Go ahead and call the meeting to order. We'll start with a roll call. McKe here. Lantern >> here. >> Friedrich >> here. >> Maramp. >> I am here. >> Thank you. >> Here. >> You like to stand and join me in the pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Okay. On to agenda approval. Uh looks like we have two uh items that were added at least since the initial version 6 and 6P. >> That's correct. Actually 6P was just moved up from new business. >> Oh, correct. So modified. Yeah. One added, one modified. >> Correct. >> Um anything else from staff? Nothing else from staff. >> Anything from council? >> Okay. Can I get an a motion to approve of the agenda as amended? >> So move. >> Second. >> All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Presentations. We have Tammy here. >> The long-term credit plan. >> Tammy, how long has uh been with Northland? >> Since 2011, I believe. >> Okay. and um this long-term. Good evening, mayor, city council. Tammy Yamal with Northland um public finance, Northland Securities. Um I believe the first year as background that the city did a long-term finance plan was in 2013. So that was before the utilities. So, and for the audience, so tonight there's this lengthy report. We're not going to go through that. I have about 15 slides as a summary as we've done in past years, mayor council. I would be happy to take questions as we go through rather than waiting till the end. And again, tonight is meant to be highlevel summary of what is a much longer plan. And if you can go to the next slide. So the purpose of the study and I'll lead by saying this long-term plan is not your budget. Your budget is where you make your annual decisions and you adopt your levies and set your appropriations. This long-term finance plan, which goes out 10 years, is really meant to be macro. It's meant to inform trends and to show um the city the city council based upon certain assumptions including source and use of funds, property tax levity, enterprise fee charges, the utility fees, capital improvement plans, and debt management. So, I just note that as you go through, remember it's meant to be macro. It has been updated every year by the city because as you get new and better information and refined, especially those capital improvement plans. If you go to the next slide, Jay, >> can you please speak up or >> Yeah. Is this >> Does this just record me? I will speak louder if it's >> And if I'm not, say it again. Say speak louder. >> Okay. So, the study approach um it uses historical data and current plans including your preliminary 2026 budget. So, as you look at this, this was at a point in time for your 26 budget and you're still working on that. It makes assumptions for expense and revenue for capital improvements. The city maintains a long-term capital improvement plan. This long-term financial plan takes that and provides information on source of funds. What would be bonded? What would come from cash or other sources of funds? And then last but not least, the impact of projected growth, including impact from increased revenue from additional utility customers as well as additional tax base as it relates to the tax levies and the spread of that. If you can go to the next one. So I'm going to start here with the conclusions of recommendation. We'll revisit this on the very last slide. So the study the focus is to maintain strong fund balances both for the health of the city and for when the city does go to the bond market to issue bonds with respect to maintaining the city's rating identifying um a strategy to fund capital as I noted a moment ago a plan for tax levies I'll raise my voice and utility fees a plan for financial impact of that growth that is projected and it is a projection it time will tell how that actually materializes and to consider the impact of economic broader economic conditions. You can go to the next slide. So the assumption in the plan for growth there the plan includes much more detail than is included here. This is very high level. Approximately 65 acres platted per year on average is estimated between 2025 and 2034. 252 residential equival equivalent units added per year on average between 2025 and 2034. That includes an average of 184 residential single family units per year plus a total so not an average but a total of 664 new multifamily units in addition to commercial property development. There is some um estimates for commercial as well. If you can go to the next slide. So now I'm going to switch from talking about growth to getting into some couple slides on the capital improvement plan. CIP stands for capital improvement plan. This slide is projected use of funds based upon the city's plan for capital improvement. Capital improvement includes equipment acquisition in addition to utility and park and facility improvements. The big line there in year 2027 relates to the top item municipal facilities. The plan for I think at least three four years has included um a new municipal facility and that is estimated for year 2027 a few years out. The other items you can see water improvement, sewer, um street improvement with the county road project out in 2030. If you can go to the next slide. This is taking that same capital improvement plan. So the spending and saying how will that be paid for in 2025? There is some plan and we're in October here. Use of cash from the fund the equipment fund unspent on bond proceeds as well. Other sources including intergovernmental grants is in the yellow. The gray is bond proceeds. The largest amount being in 2027 that directly relates to the municipal facility that is included in the plan with that estimated to be funded with bond proceeds. If you can go to the next slide please. Now I'm going to talk about annual debt service by source of funds. This is showing that the majority of future total outstanding debt. This is inclusive of existing bonds that are already issued debt and plan new debt will be payable from tax levy. The um gray color is tax levy and this represents um debt service. Debt service means principal and interest payments and the gold or yellow is from utility revenue. The increase that you see in year 2028 and it's that tax levy. The majority of that is in that tax levy relates to the municipal facility project. That project would be financed as estimated in 2027. The first debt service payments would be due in 2028, the year following. And this represents that. If you go to the next slide, Jay, here's debt service tax levy. So the slide prior we were looking at total debt service included some of the enterprise utility funds. This is just tax levy. The gold is um levy. This is for debt already issued. So that is for existing debt that is more flat. The green relates to new debt. The majority of that relates to the new municipal facility and you see that in year 2028 there is also every other year plans for equipment certificates. Those are much smaller but that is what is represented here. This is estimate. The city has not issued this debt yet. The city is in the planning stages for that project and these are based upon certain assumptions. If you can go to the next slide, this is showing city tax levy and tax rate. Tax levy is what the city council adopts and certifies. That's the revenue that you certify to the county that needs to be collected and spread upon your tax base. Tax rate is calculated by the county. Tax rate is simply a factor of the levy that the city council certifies spread over the tax capacity or the tax base of the city. The line in black is the projected property tax levy annual percent change. The orange is the tax rate annual percent change which falls under the other line the tax rate annual percent change with adjustments which are not assumed in here. So you can see that change. 2026 is estimated. You are still working on your budget. The future years are estimated based upon the assumptions in the long-term finance plan. If you can go to the next slide for those that prefer numbers rather than the graph, this is simply the numbers behind those graphs. The top section being the property tax levy payable by year. It has two years of history in the projected. I won't read those numbers. It's not the intent of this. The intent is to show that net spread levy that gets adopted by the city and adjusted for fiscal disparities distribution gets spread over your tax capacity. The plan is assuming growth in your net tax capacity both from underlying growth in the existing property value and most importantly from the new construction. And we started out with that slide on the assumption for new construction and the value that would come online from that. If you can go to the next slide. This is showing city tax levy in total. The green being the general fund tax levy which funds the operations of the city. The gold being debt service tax levy. The top of that bar represents the total amount of tax levy actually certified in 24 and 25 estimated for 2026 subject to your actions in December and then the future years estimated based upon the long-term finance plan. If you go to the next slide, the water and sewer fund, the fund um looks at revenue sufficiency and rate calculation. Revenue sufficiency for the utility funds looks at at projected year-end cash balances. Are they will they be sufficient to cover three months of operating cash? Following year debt service payment following year payo capital where the city is not bonding but needs cash on hand to pay for projects that are planned to be paid with cash and reserves for future capital plans. Based upon those assumptions and the assumptions for the expenses and the capital in the water and sewer fund, the um plan assumes 3 to 4% average annual increase in fees and charges between 2026 and 2034. That percentage estimate adjustment has remained fairly constant and on target with that for the last several years. The assumption for growth in customers and volume is based upon the approved development. So when I earlier I touched on the number of new residential units that's prepared by staff and that is the estimate based upon approved developments. If you can go to the next slide cash balance we talked about cash balance on the prior slide and the importance of that for the enterprise funds. This looks at it in total. And really what you should take from this is the long-term finance plan projects that the city's funds will continue to maintain their strong financial position. This is showing that cash ending cash for the city moves around based upon timing of capital improvement projects and timing of when bonds are issued and spent down. So big picture from this there's a bunch of squiggly lines. big picture it means that on a projected basis the city's funds are projected to remain in sound financial condition if you can go to the next slide so in summary and this is the last slide that maintaining that focus on the long-term financial plan this is I'll say it again for a second or third time this is not your budget this is where you get macro looks of I like that or I don't like better we got to talk about that and look at something different to manage the fund balance in compliance with the fund balance policy. The city of Corkran maintains a policy on what those ending fund balances and specifically in the general fund should be on a projected basis. This plan achieves that policy. Continue to review and update assumptions in the finance plan for growth. The city has done that for many years. I opened with my comments. The city's been doing this since 2013. growth impacts both future city tax levy in your rate and the revenue for the utility funds. The city has a history of being conservative in its long-term finance plan on those assumptions for growth. I would note that that there hasn't been a year where it was oh we were just too rosy pictured to date. Not that doesn't mean that may not change in the future but the assumptions have been conservative and the actual development has exceeded what has been estimated in the plans. That mayor and councel I'm going to close my comments. There's about a 70page report. Um happy to answer any questions that you may have for me. >> Any questions for D? >> I one D first thank you um for all the years that you've done this for us and such. My biggest question and the 70page report and stuff says pretty is is very informative and stuff. My number one is the monies for a campus police city hall whatever we decide and stuff. We have that we've planned well for that. Yes or no? >> Um the city has planned for that. Um, always the challenge with those major facilities is they come with the cost. They do >> and this plan makes assumptions for growth between now and then to spread the cost over. >> To the extent that growth exceeds that, that burden of that will be less than what is shown in the plan. To the extent that it doesn't, the city may adjust your plans. That will be up to the city. I know that the city is undertaking studies and has been looking at this for many years. But all cities that invest and have not just invest the need for that additional space as they grow, there's always that initial impact of paying for that >> while that growth continues. >> And an opportunity that I love to take is with the audience we have in in the chambers here and such folks. Those monies, that big spike, those kind of things have all been factored in for years and years and years and years. Um, this building is how old Jay >> 1994 is when >> 1994. We have no more places to put anybody. We've taken away our community center. We are now building hopefully a new community place in the park and such. But we have grown into this and we have nearly we are out growing this right now. So, we have to make those steps. Just so folks know and understand, the previous councils and mayors have not taken this lightly. We've been planning, we've been looking at it and doing things. Um, and no matter how how it makes me feel, Corkran is going to grow with the group we have up here and hopefully future groups um in future elections and stuff. We continue to do it responsibly, respecting current residents, but also respecting those land owners, farmers that have land and those kind of things inside the mucus line and have the right to develop. It's our job to do it in a smart way. So, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. >> Could I say one thing, council question, please? >> So, so borrowing is not uncommon. uh the the strategy that Corkran uses in order to do all of our capital improvements typ typically relies on bonding. And so we do equipment certificates when you see the trucks that are on our roads that are maintaining our roads. When you see uh the investments that we're making, we are borrowing the money to do that. So that is a strategy that Corkran has used for decades. And this in keeping with that strategy, uh Corkran has been projecting to borrow this money in 2027. And so planning has been happening. Uh there has been intermediate steps. So in 2018 a study was conducted and we had some capacity at that time. And so uh they elected instead to renovate this building, give up some community spaces and uh re recognizing that growth is happening to move into that space and and operate there as an intermediary step until you get to 2027. Uh we are beyond that capacity right now. You say we're getting there. We're past it. We don't have sufficient space right now in order to serve the community the way that we need to and 2027 is coming up quick. So, we're doing our due diligence to make sure that we're identifying what spaces are needed to take care of the community in the future. Uh we've planned for the financial security. Tammy's done a great job of saying this is what it's going to cost over time, how that's projected, how we're going to pay for it. This isn't a time to pay the bill. This is a we're going to pay the bill over time. uh conservatively uh with what we need to do what we need to do. >> Thanks J. Thanks Mr. Mayor. >> Anything? Anything else for county? >> Thank you, Mayor Councel. >> Great job. >> All right. And then we'll go on to open forum. >> Uh this is our opportunity for anyone in the audience that would like to address an item that is not on the agenda this evening. Uh you have an opportunity to come up. The limit is three to five minutes. Please address it to the dis. Uh the the council may ask some clarifying questions, but we will not take action at this time. Mr. Mayor, I have one card for public comment from a Mr. Tom Hackler. Sir, if I can get you to please step up to the microphone, state your name and address for the record and uh what you'd like to talk about. >> Yeah, my name's Tom Hackler, 9120 Brandy Wine Road, Corkran. Uh, I'm just wondering why Corkran can't get a compost site. Uh, handover has one, Lorettto has one. Uh, uh, and I know you put on our on our, uh, literature. You wrote it for a small fee, we can go to Maple Grove. Well, I took a trailer there the other day in an 8 by six trailer with two foot sides of 50 bucks. So, it's not getting to be a small fee. And uh now when their leaves are down, we're going a lot. So I'm just wondering why we can't have one. We get enough people in Corpin that must could definitely use one. >> Is that a hand raised or? >> No. Oh, sorry. >> Okay. >> I can raise my hand. >> I just was wondering. Yeah, >> we we had a proposal for one a while ago. >> Yes. uh there's a lot of concern from neighbors about smell and noise and the management of all the material is a concern. So that was why we haven't had one partially and partially with cost >> smell. What smell is there to organics that aren't on the table from leaves and branches? >> Just real quick, Mr. Mayor, I don't want to get into debate and such. Um drive by the compost site which he just talked about in Maple Grove. Um, it will take your breath away as far as the the breakdown and and those kind of things. Um, it's not Yeah, I'm not going to say anymore. It It is a specific issue in Maple Grove. It's probably Maple Grove is having issues with it existing and where it's at and those kind of things. Um, I think I said it in our conversation of uh of at the concept of somebody wanting to know kind of a sketch napkin plan. Um, we do not want to become a compost site. We do not want to become a storage facility. Corkran does not want either one of them. Um, but we do need to address compost. Um, it is expensive and such. I have my own compost right now on my own property. I turn it over regularly. That's an issue. If you don't do it, you do get the smells and such. But, uh, feel free to stop by. If you go to Target and the wind is out of the northeast, you won't spend a lot of time outside. So, I I don't want that out in our countryside. >> Couldn't we join somebody else's? >> We've looked into that. >> We're we're looking into all of those things. Yes, >> we have looked into it. there was um potentially ve a very strong there was I'd say much stronger and many more people that were interested in Rogers who did a similar thing and they ended up losing somewhere in the field of 12 to $13,000 a year on it uh in net loss after selling the permits to it. So, if we were if that if that same type of deal was on the table with the Maple Grove, which I'm not sure it is, uh, given where they are, um, and we had the same number of people interested and did the same type of licensing thing, we'd have to be decide if we're okay with, you know, an additional $13,000 loss a year. >> So, Mr. Mayor, as as I'm thinking about this, it might be a good opportunity. We've gone with some assumptions. Uh maybe we could put a survey on our website and just try and generate get an understanding of what interest is out there >> because that would give us a more solid date to understand how many people would be participating in it because that was one of the prohibitions was uh our our neighbor in Rogers, they lost $13,000 because they projected that more people were going to participate and then they did not and as a consequence the cost was prohibitive. And so if we could understand the data point of how many people would be interested in participating, then we'd be able to understand what the cost would be for the city. >> I think that'd be great. >> Do we have any other? >> No other particip. >> Anyone else for open form? >> Thank you guys. >> Yeah, appreciate it. And with that, we will go on to consent agenda which consists of items 6A through 6P. Um, I am going to pull 6P. Does anyone else have anything else that they >> Mr. Mayor, if I could? 