendment to Chapter 25. [01:20:23] **Councilmember Katie Hill:** The amendment—thank you—to Chapter 25. And I second. [01:20:26] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Okay. All right, thanks Carl and Katie. All those in favor... I just need a minute, I'm sorry. Recess. You can recess. Yeah, let's please take a five-minute break. ***[Break from 01:20:39 to 01:26:07]*** [01:26:07] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** ...and then, uh, call the Council back to order. Okay, Ethan had a good idea to play the Jeopardy tune before when we lead back in. Okay. Um, end the recess and call me back to order. All right, so we made our motion on that. We're going to consider an amendment to Chapter 62: Vegetation, Article 2: Public Nuisances of the Bayport City Code of Ordinances related to Emerald Ash Borer infestation and summary of ordinance for publication. Matt. [01:26:41] **Matt Kline (City Administrator):** Thank you, Madam Mayor, members of the Council. Um, as indicated, this is to consider adding to the vegetative public nuisance code. Um, it includes adding Emerald Ash Borer as a nuisance species that is currently significant or currently damaging as trees in the region across the whole region and causing widespread tree mortality. If you look in anybody's yard currently, um, you can pretty much see either completely dead ash trees or or very close to being dead ash. We've had this ordinance in the past has included Dutch Elms disease. Um, in order to further enforce the ability to either take this tree down or require the property owner to take the tree down because of a either public nuisance or a hazardous tree. There are some... were a couple of other changes to the ordinance. Um, it does give 20 days of abatement. We do realize that removing such a tree can be very costly, and the city is willing to work with residents as long as they get it scheduled and get it moving forward. We also kind of want to get ahead of this as Emerald Ash Borer is starting to make significant progress in the city, and not good progress. Staff is recommending the City Council adopt a motion amending Chapter 62: Vegetation, Article 2: Public Nuisances as presented. I will stand for questions. [01:28:13] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Thanks, Matt. Um, just all the conversations lately make me wonder: is there some way to make this broader so we don't have to bring it back again when there's another bug that comes into some other kind of tree? Or do we just keep adding infestations as they happen? [01:28:28] **Matt Kline (City Administrator):** Yeah, part of the... it's a double-edged sword, right? Um, part of it is we want to at least proactively be able to do it. So if somebody lodges a complaint against, say, a half-dead ash tree, then we have a little more ability to indicate that EAB is listed in the ordinance. So, um, that was one of the reasons Dutch Elm was specifically listed. It is a little unusual, but it does help out with like the arborist to indicate, "Yep, it has the AB, this is considered in the ordinance a public nuisance." [01:29:04] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** So other cities don't have a more general thing that just says "resulting from an infestation" versus specific? Like, should we get rid of Dutch Elm instead of adding another disease, just be more broad? That's a question for legal. Don't we have an ordinance that is just if it's a dead tree or you know... [01:29:21] **Matt Kline (City Administrator):** We do, and then where it throws us is Dutch Elm is specifically listed. Right. And so the reasoning that we did Emerald Ash Borer is because Dutch Elm is specifically listed. Or we could go the other way and get rid of Dutch Elm and not include Emerald Ash Borer. [01:29:40] **Councilmember Carl Bliss:** What do you think, Council? I like the specific so that way you can say, "This is the Dutch Elm, EAB." You don't get into the argument about is this truly, you know, a fully dead tree? [01:29:56] **Eric (City Attorney):** All those debates you can continue under the rest of your code to essentially seek, when you have a public nuisance of a dead dying tree and so forth, and see if you can control them. But this one is pretty easy: it has a EAB, Dutch Elm—there's not an argument. [01:30:13] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** So you're saying there already is something for General dead tree? [01:30:17] **Eric (City Attorney):** I'd have to take a look at your code, but I would be surprised if it did not have that general language that would cover a tree. [01:30:24] **Councilmember Carl Bliss:** Do we need to add Oak Wilt to the list? [01:30:28] **Eric (City Attorney):** You know, you're usually looking at those things that are truly an infestation rather than just one of those aspects that any particular natural vegetation can you know be harmed by beetles or you know other particular type of diseases. So yeah, you don't want to try to do a laundry list of everything, but when you do have things like Dutch Elm and EAB that has become a regional or national