This transcript has been processed to identify speakers based on the provided city official list and internal context from the meeting. **Note on Speaker Identification:** * **"Councilmember Kada"** in the raw transcript is identified as **Councilmember David Clausen**. * **"Councilmember Thei"** in the raw transcript is identified as **Councilmember Dave Thiede**. * **"Amanda"** is identified as **City Engineer Amanda Meyer**. * **"Corey L."** is the **City Attorney**. *** [0:00] **Mayor Myron Bailey:** All right, uh, good evening. This is the March 20th, 2024 Cottage Grove City Council meeting, which I'm calling to order. Uh, the first order of business is the Pledge of Allegiance. So if you please rise. 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. All right. Will the clerk please do the roll? [0:28] **City Clerk (Tammy Anderson):** Councilmember Clausen? [0:34] **Councilmember David Clausen:** Present. [0:36] **City Clerk (Tammy Anderson):** Councilmember Olsen? [0:38] **Councilmember Justin Olsen:** Here. [0:39] **City Clerk (Tammy Anderson):** Councilmember Thiede? [0:40] **Councilmember Dave Thiede:** Here. [0:41] **City Clerk (Tammy Anderson):** Councilmember Garza? [No response] Mayor Bailey? [0:42] **Mayor Myron Bailey:** Here. Uh, next item is Open Forum. Uh, this is the opportunity for anybody that wants to speak on something that is not on tonight's agenda. Uh, is welcome to do so. Um, we do allow three minutes, and uh, we did have a signup sheet out in the uh entryway. And I do see we have two people that did sign up, but I think it's for our uh our pavement management public hearing. Am I accurate? Okay. So what we'll do is when we do that public hearing, I'll I'll call you in order up here, and then if anybody else wants to, if you're okay with that? Thank you. All right. Uh, but was there anybody else that wanted to speak on something that is not on tonight's agenda? All right, seeing none, I will go ahead and close uh the public hearing. [1:24] **Mayor Myron Bailey:** And then um the next thing on our agenda is adoption of the agenda. And I did have something to share with the public. We do have a couple changes for this evening. Um, I'll just read it. It says, before we adopt the agenda, uh, for the Council, I would like to remove item 6A, which is the "Beyond the Yellow Ribbon" presentation, um, and add item 14A, which is the Friends of Grey Cloud litigation workshop, which will be a closed workshop. And I should just mention that this meeting will be closed uh pursuant to Minnesota Statute 13D.05, subsection 3B, for attorney-client privileged communication to discuss the Friends of Grey Cloud litigation. And this meeting will be held in the St. Croix room here at at City Hall. Uh, so with that change, I guess what I'll look for is a motion and a second from Council. [2:05] **Councilmember Justin Olsen:** Move the agenda. [2:10] **Councilmember Dave Thiede:** Second. [2:13] **Mayor Myron Bailey:** We have a motion by Councilmember Olsen, second by by Councilmember uh Thiede. Any discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor signify by saying aye. [Councilmembers respond: Aye.] [2:15] **Mayor Myron Bailey:** Opposed? Motion carries. So now that moves us—we don't have any presentations tonight, which is six. Uh, seven is Consent Agenda. Council, is there anything you want to pull on tonight's consent? [2:38] **Councilmember David Clausen:** I'm going to pull item 7D for a separate vote. [2:42] **Mayor Myron Bailey:** Okay. All right. So item 7D. Any other items, Council? Okay. So what I'd like to do uh first then, since there is no other items pulled, I'm going to ask for a motion and a second to approve consent except for D, and then I'll explain why. [3:00] **Councilmember Dave Thiede:** Council, I would move that we approve consent uh with exception of item 7D. [3:03] **Councilmember David Clausen:** Second. [3:05] **Mayor Myron Bailey:** Perfect. Thank you. That's a motion by Councilmember Thiede, second by Councilmember Clausen. Any other discussions? Seeing none, all those in favor signify by saying aye. [Councilmembers respond: Aye.] [3:15] **Mayor Myron Bailey:** Opposed? Motion carries. And the reason uh our Councilmember Clausen is pulling uh item D for a separate vote is because I assume you want to state why you're— [3:28] **Councilmember David Clausen:** I have a a rental license that's up for approval. So I'll abstain from that vote. [3:32] **Mayor Myron Bailey:** All right, sounds good. So at this particular point for the rest of the Council, um I would need a motion and a second on this particular item. [3:35] **Councilmember Justin Olsen:** I move to approve item D. [3:40] **Councilmember Dave Thiede:** Second. [3:42] **Mayor Myron Bailey:** All right. So we have a motion by Councilmember Olsen. Do I have a second? Seconded by Councilmember Thiede. Any further discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor signify by saying aye. [Councilmembers respond: Aye.] [3:50] **Mayor Myron Bailey:** Opposed? Motion carries. You can come back now. All right. So if you're here if you were here for anything that is on tonight's uh consent agenda, all of those items have now uh been approved. Uh, we'll move to number eight, which is approved disbursement, uh, which is paying the bills. [3:56] **Councilmember Justin Olsen:** Move the bills. [3:58] **Councilmember David Clausen:** I'll second. [4:02] **Mayor Myron Bailey:** We have a motion by Councilmember Olsen. Do I have a second? Seconded by Councilmember Clausen. All those in favor signify by saying aye. [Councilmembers respond: Aye.] [4:05] **Mayor Myron Bailey:** Opposed? Motion carries. All right. Next is nine, is Public Hearings. Uh, we do have one this evening and I I will read a a quick statement, uh and then Amanda Meyer, City Engineer, will maybe say a few things since this is duplicate. Am I correct? I'm looking through my glasses here. So um as you all know, the city held a public hearing on the 2024 Pavement Management Project on February 7th, 2024 and ordered the project. However, it was later discovered that there was an inadvertent error in the published notice for that hearing. So to be in complete compliance uh with the notice requirements in state law, we are repeating the public hearing tonight. Nothing has changed with the project or with the preliminary uh assessments. Tonight's hearing was properly noticed in the official newspaper and written notices were provided to all property owners in the project area. The city staff's explanation of the project documents and testimony that was presented on February 7, 2024, uh is hereby admitted to the record, and all public comments made during the public hearing as at the February 7, 2024 meeting are also hereby entered uh in the record. So if you spoke at the February 7th meeting, your comments are preserved and you do not need to repeat your comments tonight. However, uh if—even if you did testify—if you did testify on February 7th, anyone is welcome uh today to come to the podium and testify when uh when we have uh the open part to the public meeting. I would like you to understand that this is not the time uh to object to the assessment. Uh, this is the time to object to the project. Uh, if you want the Council to vote no on the project, you may voice your position accordingly. If the Council votes no, then your road will not be improved and will continue to deteriorate. At this point, the assessment amount you received for your property is uh preliminary in nature, but the statutory process requires the city to provide you with this estimate at this time. Uh, there will be another public hearing a few months from now when the Council will consider the actual assessment amounts. You will be given notice of of that hearing, and you will have the opportunity to object uh at that uh time in person or again in writing. Uh, at this hearing, the only item under consideration by the Council is whether or not they should order the project. So with that, uh, speaking of this evening... Okay. So Amanda, you want to—our City Engineer? [6:06] **Amanda Meyer (City Engineer):** Thank you. Uh, good evening, Mayor, members of the Council. So as mentioned, I am not going to run through the entire presentation that we went through in uh early February as that is being entered into the record. Um, there are two recommendations before you with this item. Um, and then I'll just reiterate, this is for the Prestige Estates neighborhood, so north of 80th, west of uh Keats