6G and H. >> G H. >> Just some questions on the >> Okay. Anything else? >> And I was going to pull P too. So, great. Mind think alike. >> Anything else? Okay. Let's see if I can do this one. Uh I will entertain a motion to approve consent agenda items A through F I and I through O. >> I'll make that motion. I will second that motion. >> All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Okay, let's start alphabetically. Uh Dean G. >> Um could we just get a quick conversation about that as far as the the amendment for Cook Lake? if we could. Thank you, >> Mr. Mayor. Council, uh you did recently in in July uh review a PUD amendment for Cook Lake Highlands for the Ara apartment building to increase their impervious surface and reduce their number of units. Well, they decided to add a dog park, a dog run, excuse me, uh next to the pool and uh they want to use an imperous surface. And unfortunately, because this was a PUD in the shoreland, we were very specific about the impervious surface limits. So, like you see in there, the imperous surface is an increase of 900 and some square feet specifically related to the addition of a dog run on the north side of the park there. >> So, that is the only change. Okay. Just do you and and I know you have a crystal ball about as clear as mine, Kendra, but uh thank you for that. Are there going to be any more changes? This has been in the works for a long long time and uh a lot of the neighbors are asking many many of the same questions and stuff and uh this is a small change to the PUD, but it it's getting very hard to continue to change things for me. So, >> I can assure you that I had that very conversation with them and asked them to get creative and not come before you for that reason. Uh, but they felt that this was the best way to do that. I I can also tell you that both uh and um the sweet living are in for building permit. So, I do think we're going to see construction on those last two pieces of the Cook Lake Highlands project. if uh if there could be an update or a heads up to the neighbors, that would be really cool. The Corker neighbors and such, just letting them know what's going on. Um the M&I Homes, those kind of things. I'm sure we've got them on speed dial or an email, a general email and stuff. Give them updates. Um >> thanks to their HOA HOA, whatever you can do. they they don't seem to be either listening or believing anything that's going on because this has been in the works for so long. So >> the website is updated pretty routinely as well and so if they wanted to go to the >> that's what I tell them and they like well you know the issues Jay and such just uh appreciate the communication. Thank you. >> Anything else on G? >> With that do we need a motion on that one? >> I will move to approve Second. >> Any discussion? All those in favor say I. >> I. >> H. >> And then H. I was at the planning commission meeting and such. Um, when I when I read the information and I think this is Dwight's, >> how am I doing? Am I remembering well enough and such? Um, have have things been ironed out? I assume they have from the planning commission. the the the concerns are um on my part knowing and understanding what's going on back there. They're adding 2,000 and some odd square feet to the building for storage. There's no employee increase or anything, but we're per our ordinances and everything else. We're asking them to curb, gutter, add parking areas, those kind of things because they're growing their building by more than 10%. What is the rule? Um >> that that's correct. Yeah, with with the site plan amendment, um the parking lot is required to upgraded to meet the current standards of the zoning district. So, um right now it's it's comprised of um pavement in some parts and gravel in other parts and there's no curve around it. So, um the the zoning ordinance and performance standards for the parking and loading areas requires that to be upgraded to um like a hard service like like pavement and then um a curb around the edge of it. Um so, we met with the applicants last week or the week before planning commission meeting uh to go over this and explore some cost um like some cheaper options than like a fullfledged uh like I don't know what the term is >> we proposed a ribbon curve and they're >> smoother less sand and such my concern is runoff if we're going to corral all this water those kind of things we put it into a curb is there going to be a cost involved related to a mitigation pond and stuff for this runoff and such or is it all just continuing on and going into the current grass that's around. It's a maintenance building. I I'm not sure why we're trying to put lipstick on a pig other than our ordinances are related to this. So, um it nobody sees it. It It's down below the hill. It goes from tar road to gravel road to now we're expecting the whole area to be tarred. Those kind of things. Again, our ordinance is such and they're inside the boundaries, those kind of things. It just seems an excessive requirement for a maintenance building. And I'm I'm speaking on personal um experiences and stuff. There's not very many courses with inside the municipal lines and stuff that have been expected to raise the bar on everything around their maintenance buildings like this. I I appreciate them adding on doing the things to keep things contained inside the building and obviously prevent theft, those kind of things um there, but it just seems excessive. the planning commission, a few of the folks on the planning commission, um I think had made the same comments and such and I I just wonder is there something we can do to make it more specific for this maintenance area or not? >> No, changing the code. >> Yeah, exactly. You would have to change the code. You need to be very careful about treating applicants differently within the same district. There was there was a conver there was a conversation about a variance and such >> we did evaluate that but the reality is there the hardship standard to reach that is just there there isn't a reason other than economic and that's not a reason for a variance um and also a delay I believe they're trying to get going. So >> is there a timing there related to they can get the building up, they can get everything inside and then the parking lot can be at a later date >> as fast along as possible to allow for that to happen. Um and a variant at this point would be we would at this point it would be January because our deadline was Tuesday for December meeting. So that would delay significant it would add a delay for that. Um at this point the recommendation from staff um based on the facts that we have is that they move forward to comply with code and we try to explore options to make it as cost effective as possible within the code >> possible changes down the road once the building is up. Is there the option to require or ask for a variance down the road after or this just >> I don't believe meets the hardship standards for I believe >> I I I don't think so either. I just it it it's not out in plain sight. So I I just I know the ordinance doesn't doesn't do that >> the area for employees. It's going to be where their employee break room is. My understanding their employee restroom. So it is as far as the city courtroom code is that is the principal structure. >> All right. Thanks guys very much. >> Anything else >> to approve item H? >> Have a second. >> All second it. Those in favor say I. >> I. >> I. I. >> Okay. >> And then finally item P uh which is economic development strategic plan. And Jay, could you just go over a highlight on that? >> Uh yes. Just remind you uh mayor and council that uh not so long ago we actually had Mary in uh to talk with us about the potential of partnerships with uh one of our developers here and we were at that time considering an AUR uh for a particular area. that was the scope of what we were talking and then as we were having that conversation it became pretty obvious that uh our 2008 data which has been what we've been using for a lot of informing our decisions about economic development as we're going into a comp plan uh was out of date and uh her expertise was was really helping us reframe some of the ways that we thought about things and the way that we were talking about things and she gave us a potential consideration of four or five different options that we could go through. And the guidance that I got from council was uh an economic development strategic plan seemed to be favorable for us to think about where, how and why do we want commercial and industrial development to occur in Corkran. Uh and so um we asked Mary to come back with a proposal. This was her proposal. Uh the timing is very good for us. Uh because if if she were to start the the project in June, it's roughly going to be a six-month project. Uh it would I start in January. Uh we would finish up the project in June about the time that we're beginning our comp plan 2050 work. And so this would inform that work in very helpful ways. Uh and even just within the past week, we had conversations with the Met Council about some changes that they're having that could impact the MUSA that this data would help us inform our response to the Met Council's proposals. And uh we we don't have that depth of data right now. So, we're making some assumptions. It would be very helpful for us to have the data to make the decisions. And so uh my recommendation to council uh you asked for us to come forward with a new plan development strategic plan from Mary and her team. Uh she's provided a proposal. Uh I I think that it's going to meet our need. Um the mayor is on the LUAC and for the first time we're going to receive some funding for the 2050 comp plan. How much funding we're going to receive uh varies between 40,000 and 90,000. Yeah. and and so we're not they're still dialing in exactly what what we have, but since we've been projecting the 2050 comp plan being paid for out of long-term finance, whatever we get from the LUAC funding or the grant, uh would help offset the cost of the strategic plan. So, uh staff's recommendation is that we go forward with a strategic plan. Mary's here if you have any questions about the plan itself. Uh she'd be happy to answer those. Um but that's what I have. Great. >> Any questions? >> I think it's vital because when you look at the financial plan, we see the levy compounded annual growth rate is about 11%. And the tax capacity increase to 6 to 8%. So we're seeing the levy grow much faster than tax capacity is grown, which means that we're not dialed in properly with how we have our land use allocated. So we're not bringing in enough revenue for the service demand that we're getting. So we need this information to better gauge that for the next comp plan >> which is interesting given we have the biggest or second jumps >> but we do not have the diversity of tax capacity. So as you look at other communities, they have the benefit of commercial industrial there. There's a lot of debate about the impact of fiscal disparities, you know, so we we can discuss and debate that, but the reality is those communities that have that diverse tax, they they see the benefit for their residents. And so this information is going to help us. And then here's the other thing it's going to do that's going to drive interest. When when these other developers recognize that corporin is taking commercial industrial to a more serious level, they're going to engage with us in a different way. All right. >> The question I had um and it's October now, the specifically Corkin Farms, we approved that industrial plan and those kind of things. We've had that broughten back to us to change that or want to change the comp plan to back to what it was and such >> or >> which was medium density. Was it medium >> or low to medium and such? >> Medium >> for for that group to be able to do anything like that. They have to submit a comp plan change, pay for it, do those things and then wait for an answer back or do we they have to sit here and wait until 20 30 >> when the amendment changes and such? >> They can submit a confident amendment but the Met Council um has that as of January 1st, comp plan amendments submitted will be reviewed against their 20 adopted 2050 framework. So that would mean density of 3.5 is what they'd be reviewing that against >> and that just came out two weeks ago. >> Yeah, two weeks ago. >> So more information >> came about a month ago actually because it was at the planning conference that that was presented. >> Okay. I just you guys know how I feel about that Cork and Farms deal and and the neighbors were seem to be back on their heels related to when did it change to industrial. They were they're more than happy to say yes to back to what it was previously and such. Um it's been a long process and and again we can't uh understand why that group backed out on that agreement to be an industrial for huge buildings on that 60some acres and those kind of things. Um I liked what I saw as far as the concept plan from that group um back in July or August whenever it was and such. Um I I think I think we said it at that point. Our comp plan is this. If we have an imbalance like we've been told and such, we can do a lot of things from now until that whole comp plan deal. But uh there's no way we can help that family move that back with the exception of they putting they submitting that comp plan change and then waiting to hear back from the Met Council. >> So the city initiative process would be the 2050 comp plan planning process. I would take >> the only thing that could be done >> at this point unless you direct me to to spend our current city budget on that effort. That would be the other option. But um I think the other feedback we had received, we didn't want to review that in a vacuum considering that's one of our last industrial pieces. So I think part of the economic strategic plan might be even evaluating location. Are these the right locations? Um that's I think the other aspect of it being what concept you had in front of you in July earlier this year was for low density at 3.00 units per acre. Um so that isn't the same what it was previously where it was medium density. Um so it would be >> medium is five. Is that right? >> What >> is medium five in the 2050 framework? >> I believe it's 5 to8. >> Okay. >> But council member Baronamp you you make the case of how important this data is for us to make decisions. >> So right now we're on a six month if we say yes to this. It's six more months with the recommendations coming from. Well, to be clear, I that we can't prevent them from submitting an application, but I I think as far as the data that you're asking for to feel comfortable with making such a change, yeah, we're months out at this point. >> All right. >> Thanks. With that motion to approve >> approve just to clarify um because I don't think it necessarily says that in the recommendation, but two authorized staff can go forward with this study. That's correct. >> Yep. Yep. Okay. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Perfect. >> Thank you. >> Then we will go on to planning a couple seconds. Thanks everybody for coming. That's leaving. So everybody else hang on tight. >> We'll start with uh item we'll give everyone a minute. Oh, perfect. >> All right. So, we'll move on to item 7 A. We'll start with a public comment opportunity for item 7A which is the M&J Creek Side Vineyard and we'll start with the two comment cards we do have. We'll start with uh Kevin Dale that come up and speak voting. We got um five minutes. >> Sounds good. >> You can start with your name and address. >> Um Kevin Dale, 9820 Creek View Circle, Corpin, Minnesota. Um I live uh directly behind uh um the uh Fernandez and uh we share about little over 400 ft of uh property line and um my my concern isn't with the uh tasting room and off sale uh of their wine. Um, my concern is, uh, John has mentioned to me, uh, of renting it out to groups or weddings and and this sort of stuff. Well, I've been to weddings and I know they get noisy. When the PA starts at midnight, things get pretty loud. Um, and and that concerns me. There, this building they're putting up is only 47 feet from my property line. The whole structure is uh 260 270 ft from my pro from my home. Uh so during the summer if we've got our windows open and they've got a large group over there, uh it's going to it's going to bother us. Again, I want to make sure you understand the the tasting room and the offsale wine. Cool. I think that's really and the tours of the facility uh for educational purposes I think is a great idea. Um but I'm concerned about uh the the that he's going to rent it out to large groups. Um and the other comment I have is um you in the documents they talk about how it's not going to prop affect my property value. Well, if they have parties back there, I may the county probably won't reduce my market value on my home because they don't want to lose money either. Um, but I'll have to take a lower price, a lower bid probably because of it. That's what concerns me. And and I don't think an event center fits in a rural neighborhood. Uh, so I mean that's basically all I've got to say on it, but >> thank you for your time. appreciate it. >> Thank you. >> And next I have um Diana Burch. Good evening. I'm Diana Burch and I live at 9800 Rush Creek Boulevard, Minnesota. Um I can ditto everything that Kevin said. I lived in that neighborhood for 43 years and I know that some of the comments they made their their uh event center or their winery is not going to be any more noise than what's on County Road 30. I don't live on County Road 30. I live on Rush Creek Boulevard. We were able to go out and spend the evenings and enjoy. All of our neighbors know each other. We've watched kids grow up. I want to continue the new families that moved into our neighborhood to continue to have that security and that freedom to grow their families in Corkran, Minnesota. There's a lot of things involved in in starting a business and having a commercial and I've seen how it's growing and growing is good, but you don't grow it in a neighborhood and that's probably the biggest thing that I'm worried about. Rush Creek Boulevard is a neighborhood. Across the street there's homes. next door. There's homes, there's families there. That an event center is if if they had a lot more acreage, it would be great because you're not up against all your neighbors. That's not what's happening. That's my concern. I don't want Corkran just to be adjacent to our neighborhood adjacent to a business. And that's that's important that we maintain that. If you want to have a business and a commercial business, you got to have a little more acreage and not be up against your neighbors so closely. That's all I have to say. I think the winery is fine, too. I don't have a problem with that. I just don't think we need a lot of people coming in Thursday, Friday, Saturday, Sunday surrounding our neighborhood. Thank you very much for your time. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> And would anyone else like to speak on this? >> No. Okay, then we will go into discussion uh or presentation first. Discussion. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yeah, item 7A tonight is a request for the M&J Creek Side Vineyard. Um this is a request from Margaret and John Fernandez who are requesting approval of an interim use permit, a site plan uh and a site plan to allow operation of a wine tasting processing business in the residential district. Um typical hours operation uh for this business would be um 12 to 900 pm uh Thursdays through Thursdays through Saturdays and then 12 to 6:00 p.m. on Sundays. Uh and it'll be a seasonal operation. Uh the subject property is 23020 county road 30. Uh the site in whole is 7.76 acres. It's comprised of a 5.84 acre parcel and a 1.92 acre parcel. The applicants have expressed that they um plan to combine these two parcels together once they're through this interuse permit process. Uh the zoning of the site itself and the surrounding properties is rural residential and the guiding land use for both the site and the surrounding area is rural egg residential. Uh the property itself is uh is in close proximity to Rush Creek as the western parcel uh is fabricated with Rush Creek. Uh and there is a mature tree uh tree coverage around the north, west and south sides of the property. Uh and this property is located outside of Musa and is served by a private septic and well system. So just a breakdown of the items uh being considered tonight. There is a site plan um for the u business itself. Uh an interim use permit for the agra business use as aggra business is identified as an interim use in the residential district. And then a zoning ordinance amendment uh to provide flexibility from the accessory structure footprint limitations uh specifically for agro business uses as well as an amendment to allow signage uh for aggra businesses in the rural residential district. So going into the site plan itself, um the images on the right show a before and after of the of the site. Um the building size, uh the submitted site plan, the site plan submitted by the applicant shows a demolition of uh one of the existing barns on the property. Um but the applicants have expressed a desire to actually retain that 726 foot garage. Um, and they would like to construct a an additional pole barn that would have a footprint of 1,440 square ft. Uh, this would result if if the barn were removed, this would result in a cumulative accessory structure footprint of 3,980 square ft. And if the barn were to be retained, the accumulative footprint of 4,76 square ft. If the applicants may >> Dwight, that's a that's a garage, isn't it? >> The one that they're moving on the corner there. >> Garage bar and that's I I use them interchangeably, but things can >> You're talking to a country guy. You get the pole shed to the west, it's a garage there and stuff. That's just me. So, thank you. >> Garage might be a better term for it. >> Just Just saying. Thanks. >> Sure. Um, so, uh, if applicants were to combine their two parcels, this would result in an allowed accessory structure footprint of 3,313 square feet. U, this proposed footprint does not comply. Uh, the the proposed footprint of either 3,980 ft or 4,76 square feet of accessory structure space wouldn't comply with what the maximum is for the property. Uh so staff is recommending a conditional approval be that the site plan either be updated to remove any uh accessory structure footprint that exceeds that limit or um the zoning ordinance be amended to allow flexibility from that and I'll explain further later on in the report for that uh zoning ordinance amendment. Um there are a number of buildings on the the property. Um and so I'll go through the building setbacks. Um the proposed building which I have my highlighter on right now does meet all of the minimum setback requirements for uh this zoning district. Uh shed one is uh a small shed located east of the existing uh home and is located within the minimum front yard setback area. Uh using historical imagery, um staff has noted that this uh this shed has been constructed after the the uh setback requirements have been enacted. So this shed is actually a non-compliant structure. Uh shed two is uh located within the minimum setback area from Rush Creek. But again using historical imagery staff has determined that this was constructed prior to the establishment of these setback requirements and is considered a legal non-conforming structure. Shed three is located within the minimum setback from Rush Creek and the sideyard setback. If they combine the two parcels, then it's not within that sideyard setback area. Um but again this was constructed prior to the establishment of these setback requirements and is considered a legal non-conforming structure. Uh and then shed four is located within the minimum setback area from the side and rear property line. Uh and this has been constructed after the establishment of the setback requirements and is a non-compliant structure. Um and then there's an existing pole barn uh that is located within the minimum setback area from Rush Creek. Um, this was constructed after the establishment of these requirements, um, and was originally approved for a different location on the property, but was constructed in the incorrect location. So, it is considered a non-compliant structure. So, to summarize, um, sheds one and two from the previous graphic uh, must be relocated to meet the minimum setback requirements or be removed from the property. Uh, and that existing pull barn must be relocated. minimum setback requirements removed from the property or obtain an after the fact variance. >> Dwight, may I confirm one thing with you? Was it one and two or one and three? >> Oh, my mistake. That is one. >> That is one and four. That is a typo. It is correct in the report, but in my pres. Uh the building height of the proposed structure well all structures within uh residential districts in the shoreland overlay district are limited to a maximum height of 25 ft. Uh the proposed structure uh that uh would house the wine tasting room has a height of 20 feet and a sidewall height of 10 feet which does comply with the district height requirements. Uh and the building would be constructed uh with uh both walls and roof of colored steel. code does allow metal sighting through a certificate of compliance and the applicants have provided um documentation of uh the materials proposed and staff finds that it does meet those code requirements and the certificate of compliance could be issued for the requested materials. Um the structures within the shoreline overly district are required to have uh a first floor elevation that's at least two feet above the regional flood elevation. Uh so in this region the flood elevation is 973 feet and the first floor elevation of the proposed structure is 976.3 feet. So that also complies with the building elevation requirements. Um parking for the aggra business must accommodate the site's most intensive use and cannot rely on street parking. So the aggra business contains a pretty wide range of potential uses. So from wine tasting to tours to potential weddings. Um and so staff's interpretation is that the most intensive use would be similar to that of an event center and using the event center formula. Um one stall is required for every two guests that um that visit the site. So the applicants are proposing a 44 stall parking lot on the property. Um so using that parking formula for event centers staff is proposing uh the maximum account for all events be limited to 88 guests. Uh the parking lot proposed by the applicant would be proposed uh would be constructed with a grass-filled geog grid. Uh this is not an approved parking surface within the city code. So staff is recommending that a condition of approval will be that the site plan be revised to provide a compliant parking surface that is either a defined gravel parking area or a hard surface with perimeter concrete curving. The driveway itself uh is uh the applicants are planning to expand the current driveway to 16 ft wide. Um uh staff has had a chance to review this with engineering and public safety and uh condition of approval be that the driveway be widened to at least 24 feet to accommodate uh two-way traffic and emergency vehicles entering the site. I know that there were some concerns that were brought up during the planning commission meeting that there are some existing trees that are located on either side of the um of the driveway at the entrance of the parking lot. So, um staff is also open to um allowing a potential second driveway to kind of move off of the side of this driveway to um support two-way uh two-way access still while retaining those existing trees. It would require the site plan to be revised and could be reviewed administratively if that's what the council >> is the the draft resolutions kind of leave it where they could do either or then come back with plan that matches that. >> Correct. >> Correct. >> Uh so the site is required to meet the landscaping standards of the zoning ordinance. Uh so the ordinance requires one overstory tree per 1,00 square feet of building area and one shrub per 300 square feet of building area. Uh the practice in the past has been that uh that these requirements are calculated uh based on the new building area specifically. So a440 square foot building would require two overstory trees and five shrubs. Additionally, um any parking areas that have four or more stalls are required to be screened. with at least three feet to screen any vehicle headlights for shining to neighboring residences and public rightway. Um the applicants are requesting that the city accept the existing vegetation for this requirement. They've provided uh a landscaping diagram of the site. Um and staff has noted noted that and recommends that screening be provided to the south and east of the parking lot to ensure that there's adequate screening. vehicle headlights from um from the adjacent properties. Um outdoor lighting as part of the Aggra business ordinance that was adopted earlier this summer cannot exceed a glare of 0.1 foot candle at the property line. Um the applicants have provided a narrative detailing the various types of lighting to be used on the site. Uh this for examples would be uh recessed lights above the four windows on the side walls of the structure. Um le LED string lighting and straight arm barn lights on either end wall of the of the proposed structure. Um landscaping around the outdoor areas of the patio and lighting for the parking lot. Um staff isn't able to determine if that would meet the uh glare requirements. A condition of approval will be that the applicants provide a phototric plan depicting the proposed lighting that demonstrates compliance with this requirement. So shows the level of glare from each source of the light. The Athens are also proposing a one one quick question. We had a similar proposal for house of worship in a rural area and I think we talked in that case about having timers as a condition so they wouldn't be on beyond the hours of operation. Is that an option here as well? >> It could be and if memorizing right I believe those were motion sensored too. So if that's something that the council would like to add as a condition. Um the applicants are proposing a a 3 foot by three foot sign uh advertising the business uh along county road 30 and that would sign will be illuminated via uh external lighting. Typically signs aren't allowed in the rural residential district. Uh but an amendment is proposed uh to the agra business standards that allow signs for aggra businesses specifically. Um so going through some of the the requirements for the interim use permit. Um agra businesses are an interim use in the rural residential rural residential district and they are required to comply with specific requirements. They're outlined uh in section 1040.030 which is the rural residential district standards. Um staff finds that the aggra business standards have been satisfied uh with the proposed application with uh the condition that the parking uh be accommodated on site uh and that the site plan be revised to include a parking lot is constructed of a material that is accepted within city code. So that's either gravel or pavement with cast in place curving. Uh and additionally the gas capacity based on the number of stalls shall be set to 88 patrons. Uh if the requested zoning ordinance is denied, uh the applicant will be required to remove any area of accessory structure space that exceeds the allowed footprint for the property. Um and any use of outdoor bathroom facilities u the applicant has noted that they plan to use mostly indoor facilities for the bathroom. But in the event that uh outdoor bathroom facilities are required uh then they are required to be screened and located at least 400 ft from the neighboring residential structures which would um be uh in compliance with the aggra business standards of the zoning ordinance. And in the event that there are outdoor activities uh those activities are required to be identified on the site plan and be set back at least 100 ft from the neighboring residential structures. Uh as for the zoning ordinance amendment, there is a request to provide an option for be for agra businesses to request flexibility from the accessory structure footprint limitations. Um the current requirement does require agra businesses to follow the maximum accessory structure footprint identified in the zoning ordinance. And under this requirement, um, parcels that are 10 acres or larger have the option to exceed uh exceed the accessory structure footprint allowance, while parcels that are between 4 acres and 9.9 acres are limited strictly to the accessory structure footprint allowed within the code. So, um, the applicant has expressed the need for additional accessory structure space for the functionality of the business, but there is no way to exceed that allowance without amending the zoning ordinance. So to address this request, staff proposes an amendment to the agra business IEP standards that the city council may grant flexibility as part of the interim use permit to exceed the maximum allowed accessory structure footprint for properties that are between four and less than 10 acres in size. provided. Council finds that additional accessory structure space is reasonably necessary for the agra business agra businesses to operate effectively. As for the sign uh request, um staff proposes the that the following amendment be added to the business IEP standards and that is that signs may be allowed for agra businesses provided they comply with residential science standards outlined in section 84 of the city code. So that would be consistent with the allowing uh like the RSF1 and RSF2 zoning districts. Um so in summary in summary staff recommends approval of staff and planning commission recommend approval of resolution uh 2587 ordinance 2025 uh-554 ordinance uh 2025-55 and resolution 2025-88 which would approve the site plan in use permit uh zone amendment and findings. >> Thank you. Um, I have a couple small items to wait and then if anyone else has questions, we can go through those. Um, >> Mr. Mayor, yeah. >> Do we do a public hearing for this or not? >> We did the public comment. >> Oh, I'm sorry. It's been a long day. Please excuse me, Kevin. And I'm trying to remember and now I remember. Sorry. >> I'm still I'm confused from everything Dwight said. So, if you guys are too, that makes me feel good. If it's crystal clear, please see me afterwards. >> Um, one minor thing I I I saw looks like in the draft resolution the max capacity is 80. I believe said 88. >> Could you speak? Sure. >> Sure. Yeah. Looks like the um draft resolution has a max capacity for the site of 80. I believe 80. You said 88. >> That's That's a typo. In the original staff report for the planning commission meeting. >> Mics aren't on, guys. >> The mics aren't on. >> How about now? >> No. >> Test. One, two, three. Well, >> if I can talk loud for him. Can you hear me? >> We don't want to repeat everything. Sometimes >> I'll try to talk louder and then if it gets too loud on that picking it up. >> Interesting. Okay. Um, so Dwight, you were saying >> to answer your question, Mr. Mayor, that that's a hold over from a typo that was in the planning commission packet. The planning commission packet showed 40 stalls and it should have said 44 and the calculation that ended up in the resolution was 80 instead of 88. So that's a correction will be made in the final resolution. >> Do you need us to amend that to be accurate or >> I would I would recommend that you add that as a as a condition if you approve the interim use permit. Just for clarity, I'll make a motion to amend that provision to 88 instead of 88. >> So, this is 2025-87 C. I >> thank you. >> I will second that motion. >> Okay. Any discussion? All those in favor say I. >> I. >> I. Opposed. >> Okay. 41, please. Um, okay. So, then we got that sorted out. Um kind of more a question for council. Um if we were to consider the zoning ordinance amendment to allow uh aggra business to exceed the accessory structure footprint. My only thought was do we if we're okay with that do we want to set it as because I think as drafted it's kind of just allows it to be exceeded. Do we want to set a higher cap or just let it be exceeded? to I guess any degree. Is there any >> Can I see the table again? The one from code that gives acreage and >> and it might not affect this site. I'm just saying in general for the zone the ordinance amendment. >> Council Nicholas, are you talking about the the table that's in the zoning ordinance for >> the accessory structure size versus lot size? Yeah, >> I can pull that up real quick. >> Thank you. Mr. Mayor, also while he's doing that, >> should we have the applicants talk about this at all? We haven't done that yet. >> Sure. Yeah. >> Okay. >> Well, please state your name and address for the record. >> Okay. Margaret Fernandez, 23020, County Road 30. Corker >> and John Fernandez. Same address 2302. >> That microphone is working. So >> good. >> I can't confirm you can hear on the TV. >> Cool. >> Um so yeah, what we wanted to come uh forward and talk to you about uh we met with a concept plan earlier this year. um took all of your feedback and um in the spirit of wanting to make sure that um we run our small farm with the opportunity to u make money and contribute to the community here in um Corkran and hopefully um provide a good service for people to come and and try some wine and learn about farming and that type of thing. Um >> yeah, so what else John? >> Nothing I can say. So, we went through all of that and this is the proposal that we came up with and we're we're very happy to answer any questions you have um that you know there's a lot of information here and we've taken a lot of time to to consider all the things to make sure that we're we're um creating an environment to raise families and have the community come together and um you keep with that rural um spirit that's that's here in Corkran. That's the whole idea. Um we do live on the residence. Uh so um for the accessory buildings and things, we we do live there as well as want to be able to maintain an opportunity for people to come and see how a farm is run, maybe try some wine, buy some wine. And uh you know, at some point in time, we'd like to highlight uh different businesses within Corkran, like artists or things like that within the tasting room to kind of to keep the community together and and create a good space. So that's all we have. >> We're here for questions because I know it's a lot of information. >> Thank you. Any questions? >> Mr. Mayor, >> thank you guys for letting me stop by. I think I've probably spent three plus hours out there understanding everything and such. The thing that kind of sticks in my crawl is the same as what's been expressed. This is not an event center, but we calculate out the event center capacity to determine the number of parking stalls. So, why isn't this an event center application instead of an aggra business and it it says in the title um wine tasting processing business that has nothing to do with events. So, we're we're planning parking off of capacity of the building and and these kind of things. Correct me if I'm wrong, please, Dwight. But 44 parking spots, 88 people in this size of building, which is going to have wine processing, everything that's going on. It seems like a huge footprint, a way excessive size parking lot and the hours of operation end at 10:00 except on Sundays it's 6:00 I think is what was said. So why do we keep talking in the event center and all of the and all of the stuff? There's an it's an event center. It's it's not an event center. It's a wine tasting agra business. I I appreciate everything that they are wanting to do as far as community those kind of things. Um why are we why why do we keep adding event center into this? >> Uh so just quick clarification the the 44 stalls is is a request from the applicant not a requirement from city staff. >> Okay. Um, but in order to, you know, curb the, you know, if if it were to be filled to its maximum capacity, all if 44 cars came to the site, city staff wanted to add a limit of guests on the property at a time. Um, and so, >> so 88 people in the building or 88 people on the property? on the property building code would have to look at the actual building itself or the building inspector look at the building itself uh to determine the occupancy inside the building. But as far as being on the site itself um staff felt that the most comparable calculation for the parking lot was the event center calculation since there is an event component with the uh requested. Yeah, I'll just add on to that. When we brought when this came back came in front of you as a concept plan, the issue was being that it was kind of an event center, but the wine tasting room component, which is not an event center component, did not fit within the event center requirements. So, what we have in front of the aggra business, um, multiple reasons why we wanted to add this, I think, as a city, but this definitely forwarded the issue. Um, allowed for a bit more flexibility to allow There might be an event component but really the primary use is um more agricultural based. There's a tourism aspect where people are coming to the property and um so that's where the aggra business is coming in. It falls under that these processes as an event center. They can't have the wine tasting room but they really want to do the wine testing room. The events are incident to the wine tasting room. So, so again that parking would guarantee no parking on the neighborhood road. They would have to park within that parking lot and nobody ends up down on Rush Creek parking and such. >> They're not supposed to. Yeah. Yeah. It's one of the conditions of the IEP. >> Okay. Yep. No, I I just I'm I'm speaking like I'm living next to Kevin and next to the neighbors out there. I I I say the same thing. I'm in favor of the wine tasting, those kind of things. The hour operations are great. Um lighting, I would love all the lighting to be on the non- neighborhood side of the building facing out, those kind of things. And I think you guys have done a good job on that. I don't know. Nobody. We're going to tell we're going to say nobody can have a wedding there and it's going to go past 10:00 or is it going to bleed past 10:00? Again, these guys are neighbors, too. They're going to be living there, too. That's all regulated and controlled by them. Or how are we going to police that? Make sure it stays that way. It just awful lot of things can can blow up and change very quickly >> based on how you feel. So if they there was an event that went past it. >> I I I just it it's hard for me to understand. It's morphed from using the existing pole shed and I think they wanted maybe 10 or 12 spots to that for their wine tasting and now it's turned into this much. And I I've gone through the the information with them and uh it's turned into way more than just a a quaint little