infestation, it makes sense to address them. And in some respects, I'm kind of surprised that this wasn't in place a couple years ago. But better late than never. [01:31:07] **Councilmember Carl Bliss:** Well, I'm just reading in Section 2, the red part where it says, "unless circumstances warrant an extension by the City Administrator." Judging by our last conversations, maybe that should be brought to us as a City Council thing. I mean, honestly, like you guys are... you know, people are upset and it's like if that comes to us, then we've got better communication with the community. I mean, I know it puts more on us, but maybe... I mean, it's one less thing you have to make a decision on. I I get it, but that's what they're saying; that's what the public wants. [01:31:47] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Yeah, than... because yeah, 20 days... I mean, if somebody told me I had to cut down a tree and it was $2,500, you know, 20 days is a short time. And I'm assuming you would... I would assume you would extend it, but maybe we change it to the Council would extend it, and then it can come before us then. Then the the people can come in, they can say, "Hey, this is the deal, you know..." [01:32:09] **Councilmember Ethan Gilmore:** I mean, we only meet once a month, so that's what it's going to mess up a lot of that, where they can talk to him any day and know at all these random times. [01:32:17] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Yeah, I I mean, I don't know, I'm just I'm just judging by what we just... I understand why you're saying it, I'm just not sure that that's the solution. What if we gave a longer longer time period to abate it? Yeah. [01:32:29] **Matt Kline (City Administrator):** Yeah, 60 days. 20 days is... I mean, you might not even be able to find a tree contractor. [01:32:35] **Matt Kline (City Administrator):** Madam Mayor, Council. We debated all of these things between [City staff], Sarah, and myself. So this was the best solution that we came up with. Yes. So 20 days would be have a hard time. The hope would be that once you get that... the hope is that people are being proactive and taking down their trees right now. If that doesn't happen, the next thing would be that a neighbor would call saying, "Hey, it appears this tree is really dead and might fall on my house." So what happens then is, if if the person knows that the tree is dead, then they take on some liability if it falls on somebody's house. If it's still living and falls on somebody's house, then somebody else's house has homeowners to cover that. But we're trying to watch out for the public on liability issues. So the thought was the 20 days should be enough time to find an arborist and at least get it scheduled. Now, maybe it does have to come back to the Council if they just don't have enough money or can prove that they don't have the ability to do that. And then maybe there's a chance that we can assess that property or find some financial help for that. [01:33:38] **Councilmember Ethan Gilmore:** That’s what I was just going to ask. So, short-term, I think "circumstances warrant an extension by the City Administrator," that's where you go. [01:33:47] **Matt Kline (City Administrator):** If it comes to it, yes, it would probably come to you. [01:33:50] **Councilmember Ethan Gilmore:** So just in the terms of transparency, are we going to be going around the city identifying these trees? [01:33:55] **Matt Kline (City Administrator):** And that's that's a very good question. I would I would tend towards yes only because they are a major... they're going to be a major, major hazard here, especially if people don't get them cut down; they're just going to get more expensive to take down. But we would probably seek Council directive on that one. [01:34:15] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** So if we do get to that point and we are finding a bunch of trees which we know they exist, it feels like we should be able to give them like some buy-into-a-deal to get that tree cut down by, you know what I mean? Like let's work on a program to eliminate them maybe, and that might make everyone feel a little better about it. Yeah. [01:34:33] **Matt Kline (City Administrator):** So so part of the issue there becomes: these are all like one-off trees, right, that need individual attention. We've tried to ask some of the tree companies to piggyback onto the street project or the art cutting project. The problem becomes our our tree cutting is fairly simple, right? You're at the the street, you can cut it down straight forward. I mean, some of these trees are likely going to have to get craned out, and so that gets way more complex than what a normal... [01:35:01] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** I understand you can't say, "Oh, you can get your tree cut down for X dollars," but could they be giving like a "if we give you all these trees to do, will you give a discount to everyone who does it?" or something like that. [01:35:12] **Matt Kline (City Administrator):** I see that perspective too, and not to