Avenue. Um, and again, all that information from uh February, I do have the old presentation if we need to go back to anything for questions. I'm here for questions, um and with that, I will um leave the recommendations before you. Thank you. [6:40] **Mayor Myron Bailey:** Sorry, I was shuffling paper there. Thank you. Um, with that, Council, do you have any questions for staff at the moment? [6:49] **Councilmember Justin Olsen:** Councilmember Olsen. I don't know if I'll direct this at you or at Ryan or at Jennifer, but um one of the items that was uh commented on the last time we talked about this issue was um the differences between various communities and the way in which they manage their assessment policies. And um since that time, I've done a little bit of of homework um to better understand uh what some of our surrounding communities do. But I wanted to have um one of you talk a little bit about uh what we do here in the city of Cottage Grove, because there are definitely variables to the way in which uh assessments are managed community by community. So uh Jennifer, do you want that, or would you like— [7:16] **Jennifer Levitt (City Administrator):** I can take that one, please. Um, so Mayor, members of the Council. Um, quite a few years ago, staff put together our Infrastructure Maintenance Task Force and came up with our special benefit uh assessment policy. Um, it has been uh revised a couple of times in the last couple of years. Um, but ultimately that document is what's guiding us for um what Cottage Grove is assessing for and how those assessments are done. As we look at residential properties, it is one uh residential buildable lot equivalent. So some cities do, you know, front footage um or by acreage. We look at every residential property as just one unit. Um, and then uh based on our policy, it is a um 45% of the total project cost assessed against those uh benefiting properties. And there's discussion in that policy regarding um what's considered um assessable work, those sorts of things. Does that help answer your question? [7:51] **Councilmember Justin Olsen:** It it does, and I appreciate the fact that you brought up the percentage because that seems to be, at least in my uh studies of other communities, where the variables are. And uh I don't pretend to know what um their policy makers are using to ultimately determine how they want to move forward with um their assessment policies. But here in the city of Cottage Grove, based on what you said, 55% of every road road project that gets done is actually paid for by the general taxpayer, and then the properties that um are listed under the special benefit appraisal, they share that 45% uh of the assessable. So they're certainly not paying 100%. They're not even paying half of what the project cost is. Um, and I know that you mentioned that there was a a task force that came together several years ago, and I I recall when that happened. Um, and I also recall there's been some revisions relative to um if somebody wants to um you know perhaps pay this over time, what does the interest rate look like, that kind of thing. So uh it's helpful, I think, to understand that, you know, we're not talking apples to apples when we're talking, you know, Grove versus any other community. Um, there's always a few differences that may impact the the ending assessment number. But uh at least here in Cottage Grove, 45% is what the assessable properties pay and 55 is what the taxpayer pays. So thank you very much for clarifying that. [8:39] **Councilmember David Clausen:** I just wanted to quickly kind of touch on the the due diligence that um that we as a community do when we assess a road project or assess the need for a road project. Uh, so could you just kind of uh touch on on kind of what core sampling was done and kind of some of the steps that have been taken um prior to this point to prolong the the uh the road and extend its uh useful life? [8:56] **Amanda Meyer (City Engineer):** Yeah, so excuse me, Mayor, members of the Council. So this uh this neighborhood in particular is unique in that we actually had identified this previously as a neighborhood that was due for a pavement management project. And unfortunately, at that time, that's when we started seeing that asphalt stripping occurring, and that was that was a new thing. Um, even, you know, MnDOT and the Local Road Research Board hadn't started any research on asphalt stripping, how do we manage it, those sorts of things. Um, so we actually, in roughly 2012, our Public Works Department did do a thin overlay of these roadways um to help lengthen uh the life cycle of this road to get us to this point. Holistically, as we look at our roadways, um myself, our Public Works Director, our Street Superintendent, we're in the process right now of reviewing our roads as a whole, uh putting together a 10-year plan, taking a look at uh when were they last paved, when were they originally constructed, looking at some of the distresses. Within the last couple of years, we've started Pacer ratings to understand sort of the degradation of that pavement and understanding is it more of a crack seal, is it ready for a mill and overlay, uh thin overlays or full pavement management. Um, one of the things we also started within the last three years is our mill and overlay program. Um, again, trying to help prolong the life of our roadways to more of that 40, you know, 40 maybe a little bit longer with uh implementing those thin overlays and instead of the seal coat, which we were seeing some issues with in seal coat. So we're constantly reviewing our streets. Um, our goal is to review a quarter of the city uh on an annual basis with those Pacer ratings to understand how our streets are uh evolving over the years and make sure that we're staying on top of our uh different maintenance options that we have throughout the community. [10:20] **Councilmember David Clausen:** And and the purpose or the the objective of the mill and overlay is the road bed itself is still structurally sound but the top layer is starting to deteriorate? [10:28] **Amanda Meyer (City Engineer):** That's correct. Yes, Mayor, members of the Council. That's correct. [10:35] **Mayor Myron Bailey:** Thank you. Okay, any other questions for staff at this point? All right, uh so at this point, thank you. Um, I should also mention I guess just uh we did get some letters. Uh, some of you I think are here, so which is fine, but this these will be entered into the record. Uh, if they uh—since they're here. So I just want to mention that we've got I think there's six I think here, um that will be entered to the record for anybody that did uh write those in. Okay. Um, so with that I will—we'll go ahead and open the public hearing. Uh, this again is the time for anybody that wants to speak on this item. And again, we did have two people that did sign up out in the entryway, so I appreciate that. Thank you. Uh, so I'll first start with those two, and then if there's other people that would like to speak on this topic, they're welcome to do so. Um, so uh Eli Wayman? 9498 79th Street South. And in in the future I'll just—you can uh state your name and address for the record. [11:20] **Eli Wayman (Public Speaker):** Eli Wayman, 9498 79th Street South. Uh, first of all Councilmember Thiede, I like that Cyclone shirt, so uh hoping for some good luck in the tournament tomorrow. But um yeah, I just want to make a point. Uh, I think the the project itself should be um rejected. And uh I have a couple points here. Um, I believe that it goes against the Minnesota Constitution, first of all. So Article 10 under Taxation states that the legislature may authorize municipal corporations to levy and collect assessments for local improvements upon property benefited thereby without regard to cash valuation. So in order for the special assessment to be valid, it has to have a special benefit for each property. I think that uh it's pretty pretty easily proven that there is not a special benefit. Um, I'll explain. The city has suggested that the uh the only way in which we will receive a benefit is by an increase in property value. The increase in property value I'd say is questionable in itself, but let's pretend that it's accurate. Uh, if the nice new shiny road increases property value, then the opposite must be true as well. A worn-down road will decrease the property value then, right? So a worn-down road will decrease property value. So let's pretend uh we went along with the plan, we got