wine tasting thing. When it first came to us, it was the original red pole building. And uh I I'm going to call it a smokehouse. That little building in front of it, I think, was an old smokehouse back in the day. Um, not sure how it's been preserved as long as it has, but it's a neat little spot. Um, I just I'm confused. An event center application, this would be a whole different thing. It seems like to me, >> well, we do allow event centers in the residential district. >> I understand that could qualify for that. But again, the Y room was the main component that they were looking to approve. Um, events would be the highest use and the event center calculation is the most similar use in our code. So that is why that is being used and that is why when they proposed 44 spaces were proposing an occupancy limit of 88 for the site. Um I I believe we have some flexibility if you want to talk about but I think they're proposing 44 spaces. I think what they initially proposed there would have been a high likelihood of overflow to do the business operations that they were proposing. I don't think 12 spaces would be enough for potential weddings being hosted at the site. >> And again, that's why it originally came to us in the poll shed with a small deal and it has morphed into this. >> Well, to be clear, they the event component was discussed during the concept plan too that they would occasionally want to host weddings and have learning events as well. Um, so that was discussed with the concept plan as well. So I don't I just while I do think the plan has changed because they've taken all the feedback from staff and council their business model really they that has not changed. >> Okay. I'll be quiet. >> Those are good questions. Mark >> um I love the idea of a wine tasting place in Corkran too. I guess my question would be um I I don't see why there would be a need to have that many people in for a singular wine testing. I've been to a few wine testing things um in the past two months because I had the opportunity to go to France and most of the wine testings that I went to were five or six people and then scheduled at like every couple hour increments. So it would never be like 44 or 88 people being in one area at one time. Um, and so I get the component of of having a wedding occasionally. I would be concerned about that. I was also just at a wedding that had hundred people only and it was incredibly loud, but it was on a farm of like 200 acres, so there were no neighbors around. The parking wasn't an issue because it was in a field right next to where the the main venue was and it was to me it seemed a perfect setup in a small neighborhood. I just feel like that would be really intrusive to have because it's a beautiful spot. So, I I would anticipate that you would probably be getting a lot of people wanting to have weddings there. Um, and I just I don't know I I don't know if I could get behind that. I love the wine tasting. That's just my initial thoughts. >> So, when we originally came with the the smaller footprint, the idea is that it is a family farm that is a vineyard and we wanted the be the ability to sell wine. You can make more money when you sell it by the bottle than you can. So, a regular vineyard doesn't make money and so it's not worth it. And I know that Corkran and a lot of rural areas are struggling. Their farmers are struggling. Um so we are trying to keep the feel of the country with bringing in what is uh a focus of the state of Minnesota and the city of Corkran to be flexible and open to those things. We're very cognizant of our neighbors. We live on the land. Um we're open to setting hours. The reason why we went with the 44 um spots is because we have to comply with the IUP. If we do once or twice a year have some, let's say we have a learning event where people come in and they learn how to trim vines or something. Well, if we only have 10 spots, then that really inhibits our ability to have enough people there to really have a good training or something like that. So the reason why we went with more spots was based on everybody's recommendation that we have to be per be prepared so that people are not parking over on the side street of Rush Creek. So you know we like the idea of small. Small is good. We don't anticipate having a bunch of people. We anticipate what you're thinking. Just a few car. You know I've been to a lot of vineyards that that's why we decided to do this. We love the feel of that. Um it's not usually a ruckus bunch. So, uh, when you know the going past a certain timeline, I we have to say, I mean, we're building a building on this is our retirement savings. So, we're building a building on our land and we're asking for permission that's going to be reviewed periodically. So, I I don't know. We take it really seriously. >> Yeah. >> Michelle, building off that, I don't know if there actually is hours of operation set in the current res draft resolution. There's some language about >> Yeah, there was 6 vi sorry >> closing at 9 Thursday, Friday, Saturday, and at 6 on Sunday. Um, and I think the 10:00 was for us to do the cleanup and whatever else we need to do after everybody leaves. So >> Natalie >> or Dwight, just for comparison, like what is the size of like Heidi's Grow House parking lot? Like how many spaces is in there? Do you know off the top of your head? Because I know she holds a lot of bigger events. >> I can try to do a quick count. I don't know off the top of my head. >> Just for comparison to help me understand visually like how how big of a parking space that really is. >> I would estimate it was about 30. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Something like that. Well, if you more if you count the stuff in the back, but up front that you see >> electric >> guest parking >> and is there a requirement that it has to be paved? >> No, it's okay. the geog grid is proposing or at least that they were proposing um in the site plan that is not something that would comply with code but we the way that the zoning ordinance was written for aggra business they a seasonal business can do gravel >> do they have to do gravel could it just be shortcut grass >> no they have to do >> it has to be gravel because that's in our ordinance >> because there's there's a few different reasons but one of them being this helps us delineate where parking can be allowed so there are cars over that tells us there's a violation of the >> There's no way they could do the geog grid with split rail fence around the parking. There's a there's a additional reason what Kevin >> speak on. >> There's you know seasonally wet low line area traffic could be an issue on the Tony road and really that type of um material for a road parking lot surface. It's not intended for like everyday use. It's used for emergency vehicles. It's not going to hold up. >> And and in my mind and I'm I'm sorry Kevin. In my mind, you still lay down the base and the gravel and everything else. And then the geog grid goes in and it's filled with whatever. And then grass for the grass to grow. So you're really driving over 4 in of top soil that could get saturated. It's going to track. It's going to be a lot more maintenance than you think. It looks good if you don't use it. If you use it, it looks >> not just not the right product for that intensity of use. It's going to be really >> And if I can just one more thing to um we invited all of you to come out and and look at the land and um thank you Dean for coming and you can attest to this hopefully the space our whole lot is is we have two acres of woods to one side with the creek. It's heavily woodened in the back. I we're fine putting even more trees back there if that's that's what we need to do. And then it's hillled up to the vineyard. So you can't even see our yard where the space where this is going to be. And then on the other side it's our house, a hill and then county road 30. So the whole space is very encapsulated. It's not it's not like an open field or anything like that. We're 100% in the trees or down um within the So that's kind of why we picked this spot. It's very private. It's very parklike. It's very quiet except for County Road 30 isn't quiet. So, you know, we're right there. It's not a a quiet space from a traffic perspective. You hear those big trucks come through. It's loud. >> Yeah. >> So, >> Dwight, I have another question. What about could we do something that is sort of like a cross between like fully committing to an event center? like maybe instead of having hours till 10:00 p.m. the hours are earlier to accommodate neighborhood impact. And then if there is ever an event, there's a permit that would be issued for the event. So it wouldn't just be, you know, 10:00 the whole time. It would be specific hours and then you'd apply for a permit if you were going to have an event since it's not really truly an event. It's more it to me it sounds more like it's wine tasting with the possibility of doing one or two events a year versus having a flatout cart blanch of just having it be an event center with hours that go till 10 o'clock at night and whatever on Sundays. >> I should clarify my earlier comment that the 10 p.m. that I saw in the resolution are actually the amplification of sound limited. >> There isn't an hours to Tom's point. So there's not an hours limit in the resolution, but there is okay >> a limit to amplified. >> So, but even with that, I think that still would would would be something that would be more >> I I like what you're saying. I had two weddings in my barn. The closest person is 1,200 ft away. >> And I still applied for >> the noise sound permit till midnight and such. >> And it was really loud in the barn, but I got 20 feet outside the barn. Nobody heard anything. my barn is really good. But it it I I agree with that. It would be nice if we could say or limit those kind of things. Or I'd rather if there's going to be an event, there's a application for that. >> Wouldn't that be the expectation right now with noise abatement at to 10? If they had an event that was desiring to go past 10, they would be >> needing to submit for a permit like that. That's the present conditions as the request is being submitted. >> The the the being a neighbor and thinking about it living there every night till 9 or 10:00 except on Sundays. That's what folks are thinking about. >> Again, the little bit of caveat these folks are living there. >> I don't think they want every night either. >> But I don't want all of a sudden it's too much. We're not going to live here anymore, but we're going to run a business. Is there something we can put in? Would they still need to be residents and such? So, they're experiencing the pain. Do you guys know and understand the way I'm saying it? >> Would the have to be reviewed? >> Yes. Ownership changes that would terminate. >> Um, yes. There's not a homestead rule, but yeah, the ownership were to change and the IDP automatically expires. Um, so there's that protection. Um, and then I the I'll let you speak on the hours of operation, but um just I from what they've submitted, it isn't every day during the week. It's seasonal and it's I I'll let you guys speak to it, but there's a few days of the week where they wouldn't simply wouldn't be operating. >> Yeah. >> 9:00. Anything at 10 o'clock is simply them just cleaning up the site. Uh people would be expected to leave at 9:00. Um and I believe we had a more flexible carve out than that would be allowed for an aggra business if they are proposing something more um stringent and that's so I don't know that um I don't know that trying to add an event permit process in addition to that I guess that seems like there would be um a lot of administrative work to keep up with that that I'm not certain that what the benefit would be when they are clearly saying have been clearly saying that that is something proposing as part of the business model. >> Well, I think to Jay's point, it's not necessarily adding a new requirement. It will be where we draw that line >> for any event. I guess what I'm talking I thought we were saying any event, you would have to >> You're correct. That's what I was saying. But Jay specified something different. >> Yeah. All right. >> Sorry, I missed. >> No, that's okay. >> And I was I guess maybe thinking somewhere in the middle where if we tried to tighten those hours, add a provision that find the actual hours of operation, bring in that 10 p.m. amplified noise to whatever that ending hour is, and then if an event were to go past that 8:00 or whatever hour we could agree upon, >> then they would apply for a per. >> Yeah, >> I think that that would be doable. Yeah, >> that's what to use Heidi's Grow Houses is that's come up a couple times is for October Fest they submit >> a permit multiple permits >> and I think just to clarify um I think there's a difference between an event versus an event with amplified sound. So because they could have an event without amplified sound. Do we need permit special permission for that? Are we specifically worried about the the sounders potentially? >> One question and I sorry if I missed it. Obviously a liquor license is going to need to be submitted for this. We're going to need to grant that too. >> Well they so the the wine component is licensed through the state, >> right? I believe it's a little different than just like a liquor store. >> So they don't need to come to us for a liquor license. >> It's more stringent state than >> it's through us, >> handled by the state. >> All the licenses are handled by the state. >> It it comes through us like everybody else. No, I just wanted to make sure we're doing the same. So thank you. >> So I guess I have two things then. Um, one is touching on something that you kind of mentioned the the landscaping and screening of the site. Staff has it uh in the draft as additional landscaping on the southern eastern side. Right. >> Correct. >> I think I' I'd support that. I I think there is some significant uh existing vegetation that might help in the other areas. I think added to the south and east would help a lot. >> So So south and Okay. Which are we talking about? >> It's going to be north and >> it's where the pumpkin patch is. Well, not that far, but >> okay. I mean, we can put more vegetation, but it's a cute I just I wish you guys could see the topography because it's gonna go that Yeah, >> but we'll do whatever >> behind the behind the building down that line like you and I talked would be a nice amenity and something neighborly to do. Right. Exactly. >> That's that's what we were proposing is up on this side on our neighbor's property. Uh we may or may not have a buyer for our chicken coop. It's not it's not represented. >> The back line is where we were going to put it's heavy vegetation, but we were going to put more just because we want >> you talked about a fence or or something along those lines to to try to mitigate some of that. >> The county road 30 sign is fair side. It's county road 30. our whole house, tons of trees, and then it's like a curve up like you will never ever see. And it's a it's kind of a 30, so you'll never see lights from a car going that way. I mean, it's so heavily vegetated if you were in there. >> I agree to that side. I I just concerned about the areas that staff have pointed out that >> we can put more there, but again, that's a huge hill. Yeah, it's a you're driving out of a hole, that's for sure. >> Yeah, it's it's a big dip. >> Not a bad display. It's just a hole. >> You won't see any lights from it. And we're going to be closing before it's dark anyway. But >> County Road 30 is is elevated because there's a bridge right here. So, the contour of the land slopes down toward the creek for most of the property. Right about where the field is um is probably the high point. And then and that's why the grapes Um, so >> John, John, can I get a I got some people online asking, can you speak into the mic so they pops out too? >> Oh, okay. So, so the whole contour of the land basically is I don't know if you guys have that that uh topography map. >> Yeah, we've had enough, >> but it slopes down. So, County Road 30 to maintain the bridge across is is elevated from the prop from uh the road uh over. So, so at at this >> at this point right here is probably the highest point and then and then it starts great grading off from there. So from from our house over it's probably, you know, five or six feet and then and then at the creek it's probably 8 feet up from from the ground. So >> So it's a natural it's a natural wall basically. Yeah, >> I'm trying to pull up the topography right now. >> Yeah, my biggest concern is right along where there is a ton of vegetation just adding extra just just for >> fencing or something. >> Yeah. Or bushes. Yeah. >> It's It's You and I have talked it's it's hard to >> There you go. >> And it being in Keville Kevin's neighbor being Kevin the neighbor and stuff. you take that chicken coop away, a lot of things open up into their yard and such. So, um, but that is one of the things that needs to go away to make this happen. But, uh, >> yeah, we're going to get rid of it. >> So, though it looks like a lot of trees, they're trees, so they're clear, you know, and there's a lot of brush in there, but we'd be >> No. So, like along County Road 30, you've got our whole house, a ton of trees, and the land goes like this way down. So you'd never from the parking lot or the tasting room, you won't even ever be able to see it from the street ever. And then this side, it's heavily vegetated um all the way over. And then the side up to Rush Creek is a big like hill that goes like this. So from where the parking lot or even the tasting room is, there won't be any cars going anywhere. You wouldn't hit anything to because there's enough vegetation or enough of a slope. I don't know how to better explain that, >> but >> so we we agree that that either planting some bushes or or something >> fence or something just right there. >> That would that I think I think you guys would appreciate that. We'll appreciate it. >> We we'll do that. Yeah. >> Yeah. And uh and so we're talking about building here and having the uh parking lot right here basically. So there won't be any vehicles over here. This here is a a grade a grade up to County Road 30. And then over here it starts to grade starts to go less. And then and then so any cars in this spot here, their headlights aren't shining over there because you have 700 vines right here first off and >> and a bunch of trees. Our yard >> and then there's trees along the >> more vines. Yeah. So >> yeah, our neighbors go up a hill too. So >> Gotcha. >> Yeah. Where's your house? >> Is it your No, his house? >> Yeah. >> Right here. >> Yeah, it's where we said we would want to put where it's heavily treed back there, but we would want to put more. I'm glad you want to plant some vegetation. I made this mistake four years ago of planting blue spruce. Well, they're dead except for the last 10. >> Yeah, I know. The trees die. We're not doing anything. >> Yeah, trees die. >> We got that same problem with the tree line right here, too. >> So, >> so there our biggest concern is right there. Even it looks like that's the heaviest vegetated everywhere else. You wouldn't even I wish we were all standing in the because everybody would understand what we're talking about. >> Let's go have some wine. >> Yeah, it's early. >> We have a bunch. >> It's pretty good, folks. >> Telling you pretty bad so we could Oh, good. I'll win my fantasies. Um the other question and the other issue is what can be done to ensure that there's no parking on Rush Creek Boulevard because that's where the wines are or the vines are people are going to come. There's an entrance to your 44 if if this all goes through. There's an entrance to your 44 space parking lot. What's going to keep people from parking over there? No parking signs. some of those things. I mean, please park. We got to do something to make sure. I know it's public street. I know all of those things. Um, but again, what are we going to do to ensure that it doesn't grow to parking over there and walk to the wine tasting place? What are we going to do to make sure there's no parking down county road 30? even though we've said it, there always ends up being county road parking and and those kind of things, complaint based and those kind of things. And I'm doing this more for public safety, but also obviously the neighborhood not being invaded. So, it just >> having having served for the Minneapolis Fire Department for 28 years, all buildings are posted with a capacity sign in them. And so everybody that comes into the building will know that our employees are, you know, us basically will also know that. So the problem won't be the parking on the side of the road necessarily. The problem will be if that were to happen, we would have to say we you have to go. Now that would be a wonderful problem for most businesses to have too many. >> I don't know that that's going to happen. >> I've never seen it happen yet. So, um, so that would be incumbent upon us to maintain the fire code, uh, to maintain our IUP, >> which we do have a fire plan and everything. >> So, >> uh, thank you, Mr. Mayor. Quick question. So, it