[0:24] Mary Fasbender: Time being 7:00 I call the Hastings City council meeting to order please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Welcome, and let the role reflect we do have a full quorum tonight. Tonight we will be doing our swearing-in of our newly elected officials for wards one, two, three, and four, and we would love to congratulate them. And with this, we will have an introduction by our City Clerk, Kelly Murtaugh. Welcome, Kelly. [1:17] Kelly Murtaugh: Thank you, Mayor and council members, council members-elect. Um, I would like to have uh, all four ward council members join me up front here. We'll do this all together as a group, so if you'll join me now and please bring the little cheat sheets I left for you. Very nice. Okay, I'll break this up into pieces here, and so please raise your right hand. I, state your name, [Laughter] do solemnly affirm that I will support the Constitution of the United States of America, the Constitution of the State of Minnesota, and the ordinances of the City of Hastings, and that I will faithfully discharge the duties of council member for the City of Hastings, counties of Dakota and Washington, and State of Minnesota, to the best of my judgment and ability. Congratulations. Yay. [2:36] Mary Fasbender: Should we have a picture? So let's do photos of these four first and then all council members. I think you're... okay, let's do first these four folks and then and then Angie, I'll welcome back. Okay, I'm going to count: three, two, one. There we go. One here, two. Okay, now let's have all council members please stand near one another, like each other. Who runs the world? This is going to show up on the website and the newsletter, so City update. Okay, here we go: 3, 2, 1. 3, 2, 1. Here we go. And then here: 3, 2, 1. 3, 2, 1. [4:36] Mary Fasbender: So now let the record reflect that the majority of the members are present and a quorum has been established. Now that you're newly appointed, thank you. Approval of minutes: council members, are there any corrections to the minutes from the regular meeting of December 16th? Okay. Comments from the audience or by Zoom: anyone wish to speak to the Council at this time? Please step to the podium, state your name and address. Anyone at Zoom? And no one on Zoom. Council items to be considered: council, is there any items—are there any items to be considered? Okay. Consent agenda: Council, I would accept a motion to approve the consent agenda. Council member Leifeld with council member Pemble. All those in favor of the motion, state by saying aye. (Aye). Opposed to that motion, state by saying nay. And that motion prevails. Tonight, in Community Development, we have a resolution to adopt a 2025 CDBG budget, and for this item, we will have an introduction by our Community Development Director, John Hinzman. Welcome, John. [6:09] John Hinzman: Thank you, Mayor, City Council members. Before us tonight is our annual CDBG budget allocation. We have $44,879 which is granted to us for different types of activities related to low and low-to-moderate income households. In this year, as in years past, what we're proposing to do is to allocate the funds towards our assessment abatement program. What our assessment abatement program does is it erases the abatement or the assessment that is levied upon properties that are within construction areas of new roads and utilities. So this year, we're looking primarily at the areas along West First Street, between some of the side streets west of Featherstone Road, and then portions of Pine Street or Prairie Street and State Street. So in these areas, applicants could apply and be eligible for the erasure of the assessment that they would have on the property. We figure with the amount we could assess, we could have abatement for six to seven of those assessments that could go forward. So that is what we have before you tonight. There's a resolution that authorizes a submittal of this budget to Dakota County CDA, and I can stand for any questions. [7:14] Mary Fasbender: Thank you, John. Council, any discussion? Council member Haus. [7:15] Angie Haus: Thank you. I'm just happy to see that we are able to get some of this funding for some of these assessments as I know it can be costly and, um, you know, really, really a nuisance sometimes for our residents. So I'm happy to see this through. I'd like to make a motion to approve the adopt resolution. [7:38] Mary Fasbender: Thank you, council member Haus. There is a motion on the table. Second? And council member Leifeld with a second. Additional or new discussion? [7:45] Lisa Leifeld: Comment, yes. Thank you, John. So with this program, which as council member Haus said, what a great option for people who can't afford this—I mean, we've known people who've had to sell their houses before, and we hate to hear things like that. How do they go about applying for this? What's that process in a nutshell, if you don't mind, John? [8:05] John Hinzman: In a nutshell, when we go through the construction project, our engineering staff makes the program aware to