the road, and uh again let's just say that it's accurate and our property values increase by $6,700. That $6,700—that special benefit—is only realized if and when you would sell your house. Otherwise, it's worthless. So I I assume the entire neighborhood is not ready to sell our homes come November. So let's just say I want to sell my house in 20 years. What do we think the road will look like in 20 years? Judging by past history, the road will again look worn down much like it is today. We've already established that a worn-down road will decrease property value. So that $6,700 special benefit that was pitched in 2024 is now worth nothing in 2044. We pay for the city's roads based on a failed pretense of a special benefit that if it does exist upfront, it will quickly fade away. There is no special benefit. Um, I wanted to also bring up uh last time we were here, I think there was a good analogy I think by Councilmember Clausen—analogy that I really like. So equated it to a kitchen remodel. Um, stated that if you redo your kitchen, the value of your house will increase, which I generally agree with. But let's equate that analogy to this example. In 1992— [Bell rings] Time's up? How much time? All right, I'll quickly finish this. In 1992, let's say built a house, got a new kitchen, great-looking Golden Oak, which is awesome. 30 years later, you decided to redo your kitchen. Uh, it was worn down, it was outdated, so you spend let's say $6,700 to redo your kitchen, and when you're done, your kitchen looks the exact same way as it is today. You've increased your property value by zero. That is the uh equivalent of this analogy. Uh, this is a maintenance project. I know it's a maintenance project because it states so in the city's own Special Assessment Policy for Public Improvement Section 3, subsection 1.3. It's called "full pavement replacement major maintenance." It's a maintenance project. It is designed nothing but return to its original state when the neighborhood was built. City's uh Engineer's PowerPoint presentation calls it out as "maintains infrastructure for a good or in good working order." So it is a maintenance project. Um, I'll finish up here. Um, I talked to a lot of neighbors, I didn't hear one person that was excited about this project and paying for the city's road. It's extremely unpopular. Um, and like I said, I protest the project itself. It cannot legally move forward as a special assessment and it should be rejected tonight. [13:54] **Mayor Myron Bailey:** Okay. Thank you. And I'll just mention that I we'll gather the information from anybody that wants to speak this evening, and then I'll turn it over to our staff like we do and they can respond to some of the questions or the comments that were made. [13:57] **Eli Wayman:** Sounds good. Thank you. [13:58] **Mayor Myron Bailey:** Thank you. All right. And then I believe it's uh Jake Robinson? [14:02] **Jake Robinson (Public Speaker):** Jake Robinson, 9501 79th Street South. Um, I'll just kind of piggyback off of what Eli said. Um, we're replacing the existing road with the same road. Um, there is no special benefit to the property owners. Um, if anything, if you're going to call it an asset, it's a depreciating asset. As you said, it's not—it's going to be worth nothing 20 years from now. Depreciates back down to what it is. Um, I will say this: If the road factors into the home value, um then I'll assume that after the road is initially built in that neighborhood, that the property values of all of our properties had decreased every year as the road had depreciated. And if that happened, then I would welcome to see any documentation that the city or the county has to show that the condition of the road is factored into our market value of our homes when you guys determine our property taxes. Um, I have my property—I have my estimate for my home that I looked at when I bought it in 2018. The only thing that it talks about with that road is that it's paved. Nothing about the condition of the road. So I reject the project. I do not think it should move forward. I'm like all my other neighbors, not interested in paying for the maintenance of a public road. Thank you. [14:48] **Mayor Myron Bailey:** Thank you. Now that was it for who signed up in the signup. Is there anybody else that would like to speak uh that didn't uh maybe sign up? You know, I think I would—yes, if you just want to go up and just uh again, name and address for the record, please. Thank you. [15:02] **Diane Schneider (Public Speaker):** Hi, my name is Diane Schneider and I lived at—I live at 9528 79th. I just have a couple of points that I did call a realtor yesterday and I had the opportunity to call another one today and gave them a quick summary of what's going on here. And both realtors indicated to me that at no point in time do they ever tell a homeowner that a new road in front of their house is going to increase the property value of their home. They likened it to um putting in a new furnace because your furnace is getting old and you want to catch it before it, you know, breaks down. That you may sell your home quicker, but you're not—you're not going to realize more money because you put $5,000 into a furnace or an air conditioner or some such um appliance in your home. Um, I don't believe that the the city is meeting its definition of a special benefit, and I think it's a—it's—the burden is on the city to prove that we are in fact getting a special benefit by paving our road. That's all I have to say. [15:45] **Mayor Myron Bailey:** All right, thank you. I think I saw another hand up back—anybody else wants to speak? Yeah, you come up. [15:52] **Michael Jalo (Public Speaker):** I did not sign in. Oh no, that's okay. Hi, I'm uh Michael Jalo. I live at 7860 Jenner Avenue South, and I'm the only um person that's ever lived on that property. And the roads were put in in 1995. And I'm not disputing the fact that they need to be replaced. I'm disputing the fact that there's a special um privilege or assess—whatever you call it—assessment. Yeah, assessment. Because it's um it's a city property. And like everybody else has said, over 30 years every year it depreciates. So by bringing it back to brand new, you subtract the 30 years of depreciation, now you're adding another 30 years on. We're at zero. Negative 30 plus positive 30, we're at zero. So um like I said before, I'm not disputing the project. I'm just disputing the fact of the assessment. Thank you. [16:29] **Mayor Myron Bailey:** Okay. Thank you. Yes, go ahead, sir. [16:32] **Mike Sandage (Public Speaker):** Mike Sandage, 7958 Jenner. Um, I agree with most of their points. I'm curious however, my biggest point is the financial burden you're putting on a homeowner. The the money I see coming from this special assessment—I work construction. I've worked construction for almost 35 years. I'm not sure where you're getting your bid, but it seems exorbitant. And you're telling us we're only paying less than 50%. Unless you're doing major utility work, maybe get a couple more bids. Secondly, you're telling us that this will increase our our property values, but yet our property taxes have gone up every year. So if our property values have been going down, why are our taxes going up? Thank you. [16:58] **Mayor Myron Bailey:** Okay, thank you. Yes, go ahead, ma'am. [17:01] **Tracy Noram (Public Speaker):** Good evening, Tracy Noram, 9582 79th Street South. I just want to hit on a point and double down on that. Yes, it's true, Tony, we only have to pay 45%, which yes, is technically less than 50%, but let's be honest, it's pretty dag-on close to 50%. So what that means is when our house values go up because of this supposedly, the city makes more money off of us because we pay higher taxes. Which means that yes, we're paying 45% of what's happening on our street that we never even asked to have happen on our street, but we're also putting into the pot that goes into everybody else's street. So while yes, we're paying 45% of our own street, we're also having pay for all of the other streets, right? Because our property taxes will go up. So this whole project in the end truly benefits the city of Cottage Grove, not us as individual homeowners, at the burden of almost $7,000, which some of us probably have earmarked for, I don't know, college tuition at the same time. Thank you. [17:35] **Mayor Myron Bailey:** Thank you. All right. Is there anybody else that would like to speak? Okay, not seeing any, I'm going to go ahead and close the