was this was one question I wanted to ask you and you just brought it up. You said employees. How many employees will you have? >> Well, currently we've got two, >> but anticipated uh, >> not too much more than that. I I would love two would be great. You know, we're looking at serving and and then and then we have when we harvest, you know, it's usually volunteers, but then you get, you know, if you're lucky, you can get 10 or something, you know, people at a time. Um, and so that's really what we're looking at. I'd love to have somebody that would learn the business with me, be one of my kids or something. But um and then and then somebody to help with the inside. So one person on the outside, one person on the inside and and that's and then us too. >> It's probably going to be predominantly volunteer just during harvest or um you know if somebody if we have uh like an activity training like the only thing I can think of right now is like a grape trimming or or how to identify different I don't know something that we do. Um it would be like for an LLC or or something like that there's probably going to be four employees top including us. >> So and counselor back at the concept level stage the potential for employees was discussed and that's why it didn't fall under the home occupation license because you can't have employees with that. >> So that's another reason why a new category uh but what they were proposing really needed a new category. >> Okay. Thank you. So going back to the thing I said, is there any appetite on the council on changing what is being proposed by staff for the plantings or do like what's proposed that I haven't got a good read on that the plantings and such I would like to see more in that corner where the chicken coupe is in that northern side of things. Um, >> I don't know >> issue with that, but that's not part of >> Yeah, currently staff is proposing that a condition of approval be that screening be added to the bring my cursor over to the east side of the parking lot and the south side of the parking lot where there's these gaps in this uh landscaping plan, but we can amend that to include more screening on the northwest. I' I'd love to see them staff work with them to talk about if that and again if nobody has been there the chicken coupe gone you got a clear shot at the dales back >> I don't have I don't have a problem also that >> over there yes do they need to screen >> yeah we're fine we're fine with that 100% I'm just >> they need to screen the vineyard >> I think that's what I'm I'm putting on >> again we we're facing all public property the rise as is at the start of the vending and it falls off to Rush Creek. >> To me, the northeast makes sense, the south makes sense. I think the east is a question. >> I don't know where we're going to put more trees on the county. >> The vines are the screening on the east. >> I'm agreeing. I'm just I'm bringing it up, guys. >> Could you say that again? >> I think the vines are the screening on the east. could be >> if we plant. So currently we have we the trees create a problem for the vines in in this area. So we need maximum sun. So we can't really what we currently have is actually affecting yields on that that that top corner and then a little bit of this corner because the trees. So, um, so prefer not to put any trees, but if you're down there and you're sitting in that parking lot, I I promise you that you can sit there with headlights and nobody on this road will see those headlights. Come on out, take a look. >> So, there's effectively a burn already. >> Yeah. And our house and everything else there. You can't see anything there. there would be no I mean and we're fine having somebody come out and look at it and say >> you know because if you were there you would see what we're talking about it it would be it just is overkill we have so many trees in our yard >> I agree with you very much I I to your question Mr. Mayor, the uh screening around the parking lot, while it might be uh overkill and such with the elevation and such, I think something on the on the south and east side of the parking would be nice addition. Not much going to happen, but it'd be nice there. And then consideration against the back property line towards the dales would be great. >> Yep. I appreciate your comments on the lighting and the traffic and all of that. What about noise? >> Yeah. So, um, we have to stay within city ordinance with noise. We're the only ambient music that we would ever really have would be in the tasting room within the guidelines. We can have ambient music. And then we also have >> or if there's a wedding. >> Yeah. So, if there's a wedding and they brought somebody in or whatever, again, we have to stay within city ordinance and all the same guidelines with the the noise levels in the area. >> And I think that's what we're going to touch on next about hours of operation and amplified noise where I want to draw that line. Um, Dwight, what >> uh provisions of the resolution covers the landscaping? I might see Any Charger fans in the audience? >> Don't Don't identify yourself right now, >> Kevin. You know that. >> It's only only 213 Chargers are ahead. If anybody cares. >> You like Green Bay, too, which again doesn't matter. You had to wear a Vikings jersey at least once last year, possibly again this year. >> I'm not asking for it this year. >> Mr. Mayor, I'm unfortunately not seeing it in the um IUP resolution. So we've added as an additional resolution or additional condition under u under 6 A 9 6 A9. Okay. Um then I guess I would make a motion to direct staff to or to amend the resolution to add a 6 A9 that um trying to figure out the best way to word this to give flexibility to figuring out exactly what's required where but piloting north west as the applicants have mentioned and the south of the parking lot and then the east side of the parking lot of the whole site. So maybe just just so I can make sure that I'm understanding uh a condition added to that IEP would be 6A uh 9. Uh the applicants would revise the site plan to provide additional screening to the northwest, south, and east of the parking lot. >> Yes. >> Can I offer a friendly? >> Sure. >> So with the vines on that hill on the east side, I'm not sure I see the value for additional screening on the east. Would you be amendable to leaving that side as is? >> Yeah, I could. I I see kind of I could be comfortable on that. I think it's not as important as it is on the south and that northwest corner. >> Move all that over to that corner. Yeah, there's a huge rise up to the vines and then up and over the hill. So, I would agree. Yeah, I like that would be okay. >> Okay. So, that uh or I'll accept that friendly. So it would just be for the south and the northwest there. >> I will second. >> Any further discussion on that? >> All those in favor say I. >> I. >> So that is added. Do I did you get all that? >> I did. Perfect. >> And then uh I guess the remaining item that I have is the hours of operation discussion and then getting um amplified noise probably line with that hours of operation uh whatever that time we've come up with is >> so uh if we were to you know throw out a what time do you would you plan on opening generally >> um I think >> 1201 yeah >> people don't usually come first >> you don't want the morning drinkers >> and I don't I don't want to be early it's 5:00 somewhere Um >> I think we had we had an idea of what we were >> Yeah, you did have specific >> I think it said noon. >> Yeah, it may be less than that, but we just wanted to be realistic and and you know >> Yeah, you wanted to set rules that you could operate. Yeah, I yeah, I I want to be ask for, you know, make sure we're >> we have those. >> Currently 685 says there will be no use of amplified sound after >> we could amend that condition to set the hours of operation and then include uh that there will be no use of sound applications. >> Yes, that's process wise what I'm thinking. Um we have what those hours that they had sent in initially is >> yes it was go up the report on the first slide here. Um so typical hours of operation that they had listed in their narrative was 12:00 p.m. to 900 p.m. Thursday through Saturday and 12:00 p.m. to 6 p.m. on Sundays. >> Okay. I mean, I think even if we could make it to 8:00 PM and then if it was past that, we could require the amplified sound or or the permit for amplified sound or additional additional hours. >> So, you're saying 12 to 9 and then amplified sound after 8 would be by special permit request. >> Yes. >> And then the Sunday hours seem reasonable. to look at. How does that seem feasible to you guys? >> Yeah. Yep. Because Yeah. Because I think the ordinance like we have to if we did have sound, it has to be facing a certain way and all that. >> Yeah. And then we'd have to come back for >> permit >> permanent or whatever to go past that hour. >> Um Okay. So, I'll make that motion to amend resolution 202587 uh six. Item six, a five >> um to >> Why don't you let Dwight read it? Perfect. >> Okay. So, the revision that is on the table right now is uh a revision to condition 685. H hours hours of operation shall be limited to 12:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. Thursdays through Saturdays and 12:00 p.m. to 6 pm on Sundays. and sound amplifi sound amplification system uh use after 8mm will require council approval of the sound waiver. >> I will make that I will second that motion. >> Okay, since made it. >> Any discussion? >> All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Okay. Any other remaining outstanding items? >> Um the buildings. Dwight, could you pull up the building? The one with all the trees and then the buildings and those kind of things. The chicken coupe will be gone. There's a machine shed close to the chicken coupe. Is that going to be removed? >> No, we would like to help it. >> No, it's old. It's been there since >> I I know. I'm I'm asking Dwight. So that stays the one in the western northwest >> western border, not the chicken coupe on the north. Nope, you were fine right where you were. >> I was just looking at my table. >> Yeah. So the shed three is a is a legal non-conforming structure. So >> um >> been there a long time. >> It it could stay if the zoning ordinance uh request is approved. >> Okay. And then the existing pole barn matterof fact variance would be staying. It would require either an after the fact variance. Yep. >> Or be relocated. >> Okay. And then the shed, is it shed two? >> Same thing. >> Shed two is a legal non-conforming structure. So that could stay. >> Okay. >> And then shed one is a non-conforming structure. It would have to be relocated out of the front setback area >> along with four. >> Right. >> Along with uh along with four. >> Yeah. And that's a plastic shed. one of the plastic shed that one of the old owners put in his bottom, >> but we were asking for the >> We will ask you for >> Oh, in the future. >> Okay. >> Try to get that in December. Yeah. >> Yeah. No worries. >> So, not to dig up a dead rabbit or anything, but on that pole it was put in, there was a permit pulled, the building permited, everything else. How did it end up in the wrong spot? >> Don't know. Yeah, I I think the best way you can answer it is the um building officials are not surveyors and so they didn't catch that it was in the wrong location when they did the footing inspection. >> Um so the at this point it'd be an after the fact variance to improve it. I do think that after speaking with the applicant there um are non-economical considerations. Um so the I do think there's argument for >> it's elevated way above the flood plane. Everything else I mean there is a tremendous model >> and there's really not another to put it at this point. >> Okay. >> All right. >> Just want to make sure we don't need to rewrite that. >> Yep. >> I have a question. Oh, sorry. >> No, go ahead. >> Um, there was a statement not to exceed accessory structure unless it's reasonably necessary. >> Um, I mean, I feel like we have ordinances in place for a reason and that we shouldn't exceed something unless there's a really good reason. Otherwise, why have the ordinance? So, I'm just wondering what's the purpose of exceeding what the allowed accessory structures footage is on the property. >> Can I take a stab at that one? >> Sure. >> So, correct me if I mistake anything. Um, so the limitation on accessory structures serves to inhibit people from having uh, you know, large storage locations on their property that are not functional. When we have a 10acre parcel, there's a c that allows you to have whatever size accessory structures you would need to operate the farm. >> I would see this as sort of an adaptation of that to a smaller footprint aggra business. >> Okay. >> So to me it makes sense if we're going to allow the IUP to be the control just like we have the cup as the control for 10acre parcels. >> Um I I wouldn't change the underlying code because I don't want people storing you know 30 motor homes on a residential parcel that's 5 acres. I think there's a purpose there to keep it from being disassociated with the rural character we're trying to preserve, >> but I think it would make sense in a case like that. >> Okay. Thank you. >> That's just my two. >> No, I appreciate that. Thank you. >> I would agree that that was staff's argument as well that an aggra business uh but um particular when we have like these micro farms that we're seeing that technically don't meet the uh what the allowances that like true agriculture gets. Um but they have the need for it because have complex operations such as this where it's not just a storage building. It's going to be a building. They're adding a building that's going to do the processing as well as host people and then they need all their existing buildings to continue maintaining um the winery. And so they they have an argument for each building as to why it's needed and what they're using it for. Um so that was that is um that was the thinking behind the flexibility specifically for our businesses at this time. >> There's like an apple orchard. They might need like a bake house to make pies and a juicing area and that sort of thing. >> Okay. >> Anything else? >> If not, I will entertain a motion to approve resolution 202587 approving the site plan and IUP as amended. Adopt ordinance 2025 54 amending section 1040.030 030 subdivision 5D and approve resolution 202588 approving the final back of the zoning ordinance amendment. >> Would you make it or you >> I am entertaining it. >> I will make that motion. >> Do I have a second? I'll second it. Any further discussion? >> Just real quick, you got some great neighbors. They're pretty awesome, too. So be self, work with each other, help each other, everything else. And uh >> I I think it's a good addition. I just don't want it to go crazy as you guys don't want it to go crazy either. Again, with them living there, I think they'll curb that also. So >> I agree. And I also think that not that I think this would be necessary, but having the IUP protection is about the the most control we have over if a site, you know, gets out of compliance and so I think that helps uh with my comments on it as well. >> Thank you. >> Yeah. So we have a motion and a second. Uh that was discussion. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Opposed. Uh and then we do have um I'll make the motion to adopt summary ordinance. This is just for publication uh 202555 which does have a four fifth requirement. Again, this is just for the newspaper to be able to publish the summary as opposed to the whole section or code. >> So move second. >> Uh any discussion? All those in favor say I. >> I. >> All right. Thank you. >> Thank you. Thank you guys. Thank you neighbors for your inputs. Sorry >> you couldn't hear everything. >> Yeah, we'll try to get >> We'll work on that. >> But appreciate you guys coming out >> and I think let's take a uh seven minute recess here and then we'll reconvene at 9 five 6 minute recess 9:05. Come back. All right, I'll go ahead and call the meeting back to order and we'll pick back up with item 7B, which is the High Point Gardens site plan and IUP. And we'll start that off with a public comment opportunity. If anyone would like to speak on this item, uh, now is the time. Looks like we're good. So, we will go on to the presentation. >> Mr. Mayor, >> okay, come on up. >> Mr. Mayor, may I real quick? Thank you folks that stayed for this very much. And I see the applicant. So, thank you. >> Sorry if that was boring. How's that >> with the candy? >> Start with your name and address. >> Uh, Marie King, 21165 County Road 10. >> Thank you. We're across from them and I haven't seen them since they moved in. >> It's been that long. >> I gave Yeah, I gave the neighborhood party. Yes. >> Anyway, I'm I'm sorry you guys, but I'm opposed. >> You could direct com them. >> Oh, and can you hear >> this? >> We hear you fine. >> We can hear you. >> Okay. All right. I'm a retired registered nurse. I have worked lock up on the psych ward with young kids, boys and girls, who have overdosed on marijuana and different drugs. I just I see how it destroys and wrecks a human being. And I just I just don't want the neighbor kids on it either. I I just so uh I'm opposed to it. Um I've just seen too much sadness. And I know that when some people hurt, they have to take pain medications, but you get addicted. And I had a close friend who uh he drove down the driveway one day and he sat crying in the car and he said, "Marie," I said, "What is it?" He said, "I was growing marijuana in my basement, but I want you to know I got rid of it. I'm going to go clean." And he did. And I won't say his name, but he's here in Corkran and he's living a good life. And he's not addicted. He is taking care of himself, eating, sleeping, and doing things. And I'm sorry you guys, but I don't want you to grow it. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> Anyone else? >> Hi, I'm Sue Dublin. I live at 21,000 County Road 10 and I'm a neighbor to >> Could you speak up just a little bit? I guess not. >> Okay, I'll try. >> Thank you. >> Getting a little late for me. >> Fair enough. >> Um, first of all, I wanted to say I like your pictures. I like the rural um things you are promoting here in the town hall, city hall. Um, that's how it was when I moved out here. These bukholic images were everywhere 50 years ago. I've been here exactly 50 years. That's when we moved out here. And so that's what we appreciated. Oh, that's how we would love it to stay, but I know it has to do some changing. Um um when my kids were in school, they they attended the DARE classes. I'm sure some of you here have done that. Um actually DARE is still in 50 states. It's in 53 countries. It's still it's still going. It's a good program. Um it um taught kids the policemen if anybody doesn't know what it was or is um the policeman came to the school and they taught the kids classes and they taught them drugs were bad and they taught them that the violence around the drugs were bad and all we all we need to do is turn on the TV and we can that's going full boore right now in our country. Drugs, violence everywhere. And so, um, clearly I'm not I'm not in favor of having marijuana growing commercially right next to my driveway as I drive in. Um, like we said at the last meeting, it is um, federally it's it's illegal to commercially grow marijuana at this point still. It's a mindaltering drug. Um it's dangerous and um that's part of what I want to talk about the danger um not only to Corkran but to me personally um it's going to change if that should go through that they can grow marijuana in Corkran commercially it will change the nature of Corkran the character of Corkran will be permanently changed. And I can't see how that would be any good. You know, how will that be for the better? I don't see one good thing coming out of this. Nothing. Maybe they will make a lot of money. Maybe that's maybe that's what's they're hoping to do. Um anyway, um I I just don't see it. Um they talked a lot about crime and safety, lighting, hiding the house, the shrubbery, um all kinds of things to keep keep the public from knowing what is actually going on there, I guess. Um, and to maybe keep it safe. I don't know why what all this safety was about. Keep criminals away, but we know criminals will would like to flock to a place where marijuana is growing. Um, they just do. Um, trouble is caused. wherever there are drugs. It's just a given. And that's that's my secondary. I mean, well, it's my primary actually. Um, not only for Corkran, changing the nature of Corkran with this forever more, but for the safety of me and my family at my house. We live um on two sides. We border their home. Um, as you drive in my driveway, it you are going right along their yard. Then I turn, go along their yard some more. Then's my field and then I proceed back to the woods where I live, way back in the woods, tucked in. And so >> you can just pause for one second. I'm sorry. If uh I can get a motion to attend time for two minutes. Second. >> Second. >> All those in favor say I. >> Oh, I went past five minutes. Yep. >> Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't even think about five