throw water on the fire... yeah, quit using all my ideas, man. These tree contractors are super busy, right, and so they don't need our... they don't need us as much. [01:35:28] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Correct. Okay. I'm just trying... I mean, I know that it's expensive to get a tree taken down and it could be there that I see, because I spot them a mile away once you notice them, you notice them. And there's people with four, five, and six of them in their yard. I mean, yeah, that's a tough bill; that's 10,000 probably. [01:35:48] **Matt Kline (City Administrator):** But to that point, sorry Matt, there isn't much out there for public funding for help like that. I and I haven't heard of anything from like State Legislature or anything like that. We could do some research what other cities do, but my guess is it's the bigger cities who are providing some type of incentive to that point. [01:36:06] **Councilmember Katie Hill:** So, but you could cut these trees down by yourself. My husband did one. It was just... it was little, though. [01:36:12] **Matt Kline (City Administrator):** I mean, you could; there's definitely... there are some where you can't and you need like a big crane or something sometimes between houses and garages. There aren't too many out there, at least that I've seen currently dead, that it's not like you would have to hire someone if you had the skills to do it yourself. [01:36:29] **Councilmember Katie Hill:** Yeah, absolutely. But if you had the skills, it's likely that you took it down. [01:36:34] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Yeah. [01:36:35] **Matt Kline (City Administrator):** Mhm. [01:36:36] **Councilmember Ethan Gilmore:** I would like to, before we go out and just start telling everyone they need to cut their trees down, maybe talk with Council about how to approach all this. Because I don't know, I just feel like... I put it out there a while back because I remember telling my neighbor that "Hey, you know we've there's a..." he had one that right by our utility pole. I no longer live in that house, but I'm like, "Hey, you're kind of putting us at risk, your dead tree on your property." [01:37:04] **Jay Jackson (Police Chief):** That’s good. I just... I don't... I don't... there's a process, right? We encourage... like if if we have somebody who makes a complaint, we encourage them to go talk to their neighbor initially, right? And if they refused to do that, then then we go through the process. And people have been in the past very good about getting their tree removed. I mean, we've had this ordinance in place... I've dealt with maybe one or two that had it removed, and we've given them extra time in the past. But this will become a major nuisance. [01:37:37] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Yeah, I don't think we've ever gone through something like this—maybe Dutch Elm when I was a kid. Yeah. [01:37:43] **Councilmember Orin Kipp:** So I just... there’s probably... didn't didn't you have a percentage of how many house... I mean probably at least 50% of the houses in Bayport have an ash tree? [01:37:52] **Matt Kline (City Administrator):** Yeah, I would believe that that's very accurate. We had 350 Boulevard trees that were ash trees, and that was roughly 30 or 40% of the trees in the boulevard. So you're talking probably double that percentage in people's yards, if not more. [01:38:09] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Okay. Well, I guess back to the point of this ordinance. Um, do we have a motion? I mean, if if you guys... you guys tossed it around and this is what you came up with, I'm... it's it seems reasonable to me. Something's got to be done; they can't be left. [01:38:28] **Councilmember Ethan Gilmore:** Yeah. Can we change the 20 days, though? Because if you do have to hire a company, it's a lot of the times where it's going to be more than a 20-day wait. [01:38:35] **Councilmember Orin Kipp:** Again, Madame Mayor, Council. The hope is that they can hire somebody within that 20 days and that get it at least scheduled. [01:38:43] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Would it make... I mean, should we say it then be "scheduled for abatement within 20 days"? Schedule instead of actually abated within 20 days? Maybe change language to that? [01:38:52] **Councilmember Ethan Gilmore:** I guess then somebody could schedule it two years out. [01:38:55] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Oh yeah, that's true point. Um, yeah, I do... I'm open to changing the 20 days. Attorney Lars, do you... [01:39:03] **Eric (City Attorney):** 30. Should we change it to 30 days? [01:39:05] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** It’s just fewer people that you have to maybe deal with for the extensions. [01:39:10] **Eric (City Attorney):** Yeah, I'm fine with 30 days. [01:39:11] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** 30 days. That’s actually fairly customary and standard. [01:39:15] **Councilmember Orin Kipp:** I think that seems reasonable. [01:39:17] **Councilmember Carl Bliss:** Better