public hearing. And um I'm going to turn to our staff. There was a variety of different questions. I know the one uh about the the legal state statutes or Constitution... One of my favorite things, your Honor. Thank you. So I'll let our City Attorney Corey L. talk through that one first. [18:03] **Corey L. (City Attorney):** Yes, absolutely. Uh, thank you, your Honor. And um certainly members of the public, again thank you for coming out. I apologize for wearing the same jacket. You may think this is the only jacket I have, but I realized too late that I wore this jacket the last time, so I apologize. Um, you're right that the Constitution does require a special benefit when it is using its—the city is using its taxing power. The special benefit is a a fact question. You're you are right in raising it. This is not the hearing to do that. Again, this is the hearing to raise whether or not the city should do the project. They're doing it under 429 to assess it, but this is not the time when you are actually being assessed. That assessment hearing will come in late fall. Um, so and there will be another public hearing for that. So if you don't want the project ordered, your street will stay the same. That's the decision the Council is making tonight. But the special benefit test is, if you want to challenge your assessment at the next hearing, you file a notice of objection with the Council at or before that hearing after you have the final assessment number. You submit that in writing before the assessment hearing. Then if you perfect the appeal and it goes to District Court, that is where we will have the experts argue it out in court. You have the—the battle of the experts, I call it, for the special benefit appraiser. Now, someone mentioned that they—the real estate agent says there's no value there's no increase in value for having a shiny new street. Realtors are not appraisers. There are expert special benefit appraisers that the cities will hire and assume—presumably if you were to challenge your assessment, you would also hire. So your Honor, that is the place where the fact question will come out, whether the city has met its burden. Because you're right, the city does has have to prove that the special benefit or that the—what your assessment is being charged does not exceed what our appraiser says the special benefit value is. So we have not the preliminary assessment role. We've done a a asked a a special benefit appraiser to give us an estimate of what the special benefit is. But if we actually need to go to District Court on this, we will ask that special benefit appraiser to do a full-blown appraisal, and they will have to justify their expert opinion on where the special benefit is and how much it is and why it is. And so then again, that's a fact question to come out uh at that time. But this is this is simply the "ordering of the project" stage. Yes, we have to give you the preliminary number so you know how much it may cost you in the end, but this is not actually challenging the assessment itself. So if there are enough noes in the audience that you don't want the Council to order your project, then they won't. And if they—if that's their decision, that they want to see this street going into a continuous state of disrepair, that's the outcome. Okay, thank you. [19:54] **Mayor Myron Bailey:** Thank you, Corey. Um, Jennifer, do you want to take some of the other comments that may— [19:58] **Jennifer Levitt (City Administrator):** Thank you, Mayor, members of the Council. The one comment that was made uh assumed that we had a bid, and I want to be really clear that at this point this is just an engineer's estimate. So um as Amanda said, we've taken cores of the street so we understand the pavement—the pavement section, what needs to be replaced. We've televised the sanitary sewer and the storm sewer, we've tested all the gate valves, um we've checked all the catch basin structures. So as part of this, just to be absolutely clear, it includes more than just the street. So you're looking at sanitary sewer repairs, uh water, storm sewer, and street lights. So all of those things are in this uh project. And Council, you know, we are usually very conservative at this phase of the project um because obviously we don't know where the bid environments are. Um, you know, you never know where asphalt prices are going to come in um when you go to bid. And so usually we have a factor of safety um in there in regards to a conservative value of estimating uh just so that we don't unduly burden the residents with one number and then come back with a higher number. So I I think our track record speaks well for itself. Usually we start high and we come in lower. Um, not guaranteeing it in this case, but that's usually how we we strive to do that. And Council, once you order the project, then we will move to an actual competitive bid, and then we'll have competitive bids on all items and we'll bring that back to you for consideration. If it is out—if it is an outlier and outside of our engineer's estimate, you have the ability then to reject all bids and have us rebid the project uh to ensure that we're within that margin that you feel comfortable with and how that affects the residents' assessments. So I hope that answers the questions, but if there's anything else we'll be happy to answer them. [20:53] **Councilmember David Clausen:** I think that did. The only thing I might—or did you have a question? I do have a question. Um, and maybe this is Amanda. Um, how many how many homes are affected again again in this do you—I tried to look to see if it was back—but I... did you recall? [21:05] **Amanda Meyer (City Engineer):** Uh, Mayor, members of the Council, there are 79 properties uh in this neighborhood. [21:12] **Mayor Myron Bailey:** I guess we've heard from maybe half dozen of you and haven't—you know, again, I I would say I'd certainly like to hear from, you know, almost like a vote from the neighborhood or something like that. Uh, you know of of in a sense. I mean, if you all want to—it's not like there's a collector road or anything. If you all want to live on bumpy roads and and affect your vehicles and things like that then, you know, some in some ways I feel that that's your your prerogative. But um you know, we've been doing this this way. Uh, we've determined—I've been on different committees and things like that in years past that we've talked about pavement management, and and we've pushed some things. We've got uh situations where, you know, obviously if this was had been done in 2012 or something like that it would be significantly less because of the way city costs have gone up and everything else, right? But uh so it's almost like one of those things. Uh, almost like insurance where you hate to pay for it, but uh um and I'm certainly not looking for the time when my roads become you know get assessed and have to be fixed either. But uh um I I would say probably, you know, at this point uh we're we're kind of following the general procedure that has been followed, and maybe we need to look at it and so forth. But uh so I guess that's okay. [21:54] **Councilmember Justin Olsen:** Thank you. Just some general comments. Um, not really directed at or to any specific um element of the conversation, but one thing that uh we as Councilmembers often hear is um "The city should do this, the city should do that." And I want to reiterate to folks that uh all of us in this room who live in Cottage Grove are the city. Every single one of us. I'm a taxpayer, you're a taxpayer. Um, my kids go to school, your kids go to school. We are all the city of Cottage Grove. Uh, and the City of Cottage Grove um as an entity or as a local government unit has assets that it has to um protect. That's why we have a Police Department. That's why we have a Fire Department. It's why we have a Public Works Department. They protect our assets. They protect our properties, they protect our parks. They do all those things, and all of us as taxpayers pay into that. Um, the city isn't some far-away, distant uh guy behind uh some door that sits in an office. That's not who the city is. The city's every one of us. And so um by extension, every one of us has a say, every one of us has an opinion, every one of us has uh a different way of looking at things. And um that's what actually makes our city really strong. And we are very strong as a city. We have the second-lowest tax rate of any community in Washington County and have historically come in at that