minutes. >> Okay. I was trying to get to finish my story. I'm almost done. >> So, anyway, my land borders there, five acres on one side and the my woods is on the back end. I've got like 13 acres of uh woods, old a lot of old growth woods in there. It's a lot of I mean it's thick. It's old and thick and it's goes all the way back um to fields. If anybody wanted to um approach their place for any purpose, they could easily come in through the woods. Come right through the woods. Be perfect for them. They wouldn't probably come through the field that side as much, but the woods would be perfect entrance. And I don't know how a criminal would know my house from their house. my house would be the most likely place to be growing something like that back in the woods in the basement. Um, and so, like I said at the last meeting, I don't see how we can ever really feel safe at my house again if this goes through. I I will not feel safe. I mean, I was shocked that something like this has come up even. Um, and I'm trying to just imagine living like that with that right next door. Me driving exactly right beside their house every time I come and go from my place. And it's it's just not doable for me. It's not. It won't seem safe. I don't see how it would ever feel safe. So, that's all I have to say. >> Thank you. Okay. Um, do we want to start with the report on this or uh Mr. Did you did you want to speak to maybe the it's a bit of a unique legal situation with how legalized. >> Can we have a discussion before Mr. Sure comments because I do have a couple of questions for him? >> Sure. >> Do you want to do the staff presentation first though or could we Is that okay? >> So the item that we are discussing now is High Point Gardens. This is an application for plan approval and interim use permit. The applicants are Nathan and Joshua Adams and they are operating under the business name Hot Point Gardens. The location is 211020 County Road 10 and the site plan is for the approval of a statelicicensed indoor cannabis cultivation business. It is a permitted use in the rural residential district. So the site plan discretion is specific to does the proposed application meet the standards outlined in the city code. Um as such they are actually proposing no changes and because they are proposing no changes to the site and um one of the requirements for the site plan technically is parking and the parking formula that is required for cannabis use traditionally would be based off of our manufacturing um formula that we have in code. But in this instance, uh the there is an IUP request to reduce the parking requirement based on their business model because we do have a caveat for when data can be presented that supports a lower parking requirement that can be approved as part of an IUP. So the area of discretion tonight is whether or not a parking a 10 spot parking lot goes in or not through the either approval or denial of the IEP. Uh So for the site plan, the proposals to locate the uh cultivation area within the basement of their existing single family home. The total business footprint is about 700 square ft. There are no exterior changes or expansions proposed except for some additional landscaping. The business will be managed by two brothers who live on site. There are no plans for initial employees. They do note in their narrative that there could be employees or interns in the future. Um there is no retail component um and there are no deliveries anticipated on site or any public facing component with people coming to the site. The applicants plan to deliver the product uh in their personal vehicles that will be disclosed to the state and the city to licensed downstream businesses offsite. Um and some notes on the site plan. There is no exterior lighting discussed. Um however strategic lighting may be necessary for effective operation of their security cameras. So uh we I do have a condition of approval uh that we uh that they do have lighting that will make the security effective. Um and then they also have to provide a photometric plan that's showing that they are meeting the one foot candle requirement that would be required um for typical commercial uses. >> Go ahead. Can those lights maybe this question more for Matt. Can those lights be infrared so they aren't readily visible to the neighbors? >> It's going to be dependent on the whatever security system they have and how they how they work. >> We did request that. >> Yeah. >> And I I did word it in a way so that it's about the effectiveness of the operations. It's not that has to meet a specific candle other than it can't be brighter than that candle limit. Um based on the business footprint, one additional overstory tree and three understory shrubs are required. They are proposing that I should Oh, you have it. That's right. They are proposing that in the southeast corner. Um southeast corner. Yep. Um sorry, I just realized I have notes in here. It's a little the Ben Q isn't working correctly. So, he's helping me with the presentation, but I'm realizing I'm just kind of having troubles here. So, um they are proposing that in the southeast corner for new landscaping. There was some discussion at the planning commission level. It actually should be more a north south alignment versus what's kind of shown right now, which is east west. It's very light green. Um and uh planning commission was fine with what's currently shown. And the idea is just to pro to the idea of this requirement is actually to meet our minimum landscaping standards. Um and then working with the applicant, we decided this was the best location to offer some more screening. Um and then there is just a slight condition of approval with that. Uh the initial calculation that when we first met with the applicant was based off of um just the grow area, but there's also a dry room. So once that became clear, uh a third shrub must be shown and then a species of the planting also need to be identified. Um so there's a couple just small conditions of approval in the draft resolution to get the landscaping plan up to code. Um next slide. So as far as the specific cannabis business performance standards that were adopted earlier this year, cultivation facilities do need to have comprehensive security measures. The cultivation area will be monitored and secured with smart lock technology provided by Right Hennison Co-op. My understanding of this is all windows, all doors will have this. Um and then security cameras will be located on each side of the house and five interior cameras within and leading to the cultivation area. So they um the cameras on the exterior will allow for monitoring in all directions of the property. And then they will also have cameras that are documenting what's going on inside the house as well. Adequate ventilation must is required to ensure no odor is detectable from the exterior of the building. The applicant is proposing HEPA approved carbon filter air purifier rated for large spaces and this is a smaller space. So this is it um is sufficient for the space that's proposed. They have no exterior venting proposed and they also will be including plastic on the walls and ceilings to further insulate and act as an odor barrier. Uh this is in compliant with the state standards as well and is part of the plan that was submitted to the state so far. Um and then finally they uh as an additional measure they include in their plan to do regular perimeter checks to ensure no odor leaks and will respond to any odor complaints from neighbors as well. And they have and they discussed having a log of such complaints and how they address them. As far as cannabis uh I'm sorry, the waste disposal plan, they are proposing that the cannabis waste that will be will be made unusable and unrecognizable before disposable disposal and tracked in a statewide system. It will be placed within a sealed and labeled container within a designated access control waste area inside the house until final disposal. And then the proposed final disposal is to compost all trimmings and plant matter and mix with organic matter to decompose. Um and there was some discussion as to how this would be accommodated in the winter. Um and they said worst case scenario in the winter they could bring the compost pile inside. And I just did some research that I don't know a lot about composting and that you can compost inside. So um and then to address potential odors from cannabis waste uh they are proposing organic waste to be stored in those sealed containers until time for decomposition. Utilization of composting methods that minimize odor release and then the waste will be grinded and mixed with other inert material. So and then when we say inert or organic material that's food scraps, yard waste, cardboard, sawdust and other items such as that. Next slide. Uh they are also subject to a location buffer. Um the location is uh does meet this as they're not located within 1,000 ft of a school facility or 500 ft of a daycare, residential treatment facility or an attraction with a public park that has amenities that are regularly regularly used by miners. They are all well outside of those buffers. Um there is also a standard that accessory structures are subject to a 100 foot setback. This is not applicable to the current proposal since the business is located in the principal structure. However, um as they had documented a hopeful or an intent to potentially expand eventually which is not being approved tonight in an accessory structure that wouldn't meet that setback. So I wanted to make sure that they were aware of that. So that is why it's discussed in the staff report. Um and then signage must comply with Corkran city code and cannot depict cannabis leaves or use sling terms or appeal to minors. Um in an effort to remain as discreet as possible, they are proposing no signage and then it comes down to the issue of parking. So manufacturing processing our fabric fabrication facilities have a formula of eight spaces plus one space for each two employees on the largest shift. A minimum of eight spaces plus one space per 500 square ft of floor area is required. So with this formula 10 parking spaces would be required. Um applicant the applicant did provide proof of parking for nine spaces within the existing driveway. Um and I will add that again the that was just a a misunderstanding of what the footprint was. Um, and so that's where that's the discrepancy between nine and 10. So there is a condition of approval that the proof of parking needs to show for 10 spaces. Um, but currently as there are today, there are approximately five spaces in addition to garage parking that um without any need for improvement. Uh, as far as the interim use permit for parking, uh, the zoning ordinance allows for parking space reductions approved as an IUP when it can be demonstrated there is a demand which is less than the required parking formula. Based on the documented business model and residency of the applicants, the request is to reduce the formal parking requirements to zero spaces with parking accommodated by the existing driveway. No employees uh are proposed initially and there are spaces for at least three vehicles in addition to the two personal vehicles associated with the business owners and res and again there's no customer traffic on site. So with these components um st and with the ongoing discussions we've had of the parking requirements being excessive um staff recommends that we reduce the parking requirement in this instance because the business model does not call for 10 spaces in a formal parking lot. Next slide. Okay. Conditions of approval include no parking on county road 10 or other public streets. All parking must be accommodated on site. If parking demand will exceed five cars at any one time, the applicant must submit a site plan amendment for city approval. Construction of a formal parking lot with all parking performance standards may be required at the applicant's expense at that time. And then the IUP is subject to inspection by city staff once every three years and or upon receipt of a parking complaint because again the IUP is not for the cannabis business. It is specifically for the parking on the site. And then the site plan must be updated to provide proof of parking for 10 spaces and must be dimensioned. Uh and then the interim use permit has a sunset clause. That is the defining feature of an interim use permit. So uh staff proposes the sunset clause included when the property is sold or transferred to someone not associated with the property at the time of the application. The property is no longer homesteaded. Parking demand for the cannabis cultivation business exceeds five parking spaces at any one time, including the personal vehicles of the operators that are disclosed for distribution of product to their customers. Uh the cannabis cultivation business ceases, the cannabis cultivation business expands, and the city determines the parking demand will increase. Um and or the cannabis cultivation business fails to meet city and state requirements. And next slide. Uh planning commission voted to recommend this on a 4-1 vote and so planning commission and staff recommend approval of resolution 2025103 which approves the site plan and interim use permits. If the council finds the standards for the IEP are not satisfied, uh findings of fact should be pro to this effect should be provided to staff and then staff should be directed to bring back revised resolutions at the November 13th council meeting which would include approval of the site plan with a condition to add and construct a 10 space parking lot that meets all city standards on the site plan. This would then trigger requirements for a grading plan, site improvement, a performance agreement, and a financial security. And then the second res resolution would be the denial of the IE. >> Thank you. Uh questions for Natalie on that? >> I have questions for Mr. >> Okay, let's just double check if anyone has any questions on that. >> Do we consider cheer Drummonds? >> We can get into that. I can speak on that and Mark. >> Um so any just trying to tackle it in a way that um with the recommended parking if you were to support this project. We can get into whether or not you do in general, but if you were is there any issues with the staff recommendation and the applicant's request on the parking uh reduction? parking. >> My my my only issue is uh in the in the staff report, no employees initially. So everything seems like we're going to grow to something bigger and those kind of things. I would rather see no employees other than the two applicants. And if there is more employees needed, they need to come back. The IUP is null and void. One more of those changes. It's >> kind of what they have in number three. >> I I know. I just we we we write things to be more generic, but as long as we are on the same page that it's going to be two employees. Uh the brothers that are doing it. Jeremy, you said number three on the interim, you shall expire immediately after one or more of the following. Seven, three. Then number three, parking demand for the cannabis cultivation operation exceeds five parking spaces in any one time. This includes parking for the personal vehicles of the operators. It doesn't address if they get more employees. >> If you had enough, you would have to have five parking spaces or six parking spaces. Then you're right. >> Yeah. So there I guess the issue is there desire to close that gap between five spaces and theoretically could have one or two maybe employees and still get up to that. Probably not more than that. >> I set aside the is I treat it the same standard I would candle shop. >> I think this would be fine. >> Um you're the one that kind of raised the concern. Um >> let's just keep having conversation. >> Okay. >> Thanks. >> Um I'm trying to think about other potential language that could address that if there's a desire for >> Well, I just have a question. we're talking about like specifics, but like I think there's a bigger question I have is that is this even legal because it's not federally allowed. Um, so I have a concern from that perspective. >> Yep. Okay. And I think I just wanted to tackle all the little stuff and then get to that big one. >> Okay. >> Um, which I think we kind of have at this point. Um, unless someone has an idea on potential language change on that >> parking minimum or number of employees capping it at there's a way to do that. Um, other than that, I don't see any other >> I I' I've asked the question and I think it's been answered and such. They need our approval to continue on with the state application. Why are we given them approval when the state hasn't even given them the approval to do this business? >> They have moved forward with the state process as far as they can. We're at the stage now where the city has to basically a form is provided to the city where we confirm that they meet the zoning standards. Um and so the um I ask that they proceed with the site plan approval process so that I can fill out that form um and that's why they're in front of us tonight. >> Thank you. >> But the approvals are contingent on the getting the official license. Okay. So, I think that addresses all the other mantra. So, we get bigger. >> Sorry about that. >> Sorry about that. >> Hopefully, let me know again if if uh you can't hear me, but um I was just saying I think we've kind of addressed any potential concerns with the smaller items of the site plan itself. Now, regarding the overall project, I believe council member Friedrich and council member Land would want to speak to that and then um city attorney James could maybe as well. >> Thank you. And Mr. Mayor, I have two questions for the city attorney, two questions for the applicant, and one question for the chief of police. >> Sounds good. >> And uh I commend the entrepreneurial spirit. So, good good for you. Uh, Mr. Fames, um, uh, I have two questions for you. And as an attorney, I know you being an attorney, I know that this is going to be very difficult for you, but could you limit your answer to just yes or no? >> I'll try. >> I say that with great respect. >> Yeah, I don't know that I could. >> So, Mr. Thes, would you agree with me that federal law s supersedes state law? Yes or no? >> Yes. >> And uh my second question again, yes or no. Do you agree with me that marijuana cultivation is a violation of the Federal Controlled Substances Act 21 USC 801? Yes or no? >> I would say that marijuana or cannabis is a controlled one substance on the Federal Register. Yes. >> Okay. So that's a yes. Thank you. Um, I have two questions uh for for you guys. Does marijuana need water to grow? Repeat my question. Does marijuana need water to grow? >> Yes, it does it. >> Where does the waste water go? >> Um, so due to the small nature of our operation, we hand water everything. Uh, there are plastic trays underneath the pots. So, in essence, only every plant receives the water that it needs. Uh, currently there is no waste water. >> Okay. >> Does marijuana smell? Um depending on the stage of growth it is in. Yes. >> Okay. Thank you. Those were my two. Chief, one question for you. Uh you >> you guys can stay up here in case there's more questions. >> Yeah. >> Sorry, Mr. >> You you heard the applicant say that marijuana has a has a smell, has an odor. Um in your experience, do some people find the smell of marijuana to be a nuisance yet? Yes or no? >> Yes. >> Thank you. That's all I had to say. >> Um I guess my question is is what is the difference between medical grade marijuana and like recreational marijuana? >> Um typically the difference is the amount of THC that is produced in the plant. >> Which one has more >> uh the medical? >> Okay. Thank you. Any other questions? >> Yeah, I'm trying to figure out how to ask it >> this with with the questions that have been asked about legalities, those kind of things. It still hasn't been how do I want to say? I'll I'll make it veno simple vetted from the feder feds that it's permitted but it's okay with the state I still and I' I've had this same thing since this has come in front of us while I have friends that are using doing this medical grade cannabis and it's helping them it's doing an awful Why isn't it more of a controlled substance federally and those kind of things in your opinion? Does that make sense what I'm saying? >> Why isn't it something that we've got all these pharmaceutical companies that are doing all this stuff? Why are pharmaceutical companies growing this stuff and doing this stuff? Why are we taking it upon uh smaller groups to grow it in their basement and and then sell sell the produce to distribution for distribution? >> I think I mean in some opinion that's a tough question. Yeah, obviously this is a gray area for everybody and everybody's learning. >> Um you know there's movement to move this from the controlled substance list. Um, there's a big movement for that. There's also a big movement for like social equity applicants and people have been negatively affected by marijuana, state marijuana laws to have an opportunity to uh remedy that uh remedy that. Um, so there's a lot of different things. Some people feel that if like big corporations get involved, um, you