than 20. [01:39:18] **Councilmember Orin Kipp:** Okay. Motion do that? [01:39:21] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Okay, with the 30-day change. [01:39:24] **Councilmember Ethan Gilmore:** I'll second. [01:39:25] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** All right, thank you Orin and Ethan. Roll call vote, I guess. Councilmember Bliss? [01:39:31] **Councilmember Carl Bliss:** Aye. [01:39:32] **Matt Kline (City Administrator):** Councilmember Gilmore? [01:39:33] **Councilmember Ethan Gilmore:** Aye. [01:39:34] **Matt Kline:** Councilmember Kipp? [01:39:35] **Councilmember Orin Kipp:** Aye. [01:39:36] **Matt Kline:** Councilmember Hill? [01:39:37] **Councilmember Katie Hill:** Aye. [01:39:38] **Matt Kline:** Mayor Hansen? [01:39:39] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Aye. [01:39:40] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Thanks. Now we're going to consider a resolution adopting procedures for counting write-in votes for local elective office. Okay, who's... Sarah? Matt? Who's doing this one? [01:39:53] **Matt Kline (City Administrator):** Madam Mayor, members of the Council. In 2023, several election laws were updated to promote more efficient election administration. Um, one of these updates relates to the tallying and counting of write-in votes for local city offices. Uh, currently state statute requires candidates for county, state, or federal offices to file a written request to count their write-in votes on the ballot for an election. The purpose of this is to eliminate staff time to count frivolous write-ins, such as Donald Duck or Mickey Mouse, which can add several hours to the end of the election night. To better align with the write-in process for these other offices, cities are now allowed to select from one of two different options for processing write-in votes. The first is outlined in the memo: it's to require the candidate to file a written request to have their write-in votes individually recorded. And because that can be difficult or hard to promote, staff felt that Option 2 was maybe the better of the two, and that would just require that write-in votes only be individually recorded if the total number of write-in votes is equal to or greater than the votes for a candidate on the ballot. So in reviewing model resolutions for other cities, it was split about 50% between the two different options. Based on Bayport's election statistics and volume of write-ins for our local offices, staff is recommending the Option Number 2. And this would be implemented this year for the general election on November 5th. And if adopted, the resolution would remain in effect until a subsequent resolution would be adopted. Happy to ask any any questions. [01:41:35] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** So Option Number 2, basically, if you know that the lowest person on the ballot has 400 and you only have 200 write-in votes, you just don't... [01:41:43] **Matt Kline (City Administrator):** Yeah, I like that option. [01:41:45] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** So you don't even like actually tally if they said Mickey Mouse or Jo... like none of that's getting... [01:41:50] **Matt Kline (City Administrator):** Right now we have to tally every single write-in vote. So unless someone is actually doing a write-in campaign and made it noted they didn't make the deadline to be on the ballot, I think we probably would take the initiative to still count those just as a good faith effort. But for those other ones that have a one-off vote, I mean our tally sheet can be this long at the end of the night, and that takes a lot of time. I wish Colleen was still here—she's my head election judge and she could vote for that. So um, we don't have to adopt either option, but I think Number 2 would make for a more efficient election night. [01:42:30] **Councilmember Ethan Gilmore:** It does make sense. I know I was a write-in candidate once, and I was just thinking about how if like I would have just assumed that all the write-ins were for me, then... but they really weren't. So it was kind of nice to have the actual tally so I knew how many were for me even though I didn't get there—there wasn't anyone else. I mean, it was just Susan running. But... [01:42:51] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** So I guess you're saying that you would do it if you knew there was a specific write-in candidate that... [01:42:56] **Matt Kline (City Administrator):** I think we probably would, yeah. Or could a write-in candidate request it, or something, or how would it... how would you... [01:43:03] **Matt Kline (City Administrator):** Well, that would be more of Option Number 1, but then they have to say it ahead of to make the request. So there is that option as an alternative. [01:43:11] **Matt Kline (City Administrator):** Madame Mayor, I have to say, since I've been doing the elections here for over 20 years, when you were a write-in candidate, that was the only serious—like actual write-in campaign—we've ever had. [01:43:24] **Councilmember Ethan