individuals. So they'll know at that time, and then the income qualifications will be shown to them, and if they meet that, they can work directly with Dakota County CDA staff and become eligible. [8:27] Lisa Leifeld: When you follow up to that, John, when you said we notify them, do we notify all residents that this is an option, or do we notify just residents who indicate that there's an issue with financing, or how does that work? [8:40] John Hinzman: Sure, all the residents that will be part of the construction project will be made aware that this program is available. [8:44] Lisa Leifeld: Okay, excellent. Thanks, John. [8:45] Mary Fasbender: Yep, thank you, council member Leifeld. And there's a second. Any other discussion? Council member Vihrachoff. [8:50] DawnMarie Vihrachoff: Uh, thank you, your honor. And then just to clarify, and forgive me John if you had already said this, this could benefit anywhere from six to eight households? Was that...? [9:05] John Hinzman: Yeah, we estimate about 6 to 8 households depending upon what we see as the average abatement on that. Sometimes we abate all of it, and that's what we're planning to do, at that 6 to 8. There may be some partials which could extend it further. [9:11] DawnMarie Vihrachoff: Okay, perfect. Thank you. I support this. [9:13] Mary Fasbender: Thank you Council. Council member Vihrachoff, again no more discussion? All those in favor of the motion, state by saying aye. (Aye). Opposed to that motion, state by saying nay. And that motion prevails. Thank you, John. Tonight, under Administration, as usual, we have our PFAS update for the first meeting of the month, and for this item, we will have an introduction by our City Administrator, Dan Wietecha. Welcome, Dan. [9:45] Dan Wietecha: First meeting of the month, first of the year. Um, and as you all know, we do a quick recap on what's new in the world of PFAS since our last update in December. Just working through some of the details in the memo and really just hitting the highlights of what is new. Um, the dates for construction are a little bit more nailed down, although they're still estimates. We are intending to proceed with the Central Water Treatment Plant; expect that we could be going to bid as soon as May of this year, starting construction this summer and substantially complete December of '26. So figure a year and a half per project. It's been real easy to say we're doing a project a year for 3 years, but realistically, there's going to be a lot of overlap. So if this one starts this summer and finishes a year and a half later, the Eastern treatment plant, the one in the industrial park which would be the next one, figure we're going to bid on it in early 2026 and completing a year and a half later, October of 2027. So you can see there's significant overlap between any of these projects. [11:00] Dan Wietecha: Um, so really just some clarification as we get those dates a little bit more firm. State legislative session opens next week. We certainly have put in, consistent with the City Council's legislative priorities, requesting assistance from the state. Do anticipate that when session opens there would be new bills introduced, since it's a new session. The other part that I would note is our request for state bonding dollars is $16.6 million. That is towards the Eastern treatment plant. It is a $20.6 million project; we received a million in planning and design grant a year ago, and just—and it's later in my memo here—but just a couple of weeks ago we got notice of a $3 million emerging contaminants grant. So take that $4 million off the top and it's down to $16.6 million. There may be some other funding that we're still waiting on and certainly pursuing, but we're not asking for more than the project actually is, but we are seeking full funding for the project, not 50%. [12:19] Dan Wietecha: One of the pieces of funding that we're still waiting on is congressionally directed spending or Community Project funding—slang might be "earmarks"—at the federal level. But it is in the House Appropriations Committee Bill, and from what we understand, it's part of the overall budget process. So until there is a federal budget for fiscal '25 approved—so not the continuing resolution that they did a couple of weeks ago, but an actual budget for the year—it could include congressionally directed spending projects, hopefully ours. Ours is at just over a million dollars, but again, as we're piecing some of this together, a million dollars certainly helps. But that has a process to go through. It may be something we would see approved and signed in the next couple of months. [13:30] Dan Wietecha: The other good news which I hinted at was the $3 million emerging contaminants grant. We actually had two applications we submitted for both the Central and the Eastern plants as separate applications. The Eastern plant is ranked number two on the state's project priority list, and the central plant is tied for 13th on the project priority list. I do want to point out there's like 150 of them tied at 13, but there's only I