know, they'll use some sort of they'll just commercialize it, right? they'll make they'll use pesticides and they I think they'll believe that um some you know smaller farmers will do things the right way and that's our plan. We plan to do everything organically and naturally and by the law and be as transparent as we can with the state and you know deliver it legally to legal businesses so >> we can eliminate a black market. That's what the state doesn't want. That's not what we want. Um, you know, you have Mexican cartels shipping cannabis into the United States and they're lacing it with a whole bunch of pesticides that are horrible. So, we're trying to do the right thing and a legal market and do it the right way. Um, if you have anything to say. >> Um, I to kind of better answer your question. I believe Minnesota, the way they're trying to set this up is they're trying to give the little people a better opportunity to kind of establish this market um >> first >> first um before the big corporations that I mean inevitably they will be here and they will start to um buy up all the small ones just kind of how all free market systems work. Um but I believe Minnesota is really trying to put an emphasis on the smaller mom and pop shops to give them a chance to kind of compete. Um, as with as regard to the pharmaceutical, this is more my opinion. I believe that they don't have a way to make money off of it yet. Uh, you can't, it's not a drug that you can put into like a pill and charge right away for this is kind of an organic chemical that is produced specifically by this plant. Um, and it's not like Monsanto and corn where they have a genetically modified everybody buys the same seed. You get the same product every time. um that inevitably believes to disease and u degradation of the product in our belief. Uh so that's why we're kind of starting um from seed. We're doing everything from seed to kind of promote genetic diversity um resistance to diseases, molds, stuff like that. Um so I hope that gives you a little more clarity. >> Mr. Mayor, thank you for the opportunity to ask and such. Um, a lot of drugs and those kind of things I know can be synthesized out of corn, can be synthey and those kind of things. I mean, we've got acres of all of those things growing. But yet, this still becomes an issue related to the feds saying it's no good, but they say the states can limit it there. The states can control it. and then it's down to a bunch of us that it's real hard for us to be smart enough and and good enough to to be able to do this right. So I it's a hard decision for me. So thank you guys very much. >> Yeah. And we're willing to, you know, do everything the right way. We want to be as transparent with the city, with the state as we can. We're going to be monitoring and logging every transaction. It's going to be under lock and key. And you know, >> BUD has a name or a serial number and everything. >> Correct. It's going to be tracked from seed to sale. >> Crazy. >> And then it's going to have no customers coming in. Uh we want to stay true to Corkran and be an agricultural garden. And uh this is just a new product. Um and you know, you have to be 21 to to uh buy it. So it's not getting in the hands of children. You have to be 21, you know, to even really, if we were even to like give a tour, you have to be 21 to even see our plants. So, no one would even see it. Um, we're basically hiding in plain sight. We're not even uh changing our site at all. You wouldn't be able to tell if we're growing it or if Sue is growing it, like she said. And we think that's going to help in our favor because we're not have any signage at all and we're just trying to do this the right way. No worries about security. No worries about >> No, we're not even gonna tell. We're really not even going to tell if we go to like a dispensary and we make a sales contract with them. Hey, we we're going to have two yields a year. So, there'll be two deliveries a year. Otherwise, you won't be able to tell we're there as maybe some odor that escapes and then we'll remy that um at any way we can. if that's more plastic or whatever, we're going to try to keep it as secure as we can and um it'll be very secure. We're anyone in and out has to be logged and the state will audit us and make sure we're following that. If they if we're not following any of that, they'll revoke our license and we'll be done. Um >> how often will they audit you? >> I think they audit us every year. We have to reapply for our license. >> So, they'll look at our books every year. And then, um >> uh another thing, no customers coming in. So when we go to deliver our product with um with a dispensary, you know, if we can keep our where our location is out of their knowledge, that's good for us. We don't want them to know where we are. We just want to deliver the product on time and it's going to have to uh pass state testing as well, but for pesticides and potency, we have to label all that stuff. So um >> you you made me nervous talking about tours. Why? >> No. No. I Sorry. I didn't >> tour's highlighting that there's a higher standard. >> There's a state requirement. >> Yeah. >> We're going to have 20 like no entry no entry signs to all the any anywhere where cannabis is held. >> I assume your business or something, not the physical address. question. >> Well, it is the physical address, but I guess we could change that if >> if the council wishes to >> you wanted it to be secret from your >> Yeah, that I guess I didn't think of that. You know, we've been kind of going for >> that would be more of a downstream thing that we worry about approval. Definitely do that. >> What was the commentary? >> If they want to keep the location secret, they should have a PO box as their business address rather than physical address. >> Yeah, that's a that's a great idea. Yeah, >> I think Mark had a comment or a question. Yeah. Thank you, uh, Mr. Mayor. Um, we all heard the city attorney, uh, state that he he agreed that federal law supersedes state law. We all heard him state that he agreed that marijuana cultivation is a violation of the federal controlled substances act 21 USC 801. We heard the applicants on at least two occasions uh acknowledge and I think this is most important acknowledge the uh concern of uh the leakage of odor and we heard the chief of police state that in his experience some consider this odor to be a nuisance. Uh so because of that I would like to make a motion to deny the uh application to deny resolution 2025-103 uh denying the site plan and denying the uh interim use permit >> and would that be uh based on those those findings of fact? Yeah, I think that the that the more important finding effect is the uh leakage of odor and the nuisance followed by uh the uh opinion of the uh city attorney that federal law supersedes state law and that marijuana cultivation is in fact a violation of federal law. I do want to add that he did say that, but I think he was trying to abide by the request. >> True. Yeah, I got some answers. >> Yes or no, which does remove some of the nuance of it. >> Um, which I think is valuable nuance, but um, we do have a motion. Does anyone want to think that? >> I second it. But I would obviously want to have a conversation. >> Okay. So, we have a motion and a second now discussion. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So, I have a question and this might be irrelevant because it's medical grade cannabis, but um I I was able to like have some knowledge of the northern area of California and the cannabis area up in that area um where a lot of cannabis is grown. Um, and it's a pretty uncomfortable area because a lot of the people that are in that area and growing that cannabis like are protecting their crops. And so you'll see like people with guns and like like and so I'm just wondering like that that to me is like really intense and it's not something I want to see in Corkran. So I guess my question is is what does your business plan look like like to protect that? I mean I heard you have cameras placed there so there is concern. Maybe that's just if you have employees to make sure that people aren't taking product that they shouldn't be touching. Um but that's that's a real safety concern for me in our city. >> Sure. Yeah. >> Um can you speak to that at all? >> Um so yeah, we have the security system set up. That is a state requirement. Um we have to fulfill that to receive the license. Um yeah, I will be living at the property as well. Um I do have a gun there for my own personal protection. Um, so that could potentially be used in a situation where I feel threatened. >> Um, but other than that, we we believe our best defense is discretion. Um, not, you know, blatantly advertising that we are growing this crop. Um, >> we're also indoors as well, so we're under a secure lock and key. Um, >> there's no access to the product. We're the only two that's going to have access to the product as well. And we're not going to be patrolling around Corkran or our property with guns >> by any means, you know, and it's an indoor plant as well. I've se California I've seen outdoor grows. So that's they're a little bit more susceptible to theft >> due due to the climate. We find it more advantageous to grow indoors here obviously than California where you are able to have an outdoor grow um where you would need obviously more physical security present to deter crime. >> Yeah. Okay. Thank you. >> My questions John thank you for answering council member Lantern's questions and such. How do I ask it? What is your opinion on our responsibility as city leaders on this subject? Do you know what I'm trying to ask? >> And to tack on to that, could you maybe speak to the state law pro the new requirements and law that was passed in the last >> Thank you, mayor, mayor, and council. I I I'd be happy to. Um I think the the question is a complex um And what what you're you're talking about is um councilman is correct that it is a federally federalally controlled substance one that it's listed as an illegal substance uh with the fed. Um so that has to be reconciled with what our state did with statute 342, right? When they they're licensing it, they're they're they're decriminalizing a lot of um of cannabis product. So the question then really boils down to I try to organize my thoughts here a little bit so not get too far into the weeds. But what we're talking about is supremacy clause, federal overstate. We're also talking about whether or not a law is preemptive, right? Um I can tell you that for purposes of preeemption, what we're probably talking about here is really something called um implied field preeemption, right? It's an area of >> what was implied field preemption. So it's an area of the that you know the question is does the does the fed intend to occupy that space without any room for anyone else right um the actions of the department of justice etc the fed have been interpreted by the states to indicate that they do not uh department of jud justice has come out and said it's a hands-off approach they have completely defunded any sort of um cannabis enforcement at the state level um there was a an executive order I got passed in the 90s in the Clinton administration that basically said there there was like three criteria that had to be met um in order for federal agencies to interfere with you know federalist ideals and uh and state uh autonomy in this area. Um and so basically the the third one is probably the most applicable which really comes down to whether the state law conflicts with the regular enforcement of federal law. But the problem is is that the fed the federal government is not enforcing cannabis at that level. So then the states have interpreted that to mean they don't intend to would be occupied the area. There is no preeemption. Um and they also have given some deference to this the local police power. That brings up 342. Some of the stated reasons in 342 um suggest that part of the reason for the law is to u push out the illicit market right with with a regulated market. So some argue that that is an enforcement mechanism that's at the state's discretion. The other thing in issue here is um the 10th amendment which deals with non-comandeering of state agencies. It says that the federal government can't forcibly make a state enforce some enforce its own laws. Okay. So um while you know the federal government can in theory come in and enforce um you know cannabis its own cannabis laws, it can't make the state do so. Um so with that uh consideration the a lot of the state level courts have said well the they're not occupying the entirety of the area. They're going to be differential to to state powers. The executive order does the same thing. And what comes out the other side is um the Fed is very handsoff in this area. So, um, uh, to to play it out on sort of on sort of a a city liability side of it, um, the city is actually pretty well protected in the framework. Um, if, uh, I know that the, uh, Chair Brumman had raised a few concerns about whether or not there'd be implications about of the, you know, city being complicit in some sort of, you know, criminal act by doing this. I think we're we're well protected because um if there was ever a drastic change of policy at number one there'd be notice um but the ones that would have to adapt the applicants to start and the state right and and the city finds itself sort of in between 342 has certain mandates city's following them applicants are following those as well. So what it boils down to really is um there there is no there's no mechanism to make the federal government uh enforce this they can on a discretionary basis they they've elected not to. So if for example we if we determine that the application meets the standards complies with 342 they meet the licensing requirements um then if you play out a challenge to that remember that that challenge will go to the hemp county district court which will interpret Minnesota law which includes Minnesota statute 342 meaning they're likely to to find that those provisions prevail and the only one that really has standing to intervene the federal government would not do So that that you kind of yields the result that way. The other part to remember is with this application, you're looking at um an IUP and a site plan, right? And that's the discretion you have to review that you have the ability to put some of these conditions we're talking about through this process and that's state law filtered down through your own code. Um, if you were to elect not to do that on the grounds that cannabis is a federally illegal product, the risk you run is if the state court disagrees with you, um, and the 60-day rule has run, that's an automatic approval for the applicants without conditions. Um, and you'd have to be asking yourself, do you does the the state court follow 342 or is it more likely to uh to find preeemption? And what we've seenviousvious obvious Minnesota is very young in this respect because we're the law isn't that old. But what we see in other places is they don't intervene. Courts don't find preeemption and there and therefore more than likely the result is a conditionless approval. So >> thank you. Yeah. And there are I believe a couple a lot of them have started to play out in cities not not this exact scenario but similar scenarios with denial of going to a state court >> and as you as you mentioned mayor there's a lot of nuances to it and it's a young law things are going to change it the courts are going to interpret we'll get some better guidance as we go but uh at present best guidance I can give you on this is 342 will be upheld by >> courts Me too. >> Thank you. That that was that was helpful. Um you were silent though on the nuisance of marijuana odor. Um do you believe the city is within its right to deny the application because of odor? >> I don't believe so. They provided measures that are compliant with state law as to avoid the leakage of odor and they are also as part of their business model they have a plan to address anything that if that's not enough they will do more. So I don't believe we can deny it because there could be odor when they have a plan to address odor um both um from the getgo as well as anything that comes up later on. >> I guess I I just don't understand how you prevent leakage of odor. So the he so they're not going to have any ventilation going outside directly. They are going to have an interior hepocarbon control filter which prevents odor and they also are going to be putting plastic shields up to further insulate the area that would have smell. Not all of it smells. It doesn't smell all the time as they have said, but the area that would be subject to smell will be um insulated with plastic and is there >> the interior will be the only place that will smell. >> John, >> if I may, yeah, just two items just to add on to that. So, if the council finds that there are other measures you'd like to see, you can certainly, as long as they're reasonably related to the application of the site plan, you you can suggest those. Our discretion at the state level is very limited on these types of applications and we do have the standards built into coding as they exist presently. I I think you have a willingness these applicants have worked with the staff um and they want to have a good result for this. So if there are conditions you want to suggest they may be receptive to those. Um the other thing councilman to your point on nuisance is um that often is more of an after the fact enforcement. So if if their business is not complying with those standards if there is uh be traveling off site and they're not addressing sufficiently, there will be an enforcement action on that to follow. So that that's I'm sorry, that's another way we would we would follow up with that. >> Next question. So can you can you speak to this uh attorneys? Um, in some information that we received as council, it was stated that cannabis is still an illegal substance and has not gone through the proper channels of diesel classification as a controlled substance substance and approved by the FDA. And also there was a court case DOS versus Jackson Minnesota Health Organization Supreme Court ruled that the federal law stood and the state law was overturned. >> That's believe abortion related case. >> That's correct. That that's the kind of the landmark abortion case. So the So two points on that, council pri um >> the to to the first point um you know whether have Okay, I'm just back up the is it a federally banned substance? Yes, it is. I wouldn't tell you otherwise. Um and the the supremacy clause is a thing, right? We we do have to we have to contend with that, but we do have to do that additional bit of analysis of whether or not preemption exists. That's that's where I was kind of jumping off from as to the the the decision that was referenced. Um that's an area where and obviously subject to a lot of debate for a lot of a lot of people and and I won't get into that today, but I will say that that's an area that the the Fed has clearly uh suggested an interest to occupy, right, and to be involved. Um this is very different than the way it's approached cannabis to this point. Um, so I I I guess that's one distinguishing point between the two. You know, constitutional scholars can debate both points and and the vality of them and what what should be done in policy, etc. But what we're left with is what do we have to work with presently in front of us? We have a a federal uh prohibition. We have a an allowance at the state level. And what have the courts done with that? Uh, and my best assessment of that presently is hands off. Mr. Mayor, >> yes, >> Matt, I don't mean to put you on the spot or anything, but during our work session, we were number three on the list of safest cities in Minnesota. In your opinion, what does this do to us as a community? And that's a really big open question. Sorry, >> I have not seen any studies uh that indicate an increase or decrease criminal activity around homebased cultivation. Um and as that's again that extrapolates out what the requirements Minnesota are would probably be unique again with it being as unique as it is I don't have good data to say what that would do to that. Is there concerns from you and our officers about the seclusion of this the lockdown everything is there issues? >> So again the lens that we look at is state law and when we look at enforcement of of state laws again are we going to see criminal activity surrounding their conduct? I don't have anything to indicate that a crime is going to happen. crime is imminent or um again they have been we've talked through um concerns and needs as far as transportation, how apparent is this going to be. We we kind of always are working to assess risk in our community and always concern the safety of our residents and our businesses. Um and we're going to work to mitigate them however they manifest. >> Okay. I Mr. Mayor, just more of a discussion. I would rather say no to this, but and always look out for but um the comment that you made about if we say no, it goes to the judges and if the judges are more likely to say we don't have the right to say no, this goes through without any