Gilmore:** Really? Wow, okay. [01:43:26] **Councilmember Orin Kipp:** I'm good with Option 2. [01:43:28] **Councilmember Ethan Gilmore:** Me too. [01:43:29] **Councilmember Carl Bliss:** I'm fine with Option 2. [01:43:30] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Okay, I'm ready to make a motion. So should I make a motion? I guess so. I will make a motion to adopt a resolution adopting procedures for counting write-in votes for local elect officials as presented to the Council. [01:43:46] **Councilmember Carl Bliss:** I'll second. [01:43:47] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Thanks, Carl. Roll call vote. Councilmember Bliss? [01:43:52] **Councilmember Carl Bliss:** Aye. [01:43:53] **Matt Kline (City Administrator):** Councilmember Gilmore? [01:43:54] **Councilmember Ethan Gilmore:** Aye. [01:43:55] **Matt Kline:** Councilmember Kipp? [01:43:56] **Councilmember Orin Kipp:** Aye. [01:43:57] **Matt Kline:** Councilmember Hill? [01:43:58] **Councilmember Katie Hill:** Aye. [01:43:59] **Matt Kline:** Mayor Hansen? [01:44:00] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Aye. [01:44:02] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** I second-guessing about the whole night. Sorry. Yeah, I know it's hard not to. It is hard not to. Okay, consider an interim appointment of Alan Eisinger as Chief for the Fire Department. Matt? [01:44:17] **Matt Kline (City Administrator):** Madame Mayor, members of the Council. Um, as you may be aware, July 31st is the term ending for the current Fire Chief, Alan Eisinger. City has had some discussions about filling this role—whether it's full-time, part-time, multiple different options. But in the interim, until an actual decision is made, Alan has agreed to fill in as the Interim Fire Chief in that role. So in the short term, it would allow the City Council to keep evaluating whether we need a full-time Chief or if some other version makes sense. The preliminary budget for 2025 will include an earmark for half of a year of full-time Chief; that was talked about in the Financial Management Plan. So then further discussion can take place here in the next couple of months, especially when we know some of more of the budget numbers and stuff like that—that'll play a big role. So at this time, staff recommends City Council approve the interim appointment of Alan Eisinger as Fire Chief effective August 1st, 2024. [01:45:24] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Thank you, Matt. Any discussion? Questions from the Council? No? [01:45:29] **Councilmember Ethan Gilmore:** I'll move to appoint Alan Eisinger as interim chief for the fire department. [01:45:34] **Councilmember Orin Kipp:** Second. [01:45:35] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Sorry, all right, thanks Ethan and Orin. I just want to thank Alan before we do the vote. Thanks for hanging in there with us! All right! [01:45:44] **Councilmember Orin Kipp:** Even though I seconded, I could still vote no. [01:45:47] **Councilmember Ethan Gilmore:** What he said. Even though he seconded, he could still vote no. [01:45:51] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** All right. All those in favor? [01:45:54] **Councilmembers:** Aye. [01:45:55] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Anyone opposed? Passed. Thank you, Alan. Thank you, appreciate it. Okay, Council Liaison Reports. Katie, do you want to start? [01:46:04] **Councilmember Katie Hill:** Yeah, so I had the Bayport Community Action League appointment on Tuesday, June 18th. Um, a lot was covered. Went through all of what they made on all of the events so far. Maybe with the garage sales, they were maybe thinking, maybe like in our newsletter around the same time as the garage sales we could have, "Oh, don't throw this away rid of this at your garage sale, donate to..." and find all these cool places to donate: homeless shelters, women shelters, anything like that, just to get people... [01:46:42] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** We're not doing the trash thing anymore. [01:46:44] **Councilmember Katie Hill:** Yeah, even B-CAL could do that in their Facebook posts. Um, Farmers Market still going on, still being great. I love the music that's going on down there. So if you haven't been down to the Farmers Market, now is the time because it's... the music just makes it really pop. Awesome, that's great. And then they were talking about garbage cans for like flashlights and batteries or lights, and we don't have anything in the city. Closest place is Woodbury, and that's Washington County Environmental Center that you would drop it off. And as long as you're a Washington County resident, it's completely free to drop any of that stuff off over there. And I mean, we can still maybe look into the recycling bins... confusing because we are now meeting down there and they're like, "Which ones are recycling and which one are trash?" So maybe we got to paint those up. [01:47:35] **Matt Kline (City Administrator):** Blue lids are coming. [01:47:37] **Councilmember Katie Hill:** Oh, blue lids are coming? Perfect. Okay. And that's what I