second-lowest property tax rate. Um, the only ones who are lower than us—and there's only one—they get what's called local government aid from the state of Minnesota, which by the way, we're all the state too. So um they get taxpayer dollars from people who live in Virginia, Minnesota, in St. Paul Park, and in Newport. We get a tiny little bit of that, but we don't get much. But um that's why they're able to uh have a little bit lower property tax rate. But other than that, we're the lowest. And that's because we're very careful with our dollars. And we also recognize that part of the responsibility of the local government entity is to ensure that every street in the city, which are assets, is in good shape. Because that's what allows us to have more people who want to live in our community and uh feel safe and comfortable. The last thing I would ever want is for uh one of my neighbors in the city of Cottage Grove to have a family member who is—let's just say having a heart attack and time is of the essence, and our public safety vehicles have a hard time getting to their house because their street is in disrepair. And you might say that that's a far-fetched thing to talk about, but it's very true, and it happens in rural communities all the time where they don't even have paved roads. They have uh roads that have deteriorated to the point where they're basically gravel. And we could go that route. Um, certainly not something I'll ever uh stand for in my time as a Councilmember because I feel strongly enough about the safety and welfare of my neighbors, the value of our community uh as a community, not just a street or a neighborhood, but as a community, that I want us to have the very best streets, the very best parks, the very best public safety personnel, the very best Public Works personnel, the best administrators who, you know, get things done for people, utility billing, etc. Because again, we are all the city. And um this is one of those things that nobody likes. And I've I've sat here uh at the Council dais on more times than I can count um and I've heard similar commentary. Nobody likes it. The Mayor had his uh neighborhood done here a few years ago, and it was a full reconstruct and it was very expensive. He certainly doesn't get a discount because he's the Mayor, and nobody likes it, but it's a necessary thing. And it's legal. It follows Minnesota Statute to the letter. So um feel free to argue that point, but I'm going to tell you right now, it's a losing argument because it is absolutely consistent with Minnesota state statute and state law. And again, it's necessary. Um, I I don't take it lightly that uh our our Public Works team, our engineering team um do all kinds of scientific testing when it comes to ordering road projects. And they don't want to do a full reconstruction if they can help it. They want to do a much less expensive maintenance project if they can help it, which is why we're now doing mill and overlays and different things. But uh when it all boils down to it, um if it needs to be done, it needs to be done. And uh just like maintenance on your house, just like maintenance on your car um it's never convenient, it's never something you want to do, but it's something that needs to be done. And uh you know, I appreciate the fact that um everybody has shared their comments, and I appreciate the fact that this is a challenging circumstance. Trust me, I do. Um, many of us have been through it ourselves. But uh it is something that um at some point you have to do. So it's—it's pay me now or pay me later, but we have to we have to do it as a community. And again, um it's not just one person or two people sitting behind a a desk someplace in a corner uh hidden away that make these decisions. It's—this is the city and we are the city. That's all I had, Mayor. Thanks. [24:34] **Councilmember David Clausen:** You know, we only have so many dollars to spend on pavement management every year. So there's a neighborhood that is next in line for next year and the year after that and the year after that. Um, I know that for for the second or third year in a row, uh I'm having potholes filled on my street, and I know that I'm not on the mill and overlay or the pavement management outlook for probably eight or 10 more years. Uh, so if 79th Street doesn't want their road paved, I'm sure there's another neighborhood that would love to be moved up on the calendar. So um I don't know if that's an option to to rework our our management strategy, but um if there's the strong opposition and they truly want to uh you know live with what they've got for a few years longer and we can you know circle back in a few years and hopefully the bid prices are lower—unlikely but possible—um, you know eventually it's going to it's going to come back up for pavement management at some point. But um yeah, you know, I'm I'm open to tabling this and and and adjusting the management project for the upcoming year if if they feel that strongly about it. But—but the likelihood that it's going to be cheaper in the long run? Unlikely. Uh, so if it were me and that were my street up for up for uh maintenance, I would jump at the opportunity to get it done now versus three or five years from now, just seeing the way that, you know, all of our bids for any infrastructure project that we've had come up—which we use the rule of three, we take bids, we go with the lowest best bidder—in every instance they've gone up every year. I don't project that they're going down for any anybody or any project in the future. So I think that would be a poor course of action. But um I'll just throw that out there. If if 79th Street doesn't want to get done, and and the rest of the neighborhood does, and they can you know they can justify coming back and and potentially having this be a larger cost burden down the line... Maybe they don't live there anymore, maybe they don't care. I'm I'm open to Public Works uh revamping our our management strategy for '24. But um I don't think it's going to be a good outcome for this neighborhood if they do that. [26:15] **Mayor Myron Bailey:** Okay. So uh a couple things that I'll just—I'm going to um share with the public. So first of all, I don't—Clausen, I I know what you're saying there, but I don't think if I'm listening to those in the audience here, I don't think that they don't want their street done. They just think the city should pay for all of it to be done. Okay. And I'm seeing a lot of heads—well, maybe not over here. Okay. But—but here's my here's my point. Um, we we many many years ago did put together a pavement management task force which involves citizens but uh similar to yourself out there, right? As well as some of our uh commissions in that. They came up with this particular process that we have. My personal opinion would be that um—and and we've actually talked about this from a staffing—a staff standpoint—and that is we have been doing projects using this formula and process now for I don't know how many years. Ryan, can you even tell me how many years, or Jennifer? 30? No. Um, I'm just curious. My point of it—if you're—the reason I'm bringing this up is what I what I hear from you, and I'm just going to say with all due respect, is you want the rest of the citizens in Cottage Grove to pay for your road when the rest of the citizens had their road paid for that they had to be assessed a certain amount. Uh, when you actually help—depending on when you've lived here—you help pay for part of their road, which is makes up the 50-something percent that is the city. And then we do that every year. So every year we continually bring more roads that, based on feedback and based on data... We don't just do a road for the sake of doing a road. Matter of fact, in your guys' particular case, if you if you recall, uh we did a mill and overlay because we said we think there's more time uh in your particular road. And so we did have our own staff go out there. Didn't cost you guys any assessments or anything like that with regards to the to the overlay process. So I wanted to bring that up as as a as a point. Maybe at some point, again this is my philosophy, you know, once we've made the complete—I'll call it the complete round where everybody paid the way the system is laid out right now, then I'd go, let's take a look at it. Uh, but I will share this with you: when that day would come, if it would come, your taxes are going to go through the roof. Everybody's taxes are going to go through the roof. And and that's what