conditions whatsoever. I I I did I under interpret all of that right? I'd really not >> camp. Yeah, I I I think you're I think you're understanding my my point correctly. I think the the risk you run if you um if you make a finding denying it purely based on the federal prohibition of cannabis is that if if that's subject to challenge, it'll be subject to challenge at the state level which will acknowledge the validity of Minnesota statute chapter 3.2 which allows it by license which they have complied with. So if that happens, we're subject to the 60-day rule as far as the decision-m process. If we haven't made that decision on time uh within that time, there is a a grant of that authority unchecked. So the the the most authority you have as far as making conditions uh addressing concerns is now at this level. And if you if you wait based on the denial, you may lose that ability in the finding on the other side. >> Last last >> go ahead. >> Sorry. >> Go ahead. >> Um I lost my train of thought. >> Sorry, >> Mark. >> Mark and then Michelle. >> Um thank you. That was helpful. So you said if if our decision if there is a decision to deny that is based solely on federal law versus state law, but um I just want to be clear that uh I would still include the uh nuisance of of odor. Um so for me, if I vote against it, it isn't just because of federal versus state. I I I I just don't believe that there will not be leakage of odor and I consider that to be a nuisance to the neighbors >> and that it can't be remedied. >> Yeah. And I just want just looking up odor control options for like known odor control options for cannabis cultivation, activated carbon filter, hepailters, those are um the known precautions to take and they're doing that as well. So, um that it's difficult to have a finding a fact that says their proposal won't control odor um when the resources available say this is what you do to control odor. >> If there weren't a parking request, would this even be an IUP? Because it's a permitted use, right? We wouldn't even >> No, there wouldn't be an IUP if there wasn't a request to not have a formal parking lot. So the we should really limit our scope to the parking lot >> in making this decision. I mean if I were state legislator I would not have voted for 342. I disapprove of it. I think it was a mistake. >> That's not the seat that I'm in. That's not the race that I ran. That's not the authority that's been given to this body. So in terms of mitigation, I like the idea on the security side. If you want to conceal your address in your your business dealings with other entities, that would probably be a good idea. If we are worried about odor, maybe we have a requirement for some kind of a garden that would have, you know, lavender and mint and things in it to try to >> cover in the winter time. >> That's true, >> but it will in the summer >> when people maybe. So those are the two things that I would throw in as potential additional litigation. >> Just real quick and this might change my mind on our the current motion that's on on the dis here is any com reasonable complaint given is brought back to the council and the interim use permit is reviewed. Is that a problem? >> So the interim use permit again is specific to parking. So if we received bonafide complaints about parking that go unressed then It would be brought forward back to council >> only the >> only >> the IP is not because everything else is permitted so to speak >> in federalally >> and if there's issues with their license that's there's there's that that would be handled differently but that' be to the IUP and >> then why are we why are we talking about smells being a possible issue and >> because it's Not regarding the IEP. >> Yeah. >> But it is plan, >> right? >> Exactly. But they are they propose measures that are seen as for the industry to control the odor. So I >> requirement >> again I go back to if the order is >> an issue >> the state is the one that does it not us. And >> I believe that I believe we so for that I believe because we have it in our zoning ordinance, Dwight and I can would be able to go out and address it if we received a complaint. Um and then they are also proactively reviewing their property um on a regular basis to see if there's also leakages. And then they had also mentioned that they they plan to be in contact with their neighbors so that they understand if there is something that they're not catching. So, I do think they have a proactive plan to address that. Um, but yes, I think because there's something in our zoning ordinance, there could be a zoning situation where Dwight and I would be able to follow up under code enforcement. And then ultimately, it's also a state issue as well. >> So, here's my question. If we were to deny this and it goes to the state and it gets passed, what are all what are our options then here in this in the city? What what what repercussions do we have? What what changes? We still had have a nuisance. If someone smelled it, we would still go out and do a nuisance and say, "What's going on?" >> The biggest thing that would happen is we're essentially become a de facto conditional use permit for the parking and we'd have no ability to curtail the parking. So, that would be the biggest risk that I think we would run into. >> But we would because if we got a complaint about too much parking in there, we would do something about it. But there's no there would be no IEP with pass without any conditions because it would essentially be like if we didn't hack on it within 60 days, >> right? But I'm saying though anybody that doesn't have an IUP right now, if someone calls and complains and says they have 15 cars in their parking lot all the time, we wouldn't do anything about that. If the parking lot if there if the vehicle >> if they only had two parking spots and there were 15 cars parked there because they were spreading out onto the street we would do something about that. There's nothing to curtail it at this point because the request is to reduce the parking requirements to zero which do make sense with the business model proposed and if we don't have any conditions saying hey this is when we'd want to reevaluate it we don't want parking on the street things like that that we don't have any document to curtail that all of a sudden they have free >> no and I get that but I'm saying if there was another even just a resident that was parking on the street where they weren't supposed to be parking we would >> we would address it though public street. >> Okay. >> So, I mean, I don't I don't see like I don't see what what the difference is. I don't see that that's even an issue then because either you guys have to go out if we if we pass it and and a complaint and go out there and then investigate and figure out what it is or they park on the street. I don't I don't see that there's a difference in what what the what the what the most the city can do in either situation. >> What I've drafted is what I think is something that is a plan for both the applicant to remain in compliance >> and for the staff to know okay they are working within the bounds of their approval if the IUP were to all of a sudden be approved by de facto >> there's no sunset clause there's no I I don't I would not recommend approving it without conditions and there's clear conditions right now so >> we wouldn't need a sunset plan though because if they sell the house that that business is going to go with Um, >> so we have to >> it wouldn't have to if you didn't have it in WP. It could stay there in perpetuity >> and they could sell it to somebody else. >> So it doesn't >> you've lost any control over that >> unless it's denied. >> We're saying if it's >> you can only park. The question was can't you deny it and it went >> we can deny the cycle >> right? So either if we were to accept it or if it was denied, challenged in court and the court decided >> that was the condition that council member Friedrich asked about is if it went to the state and the state approved it, the city no longer has any authority and it in >> I'll also add like the the landscaping they're doing for additional screening that wouldn't be required anymore. The um the lighting plan wouldn't be required any Is that the condition of approval? >> Um the um the request to disclose the personal vehicles that wouldn't be required technically us being aware of ongoing compliance with their license on the state that wouldn't be required. So there are some things that we have conditioned related to the site plan um that would become murky at best if we have now an approval without conditions. Mayor, >> if I may, members of council, the other thing I think you need to consider as far as the IUP goes is the IUP is really designed to be a benefit to the neighborhood. It's to increase the fit, right? Um the they could probably they could probably build the the lot that would be required without too much effort, but this is more to fit with the the discretion uh and and keep it a little more off off the radar. So, that's one thing to consider. The second part as far as the site plan goes, the site plan, while we do have some ability to make sure of course it's safe, uh the the oversight from the state will come in as far as those restrictions, we should expect that that's what the state will hold them to. Uh to councilman's point, the city would enforce any of its ordinances. It's nuisance included in that uh odor, anything else uh in that vein. Um so if if they're exceeding it, it's an enforcement action on a complete basis per any other the point that comes to city hall. Um, you know, but to to to think about this in terms of is is there something that you see in the site plan that could be added to to improve that condition or or or to address that concern. Um, it would be it would be good to throw that out now for consideration. Um, if not, um, another thing you can do is if it's sufficient as far as state and staff, you can you can approve it on that basis, but obviously you're going to keep an eye on it on on an enforcement basis and they know this. So just a couple other things to for the council's consideration. Thank you. >> Anything else? We do have a motion second discussion. I will call the um all those motion just to clarify is an I site plan IP. Um, all those in favor of motion to deny. >> I I >> I. >> All those opposed. Nay. >> That motion fails. 3 to two. So now does someone want to make a different motion? Presumably the other option would be to approve. locked out. I talked too long and I got locked out. >> Is it just the 103 resolution? >> Yeah. 20253. >> I'll make a motion to approve resolution 2025103. Okay. Do we have a second? I will second that. Any discussion? I'm I'm holding my nose because I don't like the state law, but this is the provenence allocated to us and I think the restrictions make sense. The applicant seems to be okay with them. >> So, I think it's the best option in front of us. And the thing that has changed my mind is that we would lose control of any conditions and stuff that the chances are high and uh it's really hard to say yes to this with my beliefs and such and I've said no all along but I do not want to lose those conditions or a chance of losing those conditions. So that's my discussion. I feel like the conditions, though they're important, aren't super relevant because there's nothing we can do anyways. >> Either way, >> not sure. I don't know that we need to. >> No, it's my opinion. Definitely. >> No, fair enough. I'm not I'm not criticizing kind of >> I guess. Um, okay. Is there anything else? If not, I will >> go. What do we need? Three. >> Yes. >> Three fist votes. >> Yeah, just as a majority. Yep. >> And then two two and an abstension would do what? It's a no. >> It failed. >> Has to pass in order to pass. I don't have any more questions. >> I'll call the vote. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Opposed. >> Thank you, gentlemen. And uh appreciate the the way you've gone about the process and hopefully >> of course >> continue to work. >> We will continue to work with you guys and satisfy all all concerns. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Good luck and stay safe. Thank you. >> And with that, uh, we are on to just staff reports. Jay, do we have anything? >> Uh, just one one thing that I want to say to the mayor and council. Uh, I want to say thank you for the flexibility that you've given me to be able to go to different types of training. I just returned from the International Association of Chiefs of Police Conference where I was with our director and our deputy director for public safety. the things that I learned there. Uh the phrase that I keep saying were inspiring and terrifying. Uh like I there there's so much that I had no idea about. Um and the the time that I had to be able to spend with I forget how many maybe a hundred uh was the delegation from Minnesota. getting to talk with other communities in Minnesota and and spend time with other chiefs and staff uh command and staff members uh was tremendously valuable uh to me. Um and so I just wanted to say thank you for that opportunity. Uh a couple key takeaways from that was we went with a very clear plan in terms of what our focus was uh because we're in the process looking forward of some campus discussions. And so uh things that we spent the time looking at was uh potential training area sites and how do we get the most bang for our buck. Uh we have records management system discussions. I think we had four different demos, Matt. Uh so I also want to reassure you that that we were investing our time investigating uh all the best alternatives that are going to be able to help Corkran continue to be the second safest state or safest city in the state. >> Why aim low? >> Why aim low? >> Go for one. >> No, we're we're going to we're going to get back up there number one depending on reporting. >> What happened? I thought we were I thought we were three. >> We've been in in the It doesn't report anything. So they don't really count. >> Ah, that's all they got. Okay, got it. >> Yeah, if you don't report crime, there's no crime. >> We can stop on the counter level. That's my understanding. So it looks like it's better than it is. >> But but but that was tremendously valuable and I just want to say thank you. Another thing in talking with a lot of those other agencies, uh I really appreciate uh again the flexibility that you've given us to invest in our people with professional development. Um, as I as I spoke with other agencies, it was clear to me that that isn't shared across the board with all other councils and getting that kind of support. And so, uh, the way that we're able to develop our people is is key to our recruitment and retention strategies, get the right people on the bus, and then make sure that we keep them there. And that means investing in them. So, thank you. >> Thank you, Speak for everyone. We appreciate the great work you guys do. Got a good And I would comment that while out there, we're continuing to get more questions about things our city did. Uh the innovative approach to the wellness items. Um in fact, >> don't share that with anybody. Nobody needs to know how we do it. >> The the other trying to figure out one of the first questions is why does you know how does your council agree to move forward with these innovations? And it was we talked about the the process that you guys helped use to analyze it. Um, and they found a lot of value in that. And in fact, I think at least one of the cover letters of our current applicants references um that the reason they applied is they want to work for a city that appreciates their officers, understand the stress they go through, and have taken action to support them and referencing specifically the the wellness retention action is is listed in one of the cover letters. So, um, it is it is and hopefully uh and what I share with most of you it's having impact with our people that are here and I think it's now really starting to have an impact um in the profession at least at the local level >> to to pick up on that I I did go to one session and this was the wellness committee now you got to remember 16,000 cops at this session at at at this uh conference there were maybe two 300 people plus in this room and it was the wellness committee for this whole association. So these are primarily sides, PhDs from very large agencies that meet together once a month to discover how or to discuss how to to do the best for wellness for for their agencies and for the profession at large. I went uh to the microphone at the end they had asked any questions and I asked about a longitudinal study uh for sbaticals. I said, you know, we we are midway into our second year of sbaticals. We've had six officers. I'm wondering if there's anybody that's been doing it longer. They all looked at me like I had a third eye. They they sent sobaticals like we've talked about that, but but that's like a unicorn. It doesn't really exist. And I said, well, exists in Corkran and uh and we're we're >> and we're taking applications. >> Yeah. And so so so as soon as the shed I I'm not kidding. I had probably 20 25 people wanting my business card because they're like, "How did you do that? I want a copy of it." And so what that really impressed upon me >> I bet they wanted Matt's business card. >> They did. Yeah. >> So how happy are you at court? >> But but one of the things that impressed upon me was uh we do have a fantastic department. not just setting the pace in Minnesota, but this was at an international conference, setting the pace for the industry, for the profession. That that was a super proud moment for me. Uh but also super intimidating is like, okay, what do we do next? Because to your point, everybody's trying to catch up and we don't want them to catch up. We want to be the best place. I will say I have gotten calls since we passed that from mayors in Minnesota and actually from across the country about it and the one protection we do have is it's impossible to explain the grading rubric that council member Nichols and Bodma came up with being inside of their head. So that that's a little layer of protection that they can get the rest of the information but there's no way to explain that. worked out well. >> Well, I think we should all remember these comments when contract negotiations come up, >> which will be soon. >> All righty. And um I hope you don't mind me saying wish you well well recovery having a little procedure. >> So wishing her speedy recovery and we'll miss you for a couple weeks. better. >> We'll be there. >> Oh, yeah. >> And um other than that, does anyone have anything? >> Yeah, I got I'm sorry. Does anybody have any coins? >> Coins? >> Did you already give your away? >> I've got I've got my last four spoken for. I got to give them away. But >> I kept getting updates or I can send you names. That just >> I got updates on Dean's Dean's list and I kept having to cross off my list. You got like three or four people that I had. >> Sorry. >> That was like on my day one. >> Council member Nichols recommendation that we create a track. That was brilliant and critical. Otherwise, we'd have certain members of the community like, "Wow, I've got five." >> I was leaving city hall Tuesday and I'm like, "I better go. I had to go make a a pit stop to get someone before >> I was going that way probably this weekend, but I'm going that way to deliver honey now. So, >> I'm glad that's what they asked. >> Whole another medallion. >> All right. >> January 1st or actually >> they're supposed to be scarce, >> right? That's a that's a feature, not a bug. >> Yeah. And again, these folks, not a one has refused it and absolutely thank >> me very very much. Um, one actually did refuse it and suggest giving it to somebody else. So, I respected that. But, uh, everyone else was speechless. The ones that I gave it to, they they very much appreciate it. And great idea. >> Definitely. Time to go. >> All right. >> Uh, just wanted to highlight uh, upcoming meetings the 13th. We have a work session at 5:30, meeting at 7. 25th just a meeting. >> That's correct. Just meeting >> at seven and December 11th just a meeting at seven and that's it for the year. >> Don't forget the 25th is a Tuesday >> and I will not be here for that one. >> Will not be here for that one. >> It got changed from the 24th. >> Gotcha. Um do we have three for that meeting? >> I will be here on the 22nd. >> 25th. >> 25th. >> December 25th. >> No, November 25th. >> Okay. Got to specify the month. is also fine. >> We are not meeting on December. >> My son's birthday got >> He's got a busy day. >> You got a commitment. Sorry. >> Yeah. >> Um but yeah, as long as we have three there. And just to double check, do we have everyone for the 11th? Cuz we'll need >> I'll be super major. >> It's my daughter's golden birthday, >> but I will be here. >> Bring her along. make it a quick meeting. >> So, so I am working really hard to keep that as a light meeting. Uh, it's in your hands. All right. >> I'll bring the duct tape. >> But on that note, before before Mark walks out, uh, I'll entertain a motion to adjurnn. So, >> I'll make it. >> Second. >> All those in favor say I. >> I. I. We're journed.