have. [01:47:41] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Thank you. I love that idea of having a local hazardous waste collection site. I don't know how hard that is, if other cities do. I know they do it every once in a while; like Stillwater had one recently, right? Um, but like a permanent one—is that... have you heard of anything like that, Sarah? [01:47:58] **Sarah Taylor (Assistant City Administrator):** No, I don't know. [01:48:00] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** I mean, it's kind of nice because you feel like you're driving... either you collect a bunch in your garage until it's time to go, right? Or you're driving down 20 miles to drop off some stuff. [01:48:09] **Matt Kline (City Administrator):** And just to comment on that, so if we do a collection site here, the bad thing about that is we actually have to pay to... [01:48:15] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Oh, you do? [01:48:16] **Matt Kline (City Administrator):** Correct, yes. So we don't... only residents get to go to Washington County Recycling Center for free. [01:48:21] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** So bring that back to B-CAL, I guess. Yeah, tell them it was a good idea, but I don't know that that would make sense. [01:48:28] **Councilmember Carl Bliss:** I've done it with neighbors before. I was going to say, maybe it's talk to your neighbor about collecting stuff and going. They've taken my stuff; I've taken theirs. [01:48:38] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Connie, that was good... you didn't hear that. Okay. All right. Orin said he didn't have an update. [01:48:47] **Councilmember Orin Kipp:** No, no, we didn't have a meeting. Didn't have a meeting last month. [01:48:50] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** All right, that was the Watershed. And then um, Ethan, or do you want me to go? [01:48:55] **Councilmember Ethan Gilmore:** I can... I didn't have a meeting either. [01:48:57] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Okay. Easy! Want me to go? [01:48:59] **Councilmember Carl Bliss:** Go. Library Board met. We basically um kind of went over the Strategic Plan, and I believe Jill's plan she's hoping to bring it to the city here in August. She submitted our annual grant request to the Anderson Foundation um for... and there's building projects that are outstanding things that are are almost complete but not quite. So she's hoping to get a grant to cover some of that really. Outdoor furniture has been ordered along with the bike station or the whatever, and that should be coming soon, she said. And then she's also looking into getting some children items for the children area. You know how Stillwater has a whole little section with kind of cool things? She's trying to get some of that done, and we'll meet again here in three weeks. [01:49:55] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** All right, thank you. So I had a couple meetings in July with some people again to kind of get that idea of a of a foundation for the city of Bayport started. It’s going to... it's not something that's going to happen overnight, but I'm just kind of planting some seeds to get that discussion going to see if we can think about maybe a foundation for parks or whatever someone has a passion about. So if that interests you as a resident and you want to start something with me, I'm super excited to to get something like that going for us because I know like we no longer have a lot of new building going on, which is how we got our parks dedication fees, and now we don't, you know? So it's a way to get that going if someone has an inkling to do that. Also did some of the Chamber events to kind of get Bayport out there and visible: a Coffee Talk at River Siren. I volunteered at the Food Truck Extravaganza. Mixer at um a new orthodontist; actually, they're not even that new, but they got a new name in Stillwater—St. Croix View Ortho. Um, I was in on the police officer interview process—thank you for inviting me, it was that was good to get to know the interviewees. And then when... went to the Fire Relief meeting, and the best news out of that one was that there's no July meeting! Uh, pretty much other... it was just regular regular news from that. I also had the chance to meet with a Girl Scout Troop Number 14 at Mabel's for their democracy badge, so I got to tell them a little bit about what a Mayor does. I could tell them about tonight; they'd hate that though. They'd say, "Why why do you do that job?" Little first and second graders, so that was that was very a very nice thing that they invited me. And then I guess a judge was going to speak right after me, so that was they were going to learn all all kinds of things. I also did that St. Croix River Workshop—the "Workshop on the Water" from Angie Hong and that we did last year. It’s always a really good reminder about how we need to be good stewards of our river and and there's always some interesting conversations. So if you guys have never done it, they do it every year I think, and there's usually a couple