we're dealing with here. It isn't that we can't not do roads. We need to do roads. And the fact is is the process that we have put into place means that because the road in front of your house is more likely used by yourself, um that's where this process has broken out between what we as a city as a whole benefit from the city, and then you you benefit because the road in front of your house is in better shape. Now whether you want to disagree or agree with the assessment value of that, I'll I'll leave that up to our experts, to be honest with you. Um, I will tell you, and I brought this up at the last meeting—and it was mentioned just a little bit ago about my road—I do know there was a council at one point in time—I was not on the council at the time—that had an uproar of citizens in front of their—of the council. And I think that was the first time and the only time that that particular council said "Okay, we won't do the road project." And then you fast forward to—it got back into the cycle, and my charge—because it was my neighborhood before I even lived there when it was a "no"—doubled in price. It absolutely doubled in price because as the road continues to deteriorate, it's going to get worse and it's going to cost more to fix it. I'm just—I'm telling you the way it is. That's what happened in here. It's the only time that I've noticed uh that the situation has ever been declined, if you will, and those residents were not happy uh to have to pay the higher rate when they knew X many years earlier it was half the price. And so whether it's the inflationary factor or not inflationary factor, um I just wanted you to be aware of how we get to the point of the the assessment process between what individual homeowners in neighborhoods pay versus uh what the rest of the city pays. Okay. I just wanted to put that out there because I don't want you to think that, you know, we're just willy-nilly doing this thing. Um, as it was mentioned early, we have core samples of your neighborhoods, and I did hear most of you—sir, most of you were saying that uh you believe that the roads need to be done, but you think the city should be doing it um versus uh you guys having to pay other than paying through the—from the city standpoint. Okay. Um, we're actually done with the public hearing, so— [29:34] **Timu Call (Public Speaker):** Yeah, I just want to know if I could ask a question? [29:38] **Mayor Myron Bailey:** I I will grant—go ahead and then... So I guess I'm a little confused because—actually, I need you to come up real quick. I'll let you do it. Thank you. [29:43] **Timu Call (Public Speaker):** My name's uh Timu Call. I live at 9476 79th Street. I'm a little confused. There was a guy walking around our neighborhood taking pictures, and I asked him what he was doing, and he said he was taking pictures of my driveway and the curbs because they were only going to do blacktop. So my understanding was our street was just going to be blacktop. Now it sounds like we're getting sewers, electrical? Is that right? And am I missing something? [30:10] **Mayor Myron Bailey:** Um, it—no. I want to—maybe Amanda, you want to take that? Is that—pop up. Is that what is that what your question is, was what are you getting? Trying to understand? Okay. With a road project— [30:18] **Timu Call:** The guy told me we're just doing blacktop, no curbs, no nothing. And so that's why I'm thinking that assessment's high for just blacktop. [30:24] **Mayor Myron Bailey:** Yeah. Okay. That's why I wanted to—and that may have been the blacktop uh contractor or one of the potential blacktop contractors because we haven't taken bids yet. But when we do these road projects—and please Amanda, do you want to share with them what the total... are? It's a great question, I'm glad you got a chance to ask it. Thank you. [30:40] **Amanda Meyer (City Engineer):** Yep. Uh, Mayor, members of the Council. The proposed work for this neighborhood: it is uh full pavement replacement, full curb replacement. There are some minor utility repairs, so looking at, you know, lining some storm sewer, uh working through some of the structures if there's any uh infiltration happening in the barrel sections, um taking a look at the castings. As City Administrator Levitt uh alluded to, we are also checking uh valves for the uh water main and then reconditioning the hydrants as well. Um, related to the street lights, uh the wire is direct burial. I know this was a question at the last meeting, and since then—Councilmember Olsen, one of the other pieces with the direct burial is um in that freeze-thaw cycle, that direct burial wire is more susceptible to break. So by putting it in conduit with this project, um easier access for maintenance, uh reducing breaks, and then also looking at upgrading the lighting to be more consistent with the neighborhoods uh across the community. So those are—I think that's a a pretty good summary of the proposed improvements for this neighborhood. [31:02] **Councilmember Justin Olsen:** But with respect to what you just discussed, can you share a little bit about um how each of those uh specific elements are funded? [31:14] **Amanda Meyer (City Engineer):** So Mayor, members of the Council. Right now, as uh City Administrator Levitt alluded to, the um we did a feasibility report and looked at the neighborhood as a whole, the proposed improvements, and then we estimate the total project cost. Um, and then we do take a look at the 45% of the total project cost um against those um assessable against those 79 properties throughout the community. And then uh with that third-party special benefit appraisal, ensuring that the calculation based on the Infrastructure Maintenance Task Force calculation, that we're staying underneath that special benefit appraisal. Thank you. [31:38] **Jennifer Levitt (City Administrator):** Well, Mayor, members of the Council, one thing I just wanted to add because I wasn't sure uh for example uh if we addressed everything that Councilmember Olsen asked... specifically the other 55% um is being borne by utilities. So our storm sewer utility, our sanitary utility, water utility, and street light utility. So those additional funds are what picks up those 55%. Uh, the one thing that I did want to make sure that I got uh into the record for you guys is just a reminder that uh by State Statute it has to be a four-fifths vote. But tonight, since you are uh one member absent, it will need to be unanimous vote uh for you to order the project. [32:20] **Mayor Myron Bailey:** Okay, thank you. Thank you for the update. All right, so Council— [32:25] **Councilmember Justin Olsen:** Mayor, I will uh move that we adopt resolution 2024-50 ordering the 2024 Pavement Management Project. [32:32] **Councilmember Dave Thiede:** Second. [32:34] **Mayor Myron Bailey:** I have a motion by Councilmember Olsen. Do I have a second? Seconded by Councilmember Thiede. Any further discussions? Seeing none, all those in favor signify by saying aye. [Councilmembers respond: Aye.] [32:45] **Mayor Myron Bailey:** Opposed? Motion does carry. Now as—as it was shared with you from our staff standpoint, um in a probably I don't know if it's our next meeting or the next couple meetings, uh we will obviously have a bid—the bid process that will come through. And then once we uh get the bids, there will be a selection process and that comes, like we talked about earlier, it would come back before the Council. Um, I happen to know specifically one of the neighbors in your your uh neighborhood over there—not that he has to be the one that I go to—but um if you're interested uh in knowing uh what that bid amount is, you can obviously check online uh or I mean, you're fine to reach out to me. I'm—any of us—we'd be more than happy to share with you uh what that uh final bid cost would be if you're concerned about where that number may come in at. Um, but again, our—at that particular point, uh then the Council would um either accept the bids, reject the bids, um maybe send it back. I mean, there's a variety of different options that may happen at that time. Okay. All right, thank you for coming tonight. [34:00] **Mayor Myron Bailey:** All right. Um, so the next item on our agenda this evening is Bid Awards, which we do have one. We do have the 2024 Mill and Overlay Improvement uh bid award in Joint Powers Agreement or JPA uh with St. Paul Park. Uh, and in this particular case, Amanda Meyer, City Engineer, will also take this one. [34:10] **Amanda Meyer (City Engineer):** All