think two of us tied at number two, or actually I think we're the only one at number two. So certainly ranked as important projects in terms of the funding criteria. And additionally, both of them are approved or fundable. It'll depend on getting some grant agreements coming through later this spring, but $3 million each, so $6 million total for those projects. That certainly additionally helps. If you remember back our discussions about the water rate increase attributable to the central plant, we said we know there's going to be an increase needed, let's do 10% January 1st and then an amount to be determined later in the year. Part of that amount to be determined depends on things like getting this additional grant, so that certainly helps people out. [14:50] Dan Wietecha: Um, the other pieces to give some update is the 3M settlement funds for the central plant. We currently have a proposed grant agreement that is being reviewed by legal and probably a little bit of negotiating back and forth on the legalese, the technical language in there. But I hope that we can have that in two weeks at the council meeting on the 21st; if not that quick, certainly at an upcoming meeting. It's in the works and it's actually in black and white, it's just a matter of making sure that we get the language right for both us and the State of Minnesota. [15:47] Dan Wietecha: Um, the other piece related to the grant agreement and the 3M settlement funds is the purchase of the land for that central plant. And as you know, we had previously approved a purchase agreement which we're still on target that we could get that done by the end of February, which is the date in the agreement. It's a little bit iffy, but we could get it done. We are currently intending to start a phase one environmental assessment—I actually approved it in the consent agenda earlier this evening to move forward with that. That process could take 3 to 4 weeks from tomorrow. Depending on the results of that, it might call for a phase two study. We know that there had at one time been a gas station on that site, so there's a good chance that there was some spillage and potentially some minor contamination to the soils there that might need to be remediated, and we should know what that is going into, you know, prior to actually signing the dotted line and purchasing the property. So it's doing our due diligence. But we'll learn more from that phase one over the next few weeks. And if it takes a little bit longer or needs to do that phase two, we might be coming back saying we need an extension on the purchase date. We can't rush it and do it February 28th, we need some additional time. But that's the quick version of what's new. It's all pieces moving forward and there's actually some significant milestones in there even though it was just a couple minutes to give you an update. But with that, I can certainly stand for any questions. Thank you. [17:43] Mary Fasbender: Thanks, Dan. Any questions? Council member Pemble. [17:45] Dave Pemble: Thanks, your honor. Thanks, Dan, for that monthly update. So, question for you: where are we at right now with water treatment plant number three options? I've been getting some calls from residents just looking for an update. I know we've put it back on the block, we're looking at other locations. Where are we at? [18:20] Dan Wietecha: The Western treatment plant—um, we had a sighting study done to look at what are preferred locations. Council agreed that the optimal location would be purchasing land just south of St. Elizabeth Church on General Sieben. We had an appraisal of that property done; we gave that appraisal to the church board and leadership to review. We have not yet scheduled a meeting to sit down with them and talk about "here's what the value of that property is and what we would recommend for a purchase agreement," but it's certainly moving forward. But if it's—I didn't put all the dates in the piece—but if it's potentially going to bid two years from now, January '27, it's not quite on the—I don't want to say "fast track," but certainly not on the schedule that we're trying to work with the central plant. So we're moving forward at looking at that property purchase, but not as immediate as the other facilities. [19:16] Dave Pemble: But nonetheless, so residents can hear that is still in the works and we are still looking at it. Excellent. Thanks, Dan. I appreciate the update. [19:23] DawnMarie Vihrachoff: Thank you, your honor. Um, Dan, I hope I'm not putting you on the spot or in the hot seat, um, but some of the questions that I've gotten from some of our residents and some constituents as well is about the process and how the city wants to continue to kind of work with folks as we are planning out some of these potential sites. And so for example, if potentially for one of these that we might be taking over a business that is in existence, could we just share general information for anybody that might be watching like what the basics of that process looks like? Um, I know that for the City Council, what we've talked about—and