options and hanging out with other Councilmembers, Watershed people, whatever—it's it's a good experience and you get a... this time it was out of Hudson instead of Stillwater, so went on that boat this time. So yeah, that was mine. And now Staff Reports. Matt? [01:52:25] **Matt Kline (City Administrator):** Yeah, Madame Mayor. Uh, we'll go through them quick. Fire Chief Eisinger—everybody has their memo in there. The only change that I have is we had ended up with 100 calls for June compared to 89 in 2023. So our year-to-date is 603 compared to 565. [01:52:43] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** So you wait—you had like 50 calls in the last week of June? [01:52:48] **Alan Eisinger (Interim Fire Chief):** Yes, it gets nuts. [01:52:50] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Goodness. Holy... okay. I've heard them. It's been crazy. I know. I mean, it it's been crazy. Okay. [01:52:58] **Matt Kline (City Administrator):** With that, everything else is in the memo. Stand for questions. Oh, and thanks again for for being our Chief. Enjoy, Chief! [01:53:07] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Chief! I like it. Yeah, thank you. Thank you. Another Chief—Chief Jackson? [01:53:14] **Jay Jackson (Police Chief):** Madame Mayor and Council. I'll try and cut it short here since we had a long meeting. Um, Officer Cornell in May recertified in their narcotics in the month of June, so he is good to go for being certified for the the rest of the year. Uh, we just attended the Cyndale Summerfest the other day; that was a nice event. My first time going to it. Um, one of the other big things is we had our biannual Body-Worn Camera audit that was completed. And we had one discrepancy that was noted, and it just had to do with a slight policy change that was updated in statute. So that change was made, and so now we're in full compliance. The big thing is the Safe Roads Grant that we received for the $25,000 in overtime costs does begin this week. So you'll residents will start to see a lot more activity on the Highway 95 corridor where we'll be upping the enforcement activities of speed, crosswalk violations, distracted driving, just traffic in general. Officer Cornell will have a six-year anniversary as a full-time officer as of July 9th. And then Safety Camp and Night to Night planning is continuing. I will stand for questions. [01:54:28] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Thanks for hosting my daughter. I see she made the packet here, so... [01:54:33] **Jay Jackson (Police Chief):** Oh, Elsa is carrying the the door breaching. Um, I thought it was a great picture, I love it. [01:54:38] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Oh, that is her! Yeah. All right. Oh, there's a couple other community events that we have that are on the on our Facebook page that I skipped over. So, and Britney's in almost all the pictures. No, I'm just kidding. She's our PR person. Yeah, she's out there. She was at the good for her Cyndale thing too. That was fun with the llamas. All right, thank you, Chief. All right, I'd like to welcome our Finance Officer, Lucas Schilling. Yay, Lucas! First real meeting. Welcome. [01:55:10] **Lucas Schilling (Finance Officer):** Madam Mayor, members of the Council. It's a pleasure to address you for the first time as the Finance Officer for the city of Bayport. I'd like to thank you again for the opportunity. Biggest thing that I'm working on currently is our annual financial audit for the year of 2023. Progress is definitely being made. Everything's going really well. The auditors were here on site on June 20th and they only had to be here for one day, which is always a good sign. We did have to file an extension with the Office of the State Auditor because the city's financials are due by July 1st, which is today. So due to the late start of the audit, we had to file an extension. We have 45 days now, until August 16th, but I've got no reason to believe we will not finish it well before that. Great. [01:56:06] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** And that was not because of you; it's because of the auditing company getting here on time, right? [01:56:11] **Lucas Schilling (Finance Officer):** Which next year we will certainly get a jump on it sooner. [01:56:15] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Yeah, I would hope. They've done that to us the last couple years now; we're we're late. [01:56:20] **Matt Kline (City Administrator):** We do have and we have spoken to them about that. [01:56:23] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Okay, good. [01:56:24] **Lucas Schilling (Finance Officer):** I will stand for questions about anything else. Welcome. [01:56:28] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Yeah, and thank you, and thanks for all your work on the audit. I'm sure it was... you've learned a lot probably in that process, huh? [01:56:34] **Lucas Schilling (Finance Officer):** Yeah, and I've had a lot of help yeah from Mary. [01:56:37] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Thank you, Mary! I know you're