right. Mayor, members of the Council. The 2024 Mill and Overlay Project uh bid award. So just to remind you, the area: we're back in that Thompson Grove area, finally finishing out the third year uh to get this neighborhood completed. Two unique pieces to this project: one, there's a short segment of 85th Street that's actually on the border between Cottage Grove and St. Paul Park, so there is some cost share with St. Paul Park. And then the other piece of uh Glenbrook just north of 82nd street, we have a 2-inch water main that's um—it's CIP pipe. So it's not something that typical in our system. We're looking to remove that and replace it with 6-inch ductile, add a hydrant for flushing, um and be more consistent with our um our water system. As we look at bids, we did get seven bids. We opened February 29th. Engineer's estimate was uh just over 1.4 million, and actually that falls right in the middle of those bids, which is good to see. Um, our low bid: Bituminous Roadways at $1,276,932.20. Um, they actually did one of the other mill and overlays in this neighborhood, so they're very familiar with the area um and we had a good experience with them based on that low bid. Um, we're looking at a cost-share with St. Paul Park just under $22,000. We will add an administration uh fee percentage to that um since the city is doing that contract administration for them. Um, and then I did want to mention with that water main piece, there is some funding coming from our Utility Fund uh for that piece of the project. So with that, I do want to mention there are two recommendations before you because of that uh shared um street segment with St. Paul Park. There is a a JPA that we're looking to execute. So with that, I'll stand for questions, and then the recommendations are before you. [36:12] **Councilmember David Clausen:** My question was regarding the second recommendation, which is to uh regarding the Joint Powers Agreement uh with St. Paul Park uh with minor modifications by the City Attorney. What variables are potentially going to be modified? [36:25] **Amanda Meyer (City Engineer):** So Mayor, members of the Council. The reason for that language is St. Paul Park is also still reviewing the JPA and they have not technically approved it. Um, minor modifications, we would look to City Attorney Land uh to provide some guidance if there's any major word changes. Um, those would come back to Council, but the dollar amounts are set based on uh construction costs. So that would not— [36:40] **Councilmember David Clausen:** So anything that would substantially uh change the or modify the city's obligation or financial burden would come back for for vote? [36:44] **Amanda Meyer (City Engineer):** Yes, that's correct. [36:45] **Mayor Myron Bailey:** Okay. Any other questions? All right. Council, we do have two uh motions before you. Um, some would like to take number one? [36:51] **Councilmember Dave Thiede:** I would move that we adopt resolution 2024-44 awarding the 2024 Mill and Overlay Project to Bituminous Roadways incorporating the total amount of $1,276,932.20. [36:59] **Councilmember David Clausen:** I'll second. [37:01] **Mayor Myron Bailey:** All right. So we have a motion by Councilmember Thiede. Do I have a second? Seconded by Councilmember Clausen. Any further discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor signify by saying aye. [Councilmembers respond: Aye.] [37:08] **Mayor Myron Bailey:** Opposed? Motion carries. And then who would like to do number two? [37:10] **Councilmember David Clausen:** I'd like to motion to approve the Joint Powers Agreement with St. Paul Park with minor modifications to be made by the City Attorney. [37:15] **Councilmember Justin Olsen:** Second that, Mayor. [37:18] **Mayor Myron Bailey:** All right. We have a motion by Councilmember Clausen. Do I have a second? Seconded by Councilmember Olsen. Any further discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor signify by saying aye. [Councilmembers respond: Aye.] [37:25] **Mayor Myron Bailey:** Opposed? Motion carries. Thank you, Amanda. All right, moving right along here. Uh, Regular Agenda number 11, we have nothing this evening. Now we're down to Council comments request. I will start as I normally do with Councilmember Clausen. [37:40] **Councilmember David Clausen:** I would just like to commend all of our city staff on their hard work keeping our meetings running smoothly and keeping our city running smoothly. Thank you. [37:48] **Mayor Myron Bailey:** All right, sounds good. Uh, Councilmember Olsen? [37:51] **Councilmember Justin Olsen:** Thank you, Mayor. Uh, a couple of things here. First of all, for those of you who are in the Easter spirit, which I believe many of us have been uh with the nice early spring weather that we experienced here over the last couple weeks, although it sounds like that's about to change... Uh, we do have our annual Cottage Grove Lions Easter Breakfast this coming Sunday at the VFW Red Barn here in Cottage Grove. The event starts at 8:00 a.m. and it goes until noon. The cost to attend this event is $12 per adult, $8 for kids. Uh, this is a wonderful opportunity to come and enjoy an absolutely delicious breakfast. Pancakes, eggs, um we have uh sausage, we have biscuits and gravy, we have all kinds of things. And you also have the opportunity to meet the Easter Bunny at no extra charge, get pictures with the kids, etc. So uh please come join us on Sunday. We would very much like to see you there. Again, the Cottage Grove VFW starts at 8:00, goes until noon. I also wanted to mention that um the Lions have their annual scholarship program out now. It is available for graduating seniors at Eastridge High School and at Park High School. Um, and uh you can get information on these scholarship opportunities through the guidance counselor office at the high schools or uh online you can look at our Cottage Grove Lion page. I also put it out on my personal Facebook page today, but that scholarship is a $2,000 scholarship for uh the students who uh are ultimately selected, and we have five of those available. So we would love to have as many uh really really good scholarship applications as possible. Deadline to apply is April 10th for the Cottage Grove Lion scholarship program. And then uh the last thing that I wanted to mention is, I believe, Mayor, correct me if I'm wrong: is this Friday the last fish fry at River Oaks? [39:21] **Mayor Myron Bailey:** No, there's one more after. [39:23] **Councilmember Justin Olsen:** Is there one more after this? Good Friday? [39:24] **Mayor Myron Bailey:** Okay. [39:25] **Councilmember Justin Olsen:** All right. Well, I'm going to tell you right now: make your reservations and get down there because it's absolutely wonderful. And uh we we have a great crew down there at River Oaks, they do a really nice job. But um it fills up fast, so you need to make your reservations come down for fish fry uh pretty quickly. I think you were there last week again, right? Yeah. So um just a delicious opportunity to uh enjoy fish fry with your friends here at uh wonderful facility, River Oaks. And thank you for the correction that we actually have two left. Um, so you can make reservations either by contacting River Oaks uh by phone, or if you go online to the River Oaks Municipal Golf Course uh page uh with—there's a link there where you can actually make your reservations online as well. And with that, Mayor, I'll turn it back to you. [40:02] **Mayor Myron Bailey:** Sounds good, thank you. Uh, Councilmember Thiede? [40:05] **Councilmember Dave Thiede:** Don't have uh have much. Just uh we're going to have something that's a little um more unusual this weekend, maybe. I mean, usually if the weathermen get all excited about it, it doesn't happen. But uh you know, so just be safe out out there. We haven't had a whole lot of snow this year and so forth. And uh um and I guess it'll keep you inside. You can watch the uh the Iowa State Cyclone boys advance in the tournament. That's a great—great plug there. There's a plug there, I guess. Yep. Well done. Well, look at the Gophers. The Gophers won—last was it last night? Yeah, last night in the NIT. I mean, it's it's second-hand tourney, but uh hey, it's still fun, right? We'll take what we can get. There you go. That's it. [40:50] **Mayor Myron Bailey:** Yeah. Okay. So uh I have three things. Uh, one real quick to kind of piggyback on the snow comment only because we've not had it, right? Um, because uh they're talking snow maybe as early as—depending