Dan of course you've been in those meetings as well—is that it's incredibly important to all of us to make sure that those businesses are preserved whether they are being relocated somewhere in town or something like that. Am I putting you on...? [20:30] Dan Wietecha: Okay, thank you. Um, there is a process and a sequencing that matters. Um, and I'll get back to that, going to jump ahead there. There is, aside from being the right thing to do, there's a legal requirement that we would provide some relocation assistance to those two businesses and hope to help them relocate. I know in our conversations with them they both want to stay in Hastings, which I think is also wonderful. Here's where we have some concerns about the sequencing: because we are intending to use the award of 3M settlement dollars for the land purchase, we cannot start the relocation process—intending to work with, actually even approved hiring them, SRF Consulting—so we have the experts in order to help us walk through that process and look at what are comparable rents and help them with relocating and what some financial assistance might be in that relocation. We can't start any of that until we have the grant agreement approved and in place. We can't start spending those settlement dollars until we have the contract with the State of Minnesota. So that's under legal review; we can't move on that. [22:00] Dan Wietecha: The other piece is, although it certainly makes sense to have some discussions and look at what are potential locations and be good neighbors and understand and appreciate that they want to stay in Hastings, if we just earlier this evening approved a 3 to 4 week process to look at environmental which might have a second piece before we actually purchase the property, we don't want to get ahead of ourselves with starting to work on relocation on something that we don't own yet. So, understand some confusion or questions out there, but really we're trying to diligently move all the pieces forward but also needing to take them in a critical path in the appropriate sequence that the items have to happen. So we need to get that grant agreement signed with the State of Minnesota to use the 3M settlement funds to purchase the property as well as cover those relocation expenses. We need to complete the environmental studies so that we can close and purchase that land. And certainly intend to work with the technical experts to help work through the businesses on the financial assistance at relocating. So financial assistance including sort of a reimbursement for the hassle, the actual costs for moving, potentially if there's a difference in their rents between where they're at currently and a new place—there's requirements in the state law that we address all that. [23:54] DawnMarie Vihrachoff: Um, so that's incredibly helpful. That's a lot of information, thank you. [23:56] Dan Wietecha: I can't give you a specific "hey, here's when or where," but I hope that helps outline the process. [23:59] DawnMarie Vihrachoff: I think so, thank you so much. [24:00] Mary Fasbender: Thank you, council member Vihrachoff. And council member Leifeld. [24:00] Lisa Leifeld: Sorry, Dan [Laughter]. Oh, not sorry—it's an easy one. But just want to make sure because when I looked on the City's website, which is where we tell people to go, there's some old information out there when I look at the map. So I can understand why we might be getting calls. So one, if it would be possible to update the decentralized treatment plant system map just so that people aren't getting confused. But then two, in that getting confused piece, when you're referring to the central plant, that is what is listed on our map as treatment plant number two, which was originally on the map at Lions Park. So this is what we're now calling the centralized plant, which is the hope to be our first plant that we're going to have up and running. And that is the one that—and that is public knowledge—the location that we're looking at on the North Frontage Road off of 55? So just so that is accurate information. [25:15] Dan Wietecha: Okay, great. [25:16] Lisa Leifeld: So yeah, if we could maybe have some update on this, and even that being said to the treatment plant number three, which we're calling Western treatment plant, right? If we could maybe update that to as a possible, you know, new location, right? Just so this just makes it look to me like—I appreciate that. [25:28] Dan Wietecha: I don't know what's on the website specifically, but if it needs some updating clarification, we'll absolutely do that. [25:34] Lisa Leifeld: That would be great just because I know we've been instructed to send people to the website. And so when I went to the website myself just to kind of get an idea, I can see where people are like, "Wait, nothing's happening." Lots of things are happening, right? [25:50] Dan Wietecha: Lots of things are happening, but let's maybe just update that so... [25:55] Lisa Leifeld: Excellent. All of the things I thought are correct and I like it. Thank you. [26:00] Dan Wietecha: And the