watching. Yes, thank you, Mary. Yeah, she's definitely eating popcorn tonight. Thank you, Lucas. Okay, Public Works Director [Joe Hansen] is not here tonight, but I'd like to do a couple of things on his thing. We will be doing more sidewalk cutting this year, and the program is actually on a whole cycle. We made it through all of the sidewalks; they've either been replaced or cut at least one time since I started. So now we will start over again and try and lower get lower to the actual ADA standard, which is quarter-inch. So first we cut to half-inch equivalent, and now we will get further down. Um, it might happen next year or the year after where we will actually do a replacement assessment, sidewalk replacement again. [01:57:33] **Councilmember Ethan Gilmore:** So just to clarify, you already did anything that was offset by a quarter of an inch, now you're going to go back to anything that's offset by a half an inch? Is that or is it the other way around? [01:57:42] **Matt Kline (City Administrator):** Other way. Okay, we did half-inch and now anything left at quarter. [01:57:47] **Councilmember Ethan Gilmore:** Okay, gotcha. We will go back and do that. [01:57:50] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Okay. Other... made it sound like you like did some up to a certain point and then you're going to go back and do them further and I'm like, "I don't think that's how that works." [01:57:58] **Matt Kline (City Administrator):** We didn't leave them at a quarter end. [01:58:00] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Yeah, I'm like, "What that's not the way it sounded." Okay. Um, and then just a public service announcement about the lead service line inventory. Um, the due date for that is coming up quickly. We are asking residents who get a tag on their door that specifically indicates that we need to determine um what their incoming water line is is for that inventory. So if you happen to get a tag on your door, please call the number on that tag and set up an appointment. Next up is Assistant City Administrator Sarah. [01:58:34] **Councilmember Carl Bliss:** Just one quick question, sorry Sarah. How what percentage of the lines have we gotten done? Been doing it forever. [01:58:41] **Matt Kline (City Administrator):** Yep, it’s a slow go when people don't answer their doors. So I would say over 60%. [01:58:46] **Councilmember Carl Bliss:** Oh, I thought it was going to be higher than that. [01:58:48] **Matt Kline (City Administrator):** Sorry. [01:58:49] **Councilmember Carl Bliss:** That’s all right. Keep working at it. Come on, people, let them in! [01:58:53] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** All right, thank you Sarah. Keep going. [01:58:55] **Sara Taylor (Assistant City Administrator):** Madam Mayor, members of the Council. The City Council and Planning Commission held a joint meeting and public hearing earlier this evening to review a residential concept development plan submitted by Rick and Will Federowski. Um, based on the feedback from that meeting, the applicant will need to determine whether or not to move forward with an application for preliminary plat for the development, so we'll keep you posted on that. Um, the School District is in the process of putting together a submittal timeline for the annexation and and land use applications for the new Anderson Elementary adjacent to Barker Els Park, and that's anticipated for a September meeting. Staff has been busy preparing various ordinance and policy updates, most of which were on tonight's agenda. And then finally, residents and businesses can expect to receive the next edition of the city's print newsletter by mail this week. Article highlights include recognition of past Bayport Mayors, water conservation tips, Emerald Ash Borer tree care, recycling resources, and member recruitment for the Fire Department. The next edition of the newsletter will be printed in September. Happy to take any questions. [01:59:58] **Matt Kline (City Administrator):** All right, my report. Just one thing on my report. We were working on... City staff is working on the 2025 preliminary budget. We’ll likely have a budget meeting, probably at a workshop in the first weekend or at before the first Council meeting in August. City staff has been very good about getting their budgets back to me already. And we had a discussion tonight about some budget impacts, so all that will be taken into account. And hopefully we'll be able to work through next year's budget. With that, I will stand for questions. [02:00:36] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** All right, thank you Matt. Anyone have any last-second announcements? No? All right. Motion to adjourn? [02:00:43] **Councilmember Carl Bliss:** I'll make a motion to adjourn tonight's meeting. [02:00:46] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Thanks, Carl. [02:00:47] **Councilmember Katie Hill:** I second. [02:00:48] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Thank you, Katie. All in favor? [02:00:50] **Councilmembers:** Aye. [02:00:51] **Mayor Michele Hanson:** Hallelujah! Okay!