when you're watching this—Thursday night into Friday, couple two to five inches maybe, who knows? All day Sunday, and then Sunday could be a whopper um depending on who you listen to. Uh, the only thing I'm bring—the only reason I'm bringing that up is, do remember: um don't park in the streets, uh because our plows need to get through the streets. And I know myself—my wife's been parking her truck in the street right now because we've been okay. We bought a new trailer, so yes, we're going to have to figure that out. Uh, but the point of the matter uh is please make sure you move your cars off of the the street so our plows can get through uh during the—this. Hopefully it won't happen, like you said, maybe it'll it'll it'll quit. The other item I wanted to mention real quick is is another positive thing and that is um uh every year uh other than Strawberry Fest—a few weeks after Strawberry Fest—we have the Fourth of July uh fireworks show. Uh, and that uh kind of day event and such with the Fourth of July fireworks show um is the Cottage Grove Lions putting on some family fun events that go on there. And then what I do for the Lions is I do reach out to some of our local businesses to see if they'd be willing to uh be a a sponsor of the Fourth of July fireworks. And so as we get a little bit closer here for the next couple meetings, I did wanted to share with you, I already have two. Uh, my goal is to have um five $5,000 um donation uh companies to donate towards fireworks, so it's a $25,000 fireworks show. Um, and I do want to mention right off the bat that I've already gotten responses back from two businesses that are returning from last year. Uh, Tennis Sanitation—uh obviously we all know who they are—he absolutely, Willie, reached out to me right away and said absolutely do it. Uh, and then also NorthPoint, uh which is the big developer in our business park right now. Uh, and not that the other ones aren't—we're just in that process where it's kind of they're working through the the process. And matter of fact, there's even another one that just reached out to me about um so it could be more than 25,000. But um I just want to thank both Ten—right off the bat, Tennis Sanitation and our partners in the business park with NorthPoint uh for uh contributing to what'll be a fantastic uh 4th of July uh celebration uh with some amazing fireworks. And they are amazing. [43:08] **Councilmember Justin Olsen:** And thank you, Mayor, for your help with that. Our Lions Club appreciates it very much. [43:11] **Mayor Myron Bailey:** Yep. Not a problem. And then I'm going to get on to a serious note, and staff's going to go, "Oh my gosh, I'm bringing this up." Um, and I know we still have a few people kind of standing out in the audience, so—or out in the hallway, so I'm going to mention this, maybe they'll hear it too. Um, there is up at the Capital right now, there is a omnibus zoning package that is going through the House and it's going through the Senate. Uh, the Senate file is 1370 and the House file is 4009. So 4009. Now some of you might be wondering why am I bringing this up? And the reason I'm bringing this up is because this particular um omnibus zoning package, if it were to pass and be signed by the Governor, will dramatically change how cities can manage their housing. And some of you might think, "Oh, it means less housing" or maybe not as much housing, and I'm telling you it's completely the opposite. Um, the way it's written as as it is today, if you or I as a single-family homeowner lives um next to somebody that decides to sell their property and a developer comes in and says "I want to put in a sixplex," um they can put in a sixplex right next to your single-family house, and we can't stop it. We can't tell them what they can do for uh what their house has to look like. We can't require them to have parking on-site, which means they'd be parking on the streets. Um, it completely circumvents um the city's ability to properly zone and manage what I think all of us want to have managed in our community. Um, we're not the only city uh fighting this. Every other city in the state of Minnesota um through all the different agencies and groups is doing this. Uh, the reason they're doing this, if you will—maybe isn't the wrong reason. If you look at what the core was, it was to create more affordable housing. Um, and uh but the the way they're doing it is not, in my opinion, the right way. And so what I do encourage you to do is: please call your local representative, um whether it's the House or the Senate. Uh, you can look them up uh at the Capital or anybody else that you want at the Capital, or even the Governor, uh and uh share with them your displeasure um at what could happen literally in every neighborhood here in Cottage Grove and other every other city uh in uh the state of Minnesota. So again, uh it is the omnibus zoning package, uh and the Senate file is 1370 and the House file is 4009. So um I don't think ever I have actually made a statement like this before, but this is so out of reality in my personal opinion. Um, I would absolutely think it would be nuts. Um, it'd be like putting it down where you live in in a in a nice area or where we live or you live. It's just unbelievable. [45:54] **Public Speaker (Unidentified):** We have an association, does it matter? [45:56] **Mayor Myron Bailey:** I don't know. Does it matter? [45:58] **Councilmember Justin Olsen:** My understanding, Mayor, is that the League of Minnesota Cities uh and Metro Cities are both um lobbying against this. [46:05] **Councilmember David Clausen:** I've heard the same. Does sound pretty ridiculous. [46:08] **Mayor Myron Bailey:** It is. And I just mentioned—yeah, literally is no um there's no—it isn't that you have an association they can stop it. It's—I mean, because they can't stop cities. [46:18] **Councilmember Justin Olsen:** Yes, the city of Minneapolis removed the parking requirement on multi-unit housing several years ago if you want to look at like a case study on this. And it has exacerbated their parking. Because then it's street parking, right? Yep. Same same scenario. Somebody comes in and replaces a fourplex or a sixplex with an 18 or 20 unit apartment building, and now they can cover every square inch with housing because they don't have to accommodate parking anymore. Um, so now you've got affordable housing and their justification is, "Well, it's low-income housing and those people are going to ride the bus." Well, that's not the reality for most people, even in those scenarios, and and then it it greatly affects and disrupts the ne—the other parts of the neighborhood. Um, so as as frustrating as as our parking requirements are in development, it's—it's with that orderly process in mind. Uh, but yeah, I know that um the state and in Minneapolis and St. Paul Association are all um advocating against those for similar reasons is that they want to keep the authority local. Because every city is different and every city has different needs. And um you know, in areas where you have mass transit that can accommodate removing that parking restriction or parking requirement might be um uh feasible. In areas where transit is lacking like the suburbs, uh it—that could be problematic. So for that reason, we're trying to keep control local so that um we can manage our needs individually. [47:22] **Mayor Myron Bailey:** Absolutely. And I just mentioned last comment on this is um staff and myself on behalf of the city did uh send letters to all of our representatives up at the Capital to express our uh desire to vote against this a particular uh bill and advocate against. So some of the responses back so far have been very good uh in agreement. Uh, we haven't heard back from everybody yet, but again, if you are passionate about this and and want to make sure that local control manages this process, please uh reach out to your uh House or Senate leader. So all right. Um, next on our agenda is Workshop Open to the Public. We do not have one this evening. Uh, 14 is a Workshop Session Closed to the Public, uh which we do have one this evening. And I'll just mention it one last time is uh this—the the meeting will be uh closed uh per Minnesota Statute 13D.05, subsection 3B, for attorney-client privilege communication to discuss the Friends of Grey Cloud litigation. And I believe we'll be back in the St. Croix room. So uh with that, we'll be adjourning in there. Otherwise, everybody have a great uh evening and Happy Easter. [48:32] [Music]