other—just you walked through it perfectly with central plant, treatment plant 2, that type of stuff. Initially a year and a half ago we referred to them as 1, 2, and 3, but then when we changed the order so it's 2, 1, and 3, we started trying to geographically refer to them as Eastern, Central, and Western. [26:13] Lisa Leifeld: I love that, and that would be a great update on the map as well then. So I am done, thank you. [26:24] Mary Fasbender: Other discussion? Is no... um, motion? This is simply a discussion. So moving on, we will have a discussion about the Red Rock Corridor and the Great River Rail joint powers agreements, and Dan, you may continue. [26:40] Dan Wietecha: Thank you. Um, I think that these are discussion items, unless there's some real strong feelings for or against to generate a memo. I think this really is more for some conversation. We are members of two—they're separate but they're related—joint powers agreements. The Red Rock Corridor Commission started back in '98, so 20-some going on 30 years ago, intended to advocate for expanding commuter bus service as well as planning for commuter rail essentially between the Twin Cities and Red Wing, including Hastings here. The other one, the Great River Rail Commission, was created more recently in 2009 to advocate for a second train daily between the Twin Cities and Chicago, which actually began operation—I was going to say earlier this year, but actually I guess it's 2024—May of 2024. [28:00] Dan Wietecha: Um, but the question is, what is the current status? What is the current benefit to our membership in these two joint powers agreements? They both continue as entities. The Red Rock one, um—I guess two comments there—we have frequently had some studies looking at: does transit... is it feasible, is it viable here? As part of the Commission, and honestly, I don't think that the finances or ridership levels are particularly going to change from what's been studied previously, but there's certainly needs in some of the community that would benefit from having some sort of commuter transit. The rail one: mission accomplished. You know, they got the second train. It continues in terms of looking at how do they best utilize that train, are there connections they can make at some of the rail stops? Not Hastings, but a matter of making it more functional and usable in those communities. [29:05] Dan Wietecha: Um, but a matter of do we as a city want to continue our membership in these joint powers agreements? One or both or neither? And really just trying to give it to the City Council to have some discussion around the value of these. Council member Pemble probably can speak to a lot of the more specifics as our representative for the past couple of years on these JPAs. It may be something that you want to refer to planning committee or something if it needs some additional discussion and brought back here, or potentially a workshop, but we've... we're pretty much booked on workshops till June, so it's not going to be immediate. [30:00] Dan Wietecha: The other piece I would note that if there's an interest in withdrawing from either, I'd give two notes: one, if there's an interest in withdrawing it takes 90 days notice and a formal resolution. It isn't just something that happens; it's easy to do, but there's some formality to it. The other piece that I skipped over, I should have mentioned, is um, we're non-financial members. So although it might cost us some time attending a meeting and staying on top of the discussion, there's no budgetary impact. So Washington County or others might have some financial stake in the operation of the joint powers entity; Hastings does not. So really it's a matter of time and effort, not dollars. But with that, I can try to take some questions. I might defer to council member Pemble or encourage you guys to defer it to or refer it to another commission. Thank you. [30:52] Mary Fasbender: Thanks, Dan. Council member Leifeld. [30:55] Lisa Leifeld: Thanks, your honor. I would like to suggest that we talk about the possibility of doing, say, a second workshop of the month. This to me feels like an hour-long. I don't think this is a 4:30 or a 5:30, but maybe like a 5:45 before our second meeting of the month if people are scheduling-wise—I know it can get complicated. I think there's been a lot that's happened, as council member Pemble would be able to tell us more about during the workshop as well, of where this was. Because at one time, we did have money in this, if I remember correctly, with Red Rock? [31:37] Dave Pemble: No, neither one. There was never any money. We never had any money in this. The only money that was involved was the legal time. [31:40] Lisa Leifeld: Okay, which that's not much. So that being said, I would like to, if anyone else is interested in voicing their opinion, send this to a workshop so that we could find out more about what it is. I think the majority of the people sitting on this dais right now don't know a whole lot about this. Um, I think it would be beneficial for us to find out, because having been part of the original—or not the original, but part of the planning and being told that we would be looking at at least 2040 before we saw any sort of bus system here. So hearing those statements over the last eight years, I think it would be really beneficial for all of us to find out a little bit more about what is this and, you know, aside from sending council member Pemble to these meetings and, you know, eating up more of his precious time with his family. [32:25] Dave Pemble: Thank you. [32:26] Lisa Leifeld: You're welcome. So that would be my recommendation if anyone has anything. Thank you. [33:00] Mary Fasbender: I would like to give council member Pemble the chance to give his synopsis of what his feelings are and if there is a need for one or the other or both. [33:13] Dave Pemble: Thank you. Um, in the last two years I've served on both of these commissions. And on the one hand, the Great River Rail—what used to be called Twin City Metro Corridors is what it was originally called—and that has succeeded. Two years ago the legislature, and it was passed last year, a gigantic—I shouldn't say gigantic, but a large—transportation bill that funded the Northstar replacement to Duluth, a Twin City to Chicago second run, and a Twin City to Fargo second run. The other two are not even close to moving forward, but we did as part of Great Rail succeed in contracting with the states of Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Illinois through their funding to have Amtrak provide a second train. And it started in May, and already by September 10th, something like that, they had over 100,000 people riding the Borealis, is what it's called. It leaves in the morning here and late morning in Chicago/St. Paul. [34:10] Dave Pemble: It does not stop at Hastings. There will not be a stop at Hastings for any reason unless there's an emergency. The plan was with, and it is with the other Amtrak trains, is they're not stopping at every location because that eats up time. So if it was to be an additional stop like say in Hastings, they would add 20 minutes to the time frame. And if you looked at that all the way down to Chicago, the other communities that wanted to have part of this, it wasn't feasible. So Amtrak picked those eight locations along St. Paul to Chicago where it would stop at, and it's been a very good... it's sold out both directions most all the time. [35:10] Dave Pemble: The other item I would talk about is that it's a completed project. It's like Dan just mentioned, it's up and running. The only need for—and in fact the later discussions we've had at Great River Rail is that we haven't planned... we've had a whole series of dates lined up in 2025, but there's not a reason to meet. So we are not meeting this month like we would normally meet, we're probably not going to meet in March either because unless something comes up, Amtrak controls all of that activity and its funding from the three states. So Great River Rail Commission is just sidelined right now. [36:00] Dave Pemble: The Red Rock Corridor bus route discussion has been very frustrating on my point representing the city, talking about when will we ever see bus service here in the community? And part of that has been "well, we're working on it, we're working on it," and I have heard the 2040 statement. But in most recent discussion in September, Metro Council representative for our area, Sue Vento, was there, and the Director of Busing for the Met Council was there. And I asked, I said, "Will we ever see busing coming to us?" And the basic answer was: right now busing to Cottage Grove has changed a lot. If you go to that lot, you might only find 20 or 30 vehicles sitting there on any given day. The lot is not full, the buses are not full. They're looking at saying, "Okay, how do we change the bus routes to more attract riders?" And the discussion is, "Let's make the Red Rock instead of a north-south corridor, an east-west corridor." But part of that comes into play where, you know, Hastings is at the end of the Red Rock Corridor right now, but it's technically Cottage Grove. [37:35] Dave Pemble: And when we'll ever see that... Met Council said basically it's a funding issue, it's a personnel issue—they're having a hard time finding people to drive that are qualified. And the funding for bus routes... and we can go into this I think at a later date, that's fine, but that's just my short synopsis. And I brought this forward this spring and said we need to talk about this because it's things that we need to consider: what's valuable for the City? Is representation on these two commissions valuable for the City of Hastings? And I think the people that are sitting at the dais need to make that decision and we need to move forward, because there are probably more important things on the docket than those two items right now. Thank you. [38:40] Mary Fasbender: Thank you, council member Pemble. Council member Leifeld. [38:45] Lisa Leifeld: Thank you, council member Pemble. That's really informative. So all of that being said, your personal opinion as being the individual for the last two years who's gone to these meetings: aside from the interest in it and the great knowledge that you're getting out of doing it, what is your opinion on your being a representative there from the City of Hastings? [39:20] Dave Pemble: There is one... there is no financial commitment from the city in either one of these organizations. Two, it's nice to hear what's being planned and talked about and maybe you're two steps ahead of the next person. But for the time commitment and the research, I'm really struggling to say that it's a valuable piece for one of us to be involved in. Thank you. [40:11] Mary Fasbender: Thank you Dave. Can you answer... so you and I have discussed this: is it more valuable to have you at the table, especially for the Red Rock, opposed to not? If their conversations are started, or is it something we can remove and jump back in? Are we harming ourselves by doing that? [40:18] Dave Pemble: Part of that discussion that the Mayor and I have had is that if there's a possibility that there's the development on the west side of Hastings that we would want to use part of that area as a corridor meeting area, something for bus routes to come to pick up and drop off. There is, in the fall review that the Red Rock had done, indications that there is an interest from Eagan to Hastings as a bus route that would be, you know, a daily bus route. No idea what the hours would be, but that's down the line. They're more worried about the corridor route from Woodbury across into Dakota County and then to the airport. So yes, I would say that in the Red Rock there's probably a need, but I don't see that it's going to be real soon that it would impact this community down the road. If everything fell into place, you know, we're talking about that development could be 15, 20, 25 years of completion before it's built out there. In 25 years that might be the corridor route that people want to go on, and then it may be a valid reason to hang in there. But yeah, that's time down the road. Thank you. [41:46] Mary Fasbender: Thank you, council member Pemble. Council member Haus. [41:50] Angie Haus: Thank you, your honor. Um, thinking about this, one thing I do fear is that without having a council member on these boards is that there's not a person to advocate for future projects, for future areas where we'd want to see things like this as well. So I would like—and I understand where uh, council member Pemble's coming from on at least the, I believe it was the first one, not Red Rocks, I'm sorry, the Great River Rail Commission—pulling out of that makes sense. But I would love a workshop as well, um, as council member Leifeld suggested as well, just to go over a little bit more substantial... just because I really do fear if we don't have an advocate there, we will be forgotten about. We won't ever get transportation then, right? And that's something that we've already struggled to get a little bit on. So, thank you. [42:50] Mary Fasbender: Thank you, council member Haus. Any other discussion council? Do we have enough? Council member Vihrachoff. [43:18] DawnMarie Vihrachoff: Thank you, your honor. Um, I support that idea as well, I'm sorry council member Pemble, of asking for a workshop though for you to uh, spend some more time teaching us about all of these things. Um, but I just think that at the at the very basis of what Hastings is, I think of rivers and bridges and trains and I just think it's an important part of our history and of our future and I'd like to examine it a little bit more. I would support a workshop as well. Okay, thank you. [43:45] Mary Fasbender: Thank you, council member Vihrachoff. All right Dan, I think you have your... okay. All right, again just discussion, and Dan will get some more information for us. All right, any council members, any announcements that you may have? All right, I do have a few. City offices will be closed January 20th in observance of Martin Luther King Jr. Day. Recycle your old lights with the Hastings Holiday Lights drop-off collection; residents can drop off their unwanted light strands at the Joint Maintenance Facility building, 920 10th Street West, during the holiday season from November 15th until January 31st. Arts and Culture Commission will meet on Wednesday, January 8th at 6:00 p.m. HEDRA will meet Thursday, January 9th at 6:00 p.m. Planning Committee and Planning Commission will both meet: Planning Committee will meet at 6:00 p.m. Monday, January 13th; Planning Commission at 7:00 p.m. Wednesday, January 15th. 6:00 p.m. Parks and Rec Commission Thursday, January 16th. 6:30 p.m. Public Safety Advisory Commission. And Tuesday, January 21st, City Council will have a regular meeting at 7:00 p.m. and also there is a Heritage Preservation Commission meeting at 7:00 p.m. With that, I would accept a motion to adjourn. [45:14] Mary Fasbender: Council member Pemble, council member Beck. Any discussion? No discussion. Council, all those in favor of the motion, state by saying aye. (Aye